The LightningScarred Planet Mars
Symbols of an Alien Sky
DVD episode 2
A video documentary that could change everything you thought you knew
about ancient times and symbols.
The Symbols of an Alien Sky video series will introduce you to celestial
spectacles and earthshaking events once remembered around the world.
Archaic symbols of these events still surround us, some as icons of the
world’s great religions, though the origins of the symbols appear to be
lost in
obscurity.
In this second episode of Symbols of an Alien Sky, David
Talbott takes the viewer on an odyssey across the surface of Mars.
Exploring feature after feature of the planet, he finds that only
electric arcs could produce the observed patterns. The high resolution
images reveal massive channels and gouges, great mounds, and crater
chains, none finding an explanation in traditional geology, but all
matching the scars from electric discharge experiments in the
laboratory.
(Approximately 85 minutes)
Order Link $29.00

Show Me the English
Mel Acheson
A demand frequently
made of Electric Universe ideas is, show me the math. It is a
presumptuous demand. A proper rejoinder is to demand of consensus
theories, show me the English. You must have some idea of what you
are talking about before you can talk about quantities of it. A
plaque in a local medical laboratory proclaims, “It's easier to take
measurements than to know what you're measuring.” Quantities will
not give you qualities; for that you need predicates. Manipulating
symbols is not the same as making sense. Recognizing and
understanding patterns of intelligibility in empirical data is a
creative act. Many modern scientists are little more than
technicians of numbers, not discoverers of understanding. Without
critical questioning, you are only quantifying presumptions.
The ancient Babylonians developed arithmetic methods for predicting many events.
Their algorithms worked well for locating planets but not for
anticipating plagues of locusts. The defect was the absence of
understanding, which enables judgments of appropriateness. The goal
of science is to understand, not merely to anticipate. Despite the
cute metaphor that mathematics is the language of nature,
mathematics is not really a language. It shuffles symbols; it
doesn't mean. What does the energy tensor mean? What does
Schroedinger's equation mean? The question is nonsensical. You can
understand mathematics with English, but you can't understand
English with mathematics.
Scientists once were
expected to have a grounding in the Humanities, to know something
about ancient Greek and Roman literature: the art of meaning. Now,
many seem unable to compose an understandable sentence. Quantum
mechanics in particular has abdicated understanding: Neils Bohr, one
of its originators, opined that it was not science because it didn't
mean anything; it didn't explain; it only predicted. Mathematics is
good for determining how much of what to put where in order to get
which result. It is good for inventing gadgets—toys, tools, weapons;
not so good for understanding what they are or for judging where and
when to play with them. A function is not a predicate; an equality
is not a unity.
The preciseness of
numbers makes correct syntax seem inessential. But cloudy rhetoric
reduces them to symbology, foggy grammar reduces them to numerology,
and hazy logic reduces them to nonsense. Without understanding,
theories become merely presumptions encrusted with tensors,
superstitions embellished with differential equations. The novel
qualities of data from space age instruments defy measurement by the
ideas of gravity and gas. Larger and more encompassing measures are
needed, those of electromagnetism and plasma.
This is not to deny
the importance of mathematics and the necessity of developing
mathematical representations of Electric Universe concepts. But the
mathematics must be subsidiary and subsequent to the concepts; it
cannot substitute for or precede the concepts. Plasma science and
plasma cosmology are building up theory from concepts developed in
response to observations and experiments rather than deriving
concepts from mathematical representations of theory. Concepts
describe; mathematics represents. You must describe a thing before
you can represent it. Representations without descriptions invite
fantasies such as black holes and dark matter to fill the voids.
Mathematical expressions without predicates are pure abstractions,
not physics, which has to do with the sensible world.
Modern astronomy has
shrouded the cosmos with darkness: dark matter, dark energy, dark
mathematics devoid of the light of understanding. Astronomers are
neoBabylonians ruling over a dark age of science. With eyes
clenched and ears plugged against alternative ideas, they blunder
into straw men and sing off key. These forlorn habitués of customary
habits mill around in an uncritical repetitiousness of obsolete
orthodoxy.
If the cosmos is to
be deduced from the first principles of a sacrosanct theory, we do
not need observation. We can shut down the space programs and reduce
the national debt. We need only a few dollars for vestments for the
priests of an unquestionable scientism.
Mel Acheson 