Unfeathered Angels

Hubble reaches out into space for us.

2011-08-10T02:37:00.000-07:00

Image via WikipediaThe findings of the space telescope Hubble only confirms my theory which goes against the belief of most cosmologist who think time travel is possible.
My theory is that,"you cannot go back through time or move forward through time."

Scientist and cosmologists assume that the light from new planets and galaxies Hubble is discovering is only now appearing in our solar system, and if we could reach them we could travel back in time, closer to when the "Big Bang" occurred.

Hubble is only 370 miles or 600Km above the earth's surface, so if the light from these sources was reaching Hubble then the light source would be seen by the naked eye on earth seconds after it reached Hubble, considering the speed light travels.

No matter how fast light travels we on earth will never see these lights with our naked eyes as it is Hubble that is reaching out into space to these light sources.

You have to consider that light comes from a heat source and light only travels as far as the intensity of that heat source allows.
The more intense the farther the travel and the less intense the less travel, its common sense.
Light does not travel on and on forever!

If it ever becomes possible for us to reach the limits of space we would not be traveling through time, we would only be reaching the extremities during universal time. Not going back and not going forward in time.

If, as most of us believe that the universe began with "The Big Bang," and we could reach the planets that have formed nearer to where the explosion took place, we would not be going back nearer to the time of the Big bang, we would only be going to these planets or galaxies and be able to see them as they are, and to observe how they have developed since the explosion took place.

They probably have had more time to develop than the remnants that traveled farther and any life on them could be far more advance than we are.

If you freeze frame any explosion the results of each frame will show what is happening at exactly the same time to the fragments nearest to the blast and to the fragments farthest away.
Looking at the fragments nearest the blast is not taking you nearer to the time the explosion was set off.

The result is the same with the universe only it is on a much larger scale than we can envisage, and the lights deep in space that Hubble is discovering will come no nearer to us but develop in their own part of the universe.
Scientists and cosmologists are still assuming that the light from the farthest galaxy has just reached us when it is the telescopes mankind has developed that are reaching out to them.
Their dream of being able to time travel is blinding them from reality.

Another thing to think about is, what if we could place Hubble 370 miles above one of these distant planets that are part of a galaxy 13 billion light years from us to reach out 13 billion light years beyond that?
What would it discover then?

More planets and galaxies, that is the answer.

From our little speck of dust that we call earth, we will never see the vastness of the universe and assumptions of how it came to be will always be made until, maybe someday, people from a planet that is far in advance of our own might come and explain the truth of it all to us.

Some people on earth think they have already been here, some think they still are, but whoever, if any are right, they will not want to expose themselves to violent peoples such as we have on earth.

Maybe when we can learn to live in peace with our own kind and show we are no threat to them, then the mysteries of the universe will be unfolded to us.

We cannot time travel.

2011-03-16T03:13:00.000-07:00

Image via WikipediaThe reason today's cosmetologist and scientist think when they are looking at distant stars like GRB090423 and assume that the dying stages we are observing happened 13 billion years ago is that they have forgotten that "light years" is a measurement of distance, not time.

A light year is around 6 trillion miles so it was decided to use the time it takes light to travel through space to measure distances in space making any calculations easier.

This fact seems to have been lost in today's world, and calculations and incorrect assumptions are being made by thinking we can "time travel" because we measure universal distance by "light years."

The light from the stars are released at source and it does travel through space, but it leaves the star behind and travels as rays.

There are many stars in the universe that cannot be seen from earth no matter how powerful the telescope is as they are too far away from us or in some cases hidden by the clutter around our planet.

When we ventured out past our atmosphere and into space we began to discover more stars and galaxies simply because we could see farther, not because the images of stars and galaxies were finally reaching us.

The more we learn about the universe and the more powerful our methods of reaching for the stars becomes, the farther we see out into space through the miles.
It is our methods that enable us to do this, not the fact that these images or sources of light are reaching us as our scientists and cosmetologist would have us believe.

Take a light bulb e.g., when it is switch on the light leaves the source and spreads around the room but the bulb stays where it is.
We look at the source of light through the beam it sends across the room, and across the distance the light source is from us.
Although the light reaches our faces the source stays where it is and in the same form it was in when the light left it. It does not take the source of the light with it.

It is in the same principle that light reacts in space.

The stars we see in space release their light which then travels a distance that is miles not time, leaves the star in the form it was and by the time it reaches us the form of that star might have changed. If we had been around when the light left the star we would have been able to observe the star in that form, but we can only observe it as it is now.

The fact that it takes various times for light to reach us from different parts of space denotes the distance in miles of that event we are studying, not the amount of years ago it happened, hence the fact that what we are seeing out there now is happening now.

The image of new stars, dying or forming is not suddenly emerging to us by any of us travelling through time, but by our modern methods of covering the miles between us.

We are waiting for Beetlejuice (or Betelgeuse as it is also known) which is 520-1400 light years away from earth to become a supernova, and we are told that GRB090423 is in it's dying throes 13 billion years away from us.
We watch and observe stars dying and galaxies forming light years from us that are much closer than GRB090423, so if they were actual years away from us instead of miles we would be able to go back 9 billion years and see GRB090423 as it was then, move through time and observe stars of interest at various stages of their lives.

If the light from these stars traveled as the scientist would have us believe there would be images of the same star in different place in the universe as all the stars are moving great distances as time goes past in an ever expanding universe.

We would be able to travel in time and see the galaxies that are forming actually formed but we are not looking back through time when we look into space we are looking across the miles.

Instead of waiting for Beetlejuice to become a supernova we could go forward in time to see when it changed.

Beetlejuice is much closer to us than GRB090423 and if it was the case that the image we see of it now happened between 520-1400 light years ago, we could go farther back and see it during its life as a bright star, or even farther back and observe its birth, but light years are only miles, mans conception of distance in space, not actual time.

Time travel and seeing the stars as they were, we cannot, but we can, through modern methods travel through the miles that separates us from the stars and observe them as they are now.

Poor old GRB090423 is dying before our very eyes, and if we are around when Beetlejuice becomes a supernova we will be able to observe it as it happens.

Comment from Prof. Brian Cox. "science can be wrong"

2011-03-13T06:06:00.000-07:00

Image by Dave Pearson via FlickrProfessor Brian Cox stated on TV on the "Something for the weekend" program dated 13-03-2011, that "Science can be wrong," and in the case of how light travels and reacts in space, science has got it very wrong.

When we look directly at a star (i.e. our sun) we are looking at it as it is at that moment not as it was when the rays from it that are hitting us left it.

Scientists wrongly assume that when we look at our sun or distant stars that we are seeing them as they were at the time it takes light to reach us from that particular star, but you have to remember that stars are spherical in shape and any light projected from them is emitted in all directions, dispersing and spreading into space the further it travels.

Light is released from the sphere it does not travel in the shape of the object it leaves, or take the object with it.

If we look face on at a movie projector we see a bright light, not the image it will project on to the screen, and if we sit at the side of the light it projects we see the ray from that source, not the image. It is only when we watch from behind the light source as it hits a screen that we see the image it is projecting.

We need something to catch the light rays and reflect the image back to us.

It is the same principle with stars, and as I stated, stars are spherical, so we are observing them from the front, the side and from behind, therefore if, as scientists assume, that light travels as the image it leaves, how can we see that image without a screen to catch it?

When the projector is switched on you see it flicker into life, then the bright light follows until it is switched off, then it fades and disappears like a dying star and the rays from it cease to show any distinguishable shape or form because you need the source of light to be present for the image to be portrayed properly.

Stars are only visible to us because the heat source that generates the light is still present. We are seeing the star as it is with light radiating from it strongly at its source and the light that was released from it years ago is dispersing into space in all directions.

Another point I would like to bring to your attention is that the dying star grb090423 which is 13 billion years away from us, is dying now not 13 billion years ago as Professor Brian Cox and his associates assume.

During the lifetime of that star the universe has moved, therefore if their theory were true we would be able to see the image of that star in another part of the sky as it formed, then in another point in the sky as it lived, with its death throes we are observing now in the position it is now.

Also if it took us 13 billion years to reach that star, according to their theory it would then be 26 billion years old plus the time it took to form and live, or 13 billion years older than it was when we left our planet, and if it was in its dying stages 13 billion years ago there would be nothing left when we reached the point in the universe that it originated.

We see stars and galaxies in various stages of birth and death light years away from us and each stage is happening out there now or we would not be able to observe them as they are. In some cases there would be nothing to focus on, as in others there would be no solid matter to bounce radar signals off.

They also contradict themselves when they look at stars and see planets circling around them and tell us that it is happening now, make assumptions of what it will be like there, when if the therory they work on were true, what they are observing would have happened light years ago and what is happening at that spot in the universe will be completely different, making their assumptions and the idea of venturing to distant stars irrelevant as we could never be sure of what we would find when we got there.

Professor Brian Cox constantly says "we think" when he is referring to his theories on the universe and that is exactly what we have to go on most of the time, THEORIES.

Theories have all too often been proved wrong when new discoveries are made or when we advance our methods of discovery and until we realize that what we see out there is happening now, our scientists will be coming to the wrong conclusions when calculating the ifs and buts of our beginnings.

While I agree with most of Brian Cox's theories I will have to disagree with him on his assumptions on how light travels from the stars.

Kepler is proving my point.

2011-02-13T10:09:00.001-08:00

Planetary News: Kepler (2011)

Kepler Discoveries Suggest a Galaxy Rich in Life

By Amir Alexander
February 3, 2011

Click to enlarge >

Kepler
Credit: NASA /

The search for distant Earths in the depths of space took a giant leap forward with the discovery of 5 Earth-size planet candidates orbiting in the habitable zone – the region around a star where liquid water is stable. If follow up observations confirm the discovery, the five planets would be among the first ever detected which could have water on their surface, and possibly – life.

The 54 habitable-zone planets detected by Kepler all orbit stars that are substantially smaller than the Sun. As a result, the habitable zones are closer to the stars, and the planets’ orbital period consequently shorter. The detection of Earth-like planets orbiting in the habitable zone of Sun-like stars will take a few more years, simply because Kepler will need to observe at least 3 transits, which for a planet with an Earth-like orbit will take around 3 years.

Even so, the implications of the spacecraft’s discoveries are already transforming our view of the universe and of ourselves within it. “Kepler can only see 1/400 of the sky” noted Borucki. “[It] can only find a small fraction of the planets around the stars it looks at,” because most orbiting planet do not transit, and are therefore invisible to the probe. “If you account for those two factors our results indicate that there must be millions of planets orbiting the stars that surround our suns.” And if planets are plentiful in the Milky Way, then life could be as well. “Kepler, said Borucki,” is the first step towards the detection of life in our galaxy.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kepler in the way it is discovering new planets is also helping to prove the point I have been making which is, "What we see happening in space is happening now, not light years ago as our cosmetologist and scientist would have us believe."

Kepler was launched in march 2009 and trails the earth as it orbits the sun at a distance of around 18 million miles.

It fixes its gaze permanently on one patch of sky looking for galaxies and planets that we cannot see from earth.

As you will note from the above passages copied from The Planetary News, Kepler has been successful in discovering a galaxy that may have life among the planets located within it and the scientists rightly are excited about this find as it could hold the answer we all have been wondering about. "Is there life out there?"

The point I am trying to make is that it took from 2009 until this year for Kepler's search to unveil the exciting galaxy that shone through the dark patch of sky it had been focusing on.

Through the ages, since mankind has been observing the skies, none of the galaxies we are now discovering by probing deeper into space has ever projected its image close enough for us to detect them from earth. You would think if the light was projected the way scientist say, some of these images would have reached us without us have to probe deeper into space for them considering the speed light travels at.

If as the scientists believe, what we see as we look at distant galaxies through telescopes from earth, or even by the assistance of The Hubble Telescope that the light reaching us in the image it portrays is an event that happened millions of light years ago, then the image of this new galaxy that Kepler has discovered should reach us soon and we should be able to view it from earth by the means available to us as I mentioned.

If this were so there would be no need to send observation crafts out into space as the image would reach us eventually according to the speed light travels.

We all know how vast the universe is, and as it stands there are galaxies and planets that will never be seen from earth no matter how long you wait for a light to shine through.

We have to reach out to these new galaxies, travel across space to get closer to them before we will be able to see their image, and if and when we do, what we will find is a planet with whatever activity that is taking place, happening at the time we observe it, not as it was billions of years before we discovered it.

When Christopher Columbus discovered America he was on a different time zone from the one he left in Europe, but what he observed on the shore from his ship was happening at that time and not sometime in the past.

We can travel to America in hours now in comparison to the months it took Columbus, and arrive in a different time zone, but the result is still the same. "what we will observe will be happening at that exact time"

It would be no different if we could travel through space and reach the galaxy Kepler discovered, we would be at a different part of the universe and in a different time zone but we would be observing what was happening on these planets at our time of arrival not some time in the past.

The light will be traveling from that galaxy and it might reach earth, but the image of the galaxy or the planets in it will not be seen from earth, only the fading rays as they pass like time ever onward until they are no more.

Published blog.

2010-10-27T04:09:00.000-07:00

Image via WikipediaThis blog is now out in book form mistakes and all, under the title of "Before Genesis to Revelation and Beyond" and can be purchased online through Authorhouse, Amazon and Waterstones, or order it at any good bookshops under the category of PHILOSOPHY, RELIGION/ INSPIRATIONAL/ SPIRITUALITY.
It makes much better reading in book form.

Time has no mass or substance.

2010-09-27T05:25:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia I watched with interest at Stephen Hawking's latest TV program on "time" in which he and other associates of his regard time as an object and not just a measurement, in the same way an inch or metre, or a pint and a litre are, measurements calculated by mankind to assist him in his everyday life.

Fellow colleagues of Stephen Hawking, who consist of cosmetologists and physicists assume that if we had the means we could time travel owing to their theory that time has matter, and can be breached, but as I see it, time has no mass, no soul, no substance, and is nothing but a measurement of how the universe has come from its origin to reach the point it is now at when you are reading this.

Let me take you through some of the points Stephen Hawking made in his program on time travel and I will in my own way dispel the myth that you can travel through time.

Stephen stated at the beginning of his program that he is something of a dreamer and I see no harm in that, but what amazes me is the fact that these learned gentlemen regard time as an object, or as a fourth dimension and forget that time, although it does exist, passes moment by moment, at the same speed everywhere in the universe as it continues to travel outward from the original blast that created it.

Time on earth as we know it is measured by mankind on the activity of our solar system with the rotation of our planet on it's axes measuring the days and nights and the orbit of it around the sun defining the years,MAN MADE CALCULATIONS defining time.
If we lived on another planet like ours in a different solar system with the rotation of the planet on it's axes very much different to ours and it's orbit around it's sun taking much longer to complete, then our measurement of time would be different and coinciding with the actions of that solar system, but time itself would be no different as it would carry on moment by moment, unmeasured in the emptiness of space, only being observed by any intelligent life who might as we do allow their lives to be dictated by it.

In the program, Physicists, try to tell us of wormholes in time that they hope someday will allow time travel, but how can you have a hole of any kind in a thing with no mass or substance?
It is a possibility that there are such things as wormholes in space that can take us to another dimension although I doubt that too, as it is my belief there is only one universe, albeit a massive one with many facets, but that they can be reached directly, if we had the means, and not through some wormhole.

The program uses entities like snooker tables and snooker balls magnified to explain that nothing is completely flat, but these are as I say, entities and time is not, so there is no comparison on that matter which makes a nonentity of their theory in that respect.

Stephen agrees with Albert Einstein that time travels at different speeds at different places in the universe, but as some of Einstein's theories have been proved to be wrong so is their theory of time, making the mistake that it is an object, or their fourth dimension as they call it.

The example of time varying in speeds at different parts of the universe was illustrated by pretending it was possible to fly a spacecraft to a black hole and enter it's orbit without being drawn in. Time for the crew would slow down by a half and if they flew around it for ten years, on exit they would only have lived five years, returning to their world in the future.
The first flaw in that theory is, it is not time that is slowing down in the spacecraft, only the objects as they circle the black hole and are affected by it's G-FORCE or gravitational pull. The second flaw is that, they DID take ten years to go around the hole and when they came out of the orbit it would still be ten years that had passed in universal time, we cannot alter the speed of time no matter what we do or where we go in the universe.

You do not need to go as far as a black hole to prove the point of speed in a circular motion, only look at a solid wheel and observe the way it acts as it rotates with the outer rim traveling faster and covering more ground as it speeds up, while nearing the middle the motion slows down coming to almost no motion at all at the centre.
The reason for that is the fact that it is the outside of the wheel covering the distance and as you approach the middle it has less distance to cover, hence the slowing down process, with the centre having nowhere to go remains still.

The same principle applies to his example of a fast train circling the earth at the speed of light, 186,000 miles per second. (mankind's measurement)
If it takes the train seven times a seconds to travel around the earth, doubling the speed only means that the train will travel fourteen times a second around the earth and not go into the future as the program makes out.
The faster you go only allows you to cover more distance in a shorter space of time regardless of which direction you are going in, be it in a straight line or a circle.

The reaction of any animate objects in the train would be the same as weightlessness in space or the same as the objects inside a plane when it hurtles from a great height at speed creating the same effect as weightlessness in space.
When Stephan Hawking experienced weightlessness in the aircraft that was used to allow him the feeling of weightlessness, he did not come out of the aircraft earlier than he entered it, he landed at the equivalent time he should have without experiencing travelling through time, and the same thing would have happened with the crew circling the black hole and the passengers in the train travelling at the speed of light or faster.

I conclude that with time having no mass, and being a measurement only, time travel will never occur no matter how many schoolboy dreams revolve around it.
Sometimes our physicists and cosmetologists stretch their imaginations too far in the hope of achieving that schoolboy fantasy and can't see the wood for the trees.

Some dreams just cannot come true even though you are a physicist or cosmetologist, and the only way to reach the future is to live until tomorrow, as for the past..............well we have our memories and archives for that.

One last thought.
If time travel were possible, some physicist or cosmetologist from the future would take great pleasure in returning to this century to tell Stephen Hawking how time travel worked, or returned to the last one to tell Einstein where he went right and where he went wrong, as he would have done had it been possible in his lifetime.

Thankfully, that will not happen as the greed of mankind would dominate the reasons to return to the past, with knowledge from the future being a sure way to gain the riches and power most of mankind strives for.

Some things will never change, especially time, which will always pass at its own speed regardless of mankind with his dreams and fantasies, it's only the moments and events that time creates that changes.

Yes TIME may control our lives, but we have no control over TIME!

Electromagnetic radiation, our universal penetration.

2010-03-27T09:57:00.000-07:00

I have tried in many ways to prove to the doubters of my theory on how light travels through space, and that we cannot go back in time when we study distant galaxies or dying stars we observe in the night sky either by unaided sight or by telescopes like Hubble or telescopes operated by electromagnetic radiation.

Some of us seem to underestimate the power of our own eyes, and do not realise that it only takes a millisecond for our eyes to focus on what is in front of them, and that we can see as far as the stars without help from telescopes or binoculars.

When we use aids like these mentioned they magnify the object we are homing in on, except for the ones that use radio waves, which bounce signals off of the object they focus on.

When Hubble was pointed at black open spaces out in the universe visions appeared, which according to my theory was Hubble reaching out to these lights, or in other words "magnifying" these lights, not so much the light reaching Hubble.
The light Hubble reaches out to are varied with constellations forming, and stars dying, and against all other theorist I believe that instead of going back in time when looking out as far as these visions we are still looking at what is out there now.
What happened out there after the Big Bang is history, and history cannot be retrieved through the more abundant lights we are observing, as we reach farther and farther out into space with our newer inventions.

I have pointed out these theories before, I hear you say, but think on when reading the next part.

Mass cannot travel at the speed of light, the light is produced by heat coming from different forms of mass,(forming galaxies, constellations or dying stars e.g.) and it is only the light that travels through space acting as all light does by spreading and weakening as it journeys out from its source.

Most of this light will carry heat and energy with it on part of its journey, which might be part of the makeup of dark matter as the light fades leaving behind its energy, but that is another story.

If, as scientist believe, that the light we can see light years away is ONLY light reaching us from some occurrence that happened just after the Big Bang, and that by reaching it we can go back in time, then how can we bounce radar signals off of it?

They are contradicting themselves by saying that the image they are seeing will have taken a different shape or form over the millions of years the light has taken to reach us, and that the images Hubble is sending back is only light coming from an event that happened, not that it is happening now, then tell us they are bouncing radar signals off of objects within these images.

You cannot bounce radar signals off of light, you need "mass" or the source of the light to be there to get a signal that way, which tells me at least, that what they are looking at is happening NOW not light years ago.

Laser light (light amplification by stimulated emissions of radiation.) is used to measure the distance between the earth and the moon, but you need the source of the power that sends the laser ray out towards the moon to be active to achieve this.
If the power source was switched off before the ray reached the moon it would go no farther, disappear, and not carry on to bounce back and record a distance.
If you sent a laser beam out into open space, you can see the beam, but as soon as the source of the power projecting that light is switched off the beam disappears, you cannot follow its projection out into space.
Without its power source it does not exist, and the same principle applies to the light sources we are observing the deeper we reach into space.

I came across an example of how scientists contradict themselves in this way which I have copied and printed below.

RADIO SIGNAL SENSITIVITY

The upgrade features a new system for focusing radio signals using a system of Gregorian reflectors, a new, more powerful 1 million watt radar transmitter and a 50ft high steel mesh ground screen to reduce ground interference. The facility, operated by Cornell University's National Astronomy and Ionosphere Centre (NAIC) under co-operative agreement with the NSF, was upgraded with funds from the NSF and NASA at a cost of approximately $27 million.

The upgrade, the second since the facility was built in 1963, allows scientists to do in one hour what previously took 10 hours. The sensitivity was improved by a factor of about 20 for studies of the solar system and by a factor of about three or four for studies of distant galaxies. More radio frequencies are now available with increased sensitivity at all frequencies. Astronomers will be able to 'observe' signals farther away, and thus further back in time, than ever before. The telescope's frequency range, and thus its sensitivity, previously 50MHz to 3,000MHz, is now 10,000MHz.
REFLECTOR DISH AND ANTENNA

Unchanged in the upgrade is Arecibo's trademark reflector dish. Most radio telescopes use a parabolic antenna that can be steered to any direction. The Arecibo antenna is spherical and remains fixed but the focusing device suspended above the dish can be steered. Thus, signals can be captured from a greater slice of the sky. A radio/radar telescope captures and transmits radiation at radio wavelengths, unlike optical telescopes, which capture light waves. So clouds, haze and even daylight do not interfere with radio astronomy.

The system suspended above the dish to focus the radio waves collected by the 1,000ft diameter (305m) reflector has been radically changed. Now, a new six-storey, 90t dome houses a new reflector system, a combination of two radio mirrors and sensitive receiver systems. It is suspended 450ft above the giant reflector dish. The mirrors focus radio waves coming from distant objects in space or radar signals that are sent out into space and bounce back from the surfaces of the planets and other bodies in the solar system.

Read that and tell me how you can bounce radio waves off of light projecting from something that is supposed to have died light years ago, or fix radio waves on light reaching us now from a constellation that formed light years ago. I repeat,(Astronomers will be able to "observe" signals farther away, and thus farther back in time than ever before.) If it is farther back in time how can we bounce signals off it NOW?
The source of the light HAS to be there still or the radio signal would carry on past it if it hasn't enough "mass" to stop it.

It does pass through the light projected by the source until it reaches the "mass" then it bounces back to the receiver, the light from the source becoming stronger and narrowing nearest the source, acting as all light does, stronger at the source and spreading and weakening as it travels outward.

It is the same thing when the scientists point their radio receivers towards a planet that they are studying and expect to pick up signals coming from that planet, as in the diagram above on electromagnetic radiation. If the planet is not there, as they would lead us to believe, why point the receivers towards it, why not just point it to an empty space in the sky and expect signals from planets that might have filled that space?
Sound travels slower than light, that we know, so any part of the sky could pick up signals from dead planets, but the fact that scientists point their receivers towards a visual sight that is still transmitting heat and light should tell them that the planet is still operational even though it would take us mere mortals light years to reach them. The latest finding of a star similar to ours is 127 light years away from us, but because it takes us that time to reach it does not mean it was created then and the light from it is only reaching us now. It is us that has just discovered it with the improving technology and ever intrusive equipment we are developing, and we are seeing that star as it is in its own part of the universe.
The star could well have been created at the time of the BIG BANG, but it certainly has not died, nor has any other star we can see with or without modern technology, they will merely have developed through the years under the same principles our solar system has.

I am not debating that light travels, nor am I debating the speed of light, only that what we are observing out there is happening NOW not light years ago.
Not only is the light traveling to us, but we are reaching out to that "light source" nullifying any time lapse, and nullifying the notion that we can go back in time.

Light years away from the truth.

2010-02-03T12:58:00.000-08:00

Image via Wikipedia

I am still trying to prove my theory that the distant stars and constellations we see in space, or the events the Hubble telescope is capturing are happening now, and not light years ago as most scientist would have us believe, and budding scientist latch on to without thinking for themselves.

It is true that our SUN is 8.5 light minutes from EARTH, and it stands to reason that it takes 8.5 light minutes for light to reach us from there, but that does not mean that when the SUN disappears below the horizon, it happened 8.5 light minutes ago, and we are only witnessing it after the actual event.

We can look at the SUN directly with our naked eyes, through the light it is omitting, and it is the rays of the SUN that are moving towards us, carrying heat with it. We look directly through the light with telescopes, and magnify the surface of the sun. If the light was travelling the way the scientists would have us believe, we would not need telescopes to magnify it, the light would reach us as a mass, and not as the dispersed light that reaches us.

If you look at a child's drawing of our SUN you will see squiggly lines coming from a yellow ball, it's these lines depicted by a child that makes my explanation more simple to explain. These squiggly lines are the rays, light rays, the light that travels through space, the light rays we are able to look through, and see the SUN as we look at it, not 8.5 light minutes later. We are looking straight at the source of the light, the actual object that produces the light through massive volcanic action bursting through it's surface.

If we observe a sunsetting among clouds, we see the rays of the sun beaming through the breaks in the cloud formation, and it is these rays that are leaving the sun, moving outward, while expanding into space, past Mercury, past Venus, past Earth, out into the vastness of space expanding and dispersing as it journeys on, losing heat and density the further it goes, until it is just a glow, light years from where it originated, and as long as the source is still active, this will continue.

If the source suddenly ceases, the last rays of light to leave it will continue out into space, but if anyone who had observe that source before it became inactive, was watching the event, they would see the source disappear, and if far enough away would still see the last rays of light, and still be able to reach out and touch the glow that had travelled to their world in that form.

Scientist think that the dying stars, or forming constellations we have observed millions of light years away from us have already died or formed, because of the distance they are away from us, given the light years it takes these images to reach us, but if that was the case it would mean that the image of that light source stopped light years away from earth, never reaching any further and never expanding as light does.

Take a cinema for instance, as the light is projected from the camera lens, onto the screen it enlarges, making the picture clear enough to view, but if you keep taking the screen further away, the picture widens until it is no longer distinguishable, as the light disperses the further it travels.

It is the same principle with the distant stars, they project their light, and it travels through space reaching our skies, and in the case of our nearest star after our SUN which is PROXIMA CENTAURI, we are able to touch it's projected rays as they travel through our corner of the universe, 4.22 light years after they left it's surface, passing us as a glow in the night sky, reflecting off moons and planets as it carries ever onward.

If this is not the case, and the source of that light has gone, why can we still see the source? It is not the image or mass of the light that travels through space just the rays of light. We can focus on that image or star with our naked eyes, light years away, although it is only a shiny dot in our sky, the Hubble telescope can focus on constellations millions of light years away, and if they were not there, it would only be light it would reflect, not a solid image.
It does not take our naked eyes 4.22 light years to focus on our nearest star, after our sun, or 8.5 minutes to focus on our sun, but we can see them.

It is the same with the radar telescopes we use, they bounce signals off distant planets, light years away then tell us with one breath that they might not be there now, then tell us with another breath that if we could reach them we might discover a planet with life on it.
That is the main reason of space exploration, FINDING LIFE, but what is the point if the planets you are discovering do not exist any more.

The scientist's conclusions in this case, makes a mockery of all their theories, because how can you bounce a radar signal off an object that is not there, and how can you see a light source that disappeared light years ago?
What is the point of observing something that does not exist in the only form we can see it, because if we could reach it to find evidence of the BIG BANG, according to their theories the formation would have disappeared or changed so dramatically that we would never be able to prove anything.
The planets they find orbiting around stars, are found by a shadow crossing a light source, if neither is there how can it be possible to find them in this way?
The answer is simple, YOU CANNOT.

They are still there, as are the stars, constellations, dying or otherwise that we or Hubble sees sending light towards our corner of the universe, and as long as we can observe them they are there.

Closer to home, our SUN sends rays of light and heat, towards us which takes 8.5 light minutes to reach us, so pity help us if the Sun itself or it's image, decides to travel at that speed towards us, which when you boil down the scientist's theory, is what happens in regards to light travel.
The universe as we know it will cease to exist a lot quicker than we think, and it will matter not who was right.

I rest my case once again, for now at least.

Someday the right person will take heed of what I am saying, and agree with me, but until they do, our chance of understanding the universe will be restricted.

2012 will not be the end of the world.

2010-01-22T01:35:00.000-08:00

Image by Image Editor via Flickr

This is a piece I wrote in "thephilosopherschair" some time ago, and I thought it might interest my new readers, as the topic comes up often among followers of such themes, so here are my thoughts on the subject.

By Donald Swarbrick.

July-24-09.

I would like to start by reminding you, that these are my theories, and would like you to consider them before being sent into a panic by the other theorists who think that the world will end on 21 or 23 of December 2012 by taking their assumptions from one of the Mayan calendars.

Lets look at a couple of the causes that are supposedly going to end the world or put it into such an upheaval that it will make our very existence dubious. Things that have been thrown into the mix are "solar bursts" which the world experiences all the time (the Aurora borealis and the aurora australis being an example of this) which the earth defends its self against by deflecting the rays around the surface keeping them safely above our atmosphere, and regardless of their strength the earth's gravity will continue to deflect them as they are unlikely to become strong enough to counteract our gravitational field, as the bursts are only clouds of charged particles, and not an actual furnace charging towards the earth. We have to remember that there are planets nearer to the sun that get the same sun bursts as we do, and come to no harm although they get a stronger surge than us, and the bursts continue to the outer planets too, with no damaging results.

The earth has encountered strong solar bursts before and survived, the only difference this time is the fact that we have satellites up in the area that the bursts are being deflected through, and given the uses we have for these satellites it will cause a lot of disruption to the way of life we have become accustomed to, but once they are past we will be able to put things back the way they were although it may take some time. So if that is a portrayal of doomsday to you, then just be patient as everything will return to normal, or as they say "normal service will be resumed as soon as possible."

Geomagnetic reversal, or polar shift is another expectation by some in the dreaded 2012 but as it takes 5,000 years for this to complete once the cycle has begun, and if we only had till 21 or 23 of December 2012 for its completion then we would be much nearer to the end of the cycle with more distinct signs, other than global warming, or volcanic and geological movement to convince us. Earth has gone through many changes and the signs that the doom merchants are using to convince us that earth's end is near are only natural occurrences that the world has to endure through it's lifespan, but will not dictate its demise.

The Mayans were very knowledgeable people both in astronomy and mathematics 2,000 years BC so you have to ask, where that knowledge came from, and why are the few descendants that are left, not as clever, or, why did they not carry on from where their ancestors left off giving us more to work on other than the records they left behind?

I wrote a piece in "unfeatheredangels" on the subject of some of these intelligent races, all from a similar time zone and area where each of their cultures were only slightly different although they were not connected to each other, and made the suggestion that they could have gained their knowledge of the stars by traveling here from a planet that had become endangered, and were brought here by the same spacecraft described in "The Old Testament" by Ezekiel. This may sound outrageous to you but when you consider the knowledge they had then, compared to the knowledge the supposed learned people of today have, and why that knowledge was not passed down and elaborated on by their following generations, it becomes a more logical theory.

When you study their rituals and beliefs, which don't always come from myths or legends, you can, if you study the beliefs,and look at them with an open mind, begin to see where my theories take some logic. Take one, for instance, the "Zapotee" (another race from around the same time zone and area as the Mayans) who think they come from an elite race among the clouds, so if they WERE brought here from another planet, that is where their belief would have originated, and not from myths or legend as we have been led to believe. It has been thought that most of these races I am speaking about suddenly appeared on earth,and their ancestry has been nigh impossible to trace, so that is all the more reason not to discount my theory.

The Mayans had two calendars, one called Mesoamerican long calender, the other being the Venus cycle, and they took calculations from the stars for many different reasons that I am not going into now ( look up the Mayans on the Internet for all the facts you need) so why has the public been frightened by one of them just because it happens to last for 5,125 years and expires in December 2012. They only used it for a certain purpose and whatever purpose that was, was not needed after 2012, not because the world was going to end but because the astronomical reason they were using it would have become outdated as the stars alignments altered. They never predicted the end of the world although they were knowledgeable enough to do so, if it was possible at all, and would have made it more clear than a date on some calendar they were going to discard in 2012 had they survived in the strength and knowledge of their origin, and not have mysteriously faded into oblivion, taking their exceptional knowledge with them.

The Mayans, and the other races in and around that time knew more than they should, and one reason that cannot be discounted is the fact that they could have gained their knowledge first hand from the space travellers who brought them here, the same people the bible is referring to. Their calendars could have been brought from their own planet as they do not fit with earth's cycles, and the calculations taken from there, while the long count calendar that all the fuss is about, having nothing whatsoever to do with earth.

If the person who started all the fuss had explained to the gullible people more of the culture and rituals of the Mayans, then there would be more understanding of such an intelligent race, and less ridiculous theories on a prediction they never made or suggested.

Thankfully we have the Internet to fall back on now, so if you want to put your mind at ease on the 2012 subject, then I suggest you go and study the Mayans and make your own mind up instead of listening to other peoples theories, mine included.

Some of you will never be convinced that 2012 is not going to bring disaster to the earth, but I will be under the clock with a red rose in my lapel, to meet any of you who care to turn up on the 25Th of December 2012 to prove I was right. What clock? I will disclose that on the 24Th but remember to buy my Christmas present. A bottle of Bacardi would be fine to bring in the new year of 2013................? Now thirteen is an unlucky number to some..................................... I wonder??????

In the beginning.

2009-12-26T04:45:00.000-08:00

To understand fully what this blog is all about, I would advise you to go to the very first post and read it from there.
I realize that there is a lot to read but I think you will find it is worth it if your are interested in these matters.

The star in the east.

2009-12-18T06:19:00.000-08:00

As it is getting near Christmas I thought I would transfer a piece I wrote in "thephilosopherschair" that might give you food for thought at this time of year.

By Donald Swarbrick.

Here is something else to ponder, if you want to compare events in the bible to what we know today.

How would the people from biblical times describe the vision in the picture above?

This is an example of how the star in the east could have come about, when all the time it was an aircraft, never seen in the skies in these times, a simple case of mistaken identity, due to lack of knowledge.

It might not be exactly how we would describe it in this day and age if it were to have taken place yesterday, but it gives one example of how reporters could translate it to the newspapers, given our knowledge now.

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, each give their account of events at the time of Jesus conception, birth and early life, and regardless of the many translations of these gospels, plus the description of four different men of these times, there is a strong indication that the phenomenal occurrences that happened were influenced by superior beings from another planet.

If we take a look at some of the important factors described by these four individuals, we should see how much easier it would have been to prove the existence of space travelers if they had the technology of the world we live in today. If they had the same knowledge as people from the twenty first century or, if the events we are going to look at happened in this day and age everything described would be more clear cut, although the fear of God would still he present. This was the time of King Herod and in his domain so with the prophecies about this new born child’s future threatening his ruler ship he ordered its death. The Wise Men who, had been guided towards the child’s birthplace by what has been accepted as a star, told Herod of the birth, of the importance of the child, of their intention to visit him and present him with gifts.

There are no stars in the sky capable of guiding anyone to a particular place on earth’s surface in such a way, (although sailors in the early days before, the compass was invented used stars for guidance, it was not in the same way as this event recorded in the bible) so my assumption is that the bright light was a small craft or power pack used by an “angel” within earth’s atmosphere which would give the appearance of a star to the more primitive people of that era.

The people around the Middle Eastern countries in these times knew something exceptional was taking place but could not fathom exactly what; making them create the mystique that has been deciphered from the scriptures. The Wise Men were so called in my estimation, because they understood what the light meant, although not what it was, but they had accepted the existence of God hence the reason they were chosen. They had been told of Herod’s plan to kill God’s son, (through mental telepathy) which they describe as a dream, and would most likely have appeared to them as such with God and his crews not wanting to reveal too much of their powers. They disobeyed Herod’s wish for them to return and tell him of the whereabouts of the child, taking another route home.

At the same time an angel (which we have established are God’s crew carrying messages to earthlings from the spaceships above) warned Joseph to flee to Egypt with Mary and the baby, as Herod was going to kill all the boys of two years or under, making sure the baby who threatened his dominance would be exterminated. Joseph and his family had been sent to a land that was well known to God’s crews, to await Herod’s death, the news of which would be relayed to him in the usual way by an angel. This was another strange occurrence Joseph had come to accept proving his belief in God’s existence, although not fully understanding, had complete faith in his guidance, taking Jesus to Nazareth where he would spend his early years. All these events had been foretold by the early prophets, so they came as no surprise to the more intelligent people of the time, one of whom was John or John the Baptist as he was to be known, as it was he who was chosen to baptize God’s son.

John had already been telling the earthlings about God and his crews from Heaven and as their spaceships had been present (although disguised) in the skies, and, they had been influencing life on earth for some time it stands to reason the news of them was beginning to spread, just as they had planned. They wanted their existence to be known, but could never make the earthlings fully understand where they came from and why they were so advanced compared to them, When the myths and mystique grew around them they used it to their advantage as it created the required effect, gaining the attention of the people towards the warnings about earth’s demise and the safe haven of Heaven the space travelers had to offer.

John the Baptist had the sense to realise what was taking place, he had heard of the prophecies that had been ignored before and knew of “the wrath of the Gods”. It says in Matthew Chapter three verse sixteen that after, Jesus was baptized by John, “the heavens were opened and he saw the spirit of God descending like a dove.” And a voice from Heaven said this is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. More reason to believe spacecraft were in the skies above, or would you rather believe in a mystical character floating on vaporized water with feathered wings rather than the more logical explanation of people inside spacecraft, hovering above the earth. I can understand people of two thousand years ago thinking the ridiculous, but it puzzles me why in this day of space travel, primitive as it is, earthlings still believe in the myths of angels with harps and feathered wings floating on clouds.

We have updated the Bible into modern language, but still hold on to the myths and evade the reality. If a true translation were to be written, the events after the baptism of Jesus would read like this, “after the baptism, as Jesus came out of the water, God who had been watching from the spaceship revealed the presence of the craft by sliding back the door underneath it allowing the inner lights to beam down to earth where he then descended from in his smaller craft (used only in the inner hemisphere) to where they were, while transmitting the message through the loudspeakers saying, THIS IS MY BELOVED SON IN WHOM I AM WELL PLEASED”!

These were the only moments the armada above could be spotted and as the witnesses did not understand fully what they were looking up into, they tried to express it the only way they knew, providing us with the mystique that we have come to connect Heaven with. Jesus was then led out into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil where his allegiance to his father GOD would be tested to the limit, proving he was without the sinful worldly nature the earthlings possessed even though he was part earthling. When you read through the Bible, you begin to realise why it was interpreted in this way through the years, with present day man still wanting to pretend that he is the only intelligent life in the Universe. A power such as I am unfolding to you now is better thought of as being a spiritual, unrealistic force rather than face up to the fact that they are real and can reappear in our skies at anytime! It’s this fear of the unknown that makes man reject these things, but if he began to accept them for what they really are, they would realise it is only the devil’s ships they have to fear, as they will have a big say, as to where our destiny lies, (the planet Heaven or the planet Hell!)

The puzzle of gravity

2009-11-05T13:32:00.000-08:00

Image via Wikipedia

Gravity is one of the biggest problems we have when trying to understand the way the universe works, because we still are trying to figure out how it works, and the importance of its function.
We know it is essential to the way the universe is held together, but if we cannot understand it, then we cannot progress with our understanding of the universe as a whole, and some theories will remain theories.

It is my conjecture that gravity was needed to create the Big Bang, as I explained in earlier chapters of "unfeatheredangels" by gasses contorting as they met, which eventually resulted in the first spinning effect as they reacted with each other.
This in turn created a giant vortex, the suction to draw everything from the atmosphere within billions of light years in circumference into its center, which would include the ingredients that made up the universe.

All the ingredients were around, they only needed the reaction to bring them together, and this massive vortex was the answer.
Everything was mixed up and spat out by the chemical reaction created inside the vortex, by all the ingredients interacting to create the Big Bang, which sent solids, liquids, and gasses, spinning out into the space we are still careering through.

We are still being carried by the blast, that is why the planets are moving further apart, and the galaxies still stretching out through space.

Gravity was started by the spinning motion, and it is simply the orbs that make up the galaxies that are punching their way through space, while spinning and clearing air from their path, both on their outward journey away from the blast, plus the air they are clearing during their rotation on their axes, creating a vortex around them. The suction is in the lower layer, and the surge in the upper layer of the draft, which creates GRAVITY as we know it.

It is more the air or the atmosphere they are clearing during their rotation on their axes, that causes gravity as we know it, pulling objects down towards them that are a certain distance away from them,or inside the bubble created by the rotation, while bouncing others back off into space if they hit the bubble.

Draft is gravity, just like the draft you get when you slam a door, but the displacement of air is the cause of the gravity around the planets of the universe, because they are spinning.

If you are standing on one side of the door the displacement will push you, but if you are standing on the other side you will feel suction or drag, but because the door is only opening and shutting, and not spinning, you won't create gravity.

A sphere on the other hand creates both suction, and the surge of air ahead of it, and as it is spinning the suction, and surge combine to create gravity. The pull downwards, and the bounce outwards, is the suction, and the surge reacting with the spinning motion as they fight with each other.
If it was a rectangle shape, or a square, the punching motion would always be at the front of the object heading through space, and the suction always at the rear, but with the spherical shape none of them has the upper hand, but both are present.
Its simple aerodynamics, if you were at the front of the rectangle, under the air rushing past you would be forced down onto the surface, but if you were at the back you would be brushed off by the air disturbance rushing past taking you away from the object, like a comet shedding particals constantly, as it moves through space.

Gravity can have an effect further away from the sphere than we have calculated, because it could be displacing the atmosphere miles further out from the gravitational pull we know of, and that is what holds smaller planets and Moons in their grasp.

Our Sun's gravitational pull holds all the planets that we have discovered in our solar system and keeps them together to make up the solar system we know of, and the same thing is happening in other parts of the universe, making up galaxies, which in turn affects all other objects hurtling out in the blast created by the Big Bang.

Therefore the gravity created by the spinning motion of all the objects in the universe, reaches out further away from the objects than we first thought and creates the bases that holds the universe together in the form we know, plus the fact that all these objects are still hurtling away from the original blast.

When our spaceships force there way through earth's gravitational pull, they enter into what appears to us as space and weightlessness, but the thin atmosphere they enter into could also be moving around along with the pull of the Sun, and although it has not been measured or noticed by us, this movement could still have a significant effect on the rest of the objects spinning around in the universe.

The newly discovered ring around Saturn is evidence that this is probable, as the dust particles making up the ring are eight million miles away from the planet.
Therefore the gravitational pull of Saturn has at least a radius of eight million miles, probably more.

Also every other object that spins around in the universe could have an effect on every other piece of Big Bang debris, if the atmosphere that surrounds each object blasting away from the original explosion, carries its thin atmosphere around with it.
There are particals in the space between planets,and stars,it is not a vacuum, or heat would not travel through it.

This unmeasured action of movement of thinning atmospheres that surrounds all the spheres could be the reason the universe does not collapse or collide, during its ever outward journey away from the core of the blast, as it acts like a cushion holding everything in its place, or in other words, holding the universe together.
The very answer to the question mentioned at the beginning of this post, the question that we need to answer before we can progress.

Biblical nuclear missiles

2009-10-29T14:43:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

If you think it is an unbelievable theory to think that aircraft, or flying machines are being described in the book of Ezekiel, and would like to believe, or mock the idea, I wonder what you think happened in this next theory of mine, that no one else has thought of as far as I know.

The story should be familiar to most of us, but we have never questioned the cause or the outcome.

We have the case of Sodom and Gomorrah where in Genesis we have the event of the cities being destroyed because of all the sinful things taking place, which made god angry enough to carry out the deed, but what we have to ask is, how was this deed carried out so completely with the armament that was around in these times?

Bows and arrows, which was the main weapon in these times, cannot destroy a building never mind a city, and we have to remember it was two "Cities" we are talking about not two small towns or villages, so where was the power to carry out the deed when nothing explosive was invented then?
Natural volcanoes yes, but the description of the devastation left is nothing like the damage a volcano makes, bad though it may be.

If you read Genesis, chapter nineteen verse one, it reads, "And there came two angels to Sodam at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodam; and he bowed himself with his face towards the ground;" No mention of feathers when angels appear, but why should there be when they have none.

Lot was told by the angels to flee the city because it was about to be destroyed, and to take some of his family with him.
He did as he was told, so he must have known the task was possible by these people called angels.

In Genesis chapter 19, verse 17 It reads "And it came to pass when they had brought them forth abroad, that he said. Escape for thy life; look not behind thee, neither stay thou in all the plain; escape to the mountain lest thou be consumed."

They had to be miles away from the city to make sure they were out of reach of the blast, but what weapons in these times could cause so much devastation?
Verse 24 of the same chapter reads "Then the lord rained upon Sodam and upon Gomorrah fire and brimstone and fire from the lord out of heaven.

OUT OF HEAVEN......not from the earth, but the crafts in the skies, that brought this advanced race of people here.

Now reading that story one hundred years ago even, you might not understand what was happening, but it should be clear enough now.

The next few verses makes it a bit clearer, 25, reads "And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground."
Verse 26, refers to the line in verse 17 "Look not behind thee" and quotes
"But his wife looked back and became a pillar of salt.
Verse 28, And he looked toward Sodom and Gomorrah and toward all the land of the plain; and beheld, and lo, the smoke of the country went up as the smoke of a furnace."

When you think of the devastation left behind, people from this day and age should only have one clear thought in their heads, HIROSHIMA and NAGASAKI, the two cities destroyed by nuclear bombs to end the second world war.

Only a power such as that could come anywhere near to causing all that destruction, and the blast cause Lots wife to be turned into a pillar of salt.

All we have to do in this day and age is to look up the Internet and compare the destruction of the Sodom and Gomorrah and the scene described by Lot in the bible, to the scenes described by the pilots who overflew the Japanese cities, and look at the pictures taken of the aftermath, and the devastation caused by the nuclear bombs.
They are almost identical, and the reason for that is, it was the same method used in both instances.

So you might say, there were no nuclear bombs in biblical times, but you also thought there were no aircraft flying around the skies, so what is your conclusion now you know such a bomb exists.

Lot, and the people of his time have an excuse to wonder at the destruction, but WE should know the cause, and now realize there are people around the skies who are way ahead of us in developments, who used nuclear weapons years before we invented them, and have reached us from their planet in crafts we are still trying to come to terms with.

What other answer could there be?

The measurement of time.

2009-09-17T23:36:00.000-07:00

Image by Smithsonian Institution via Flickr

We measure time according to our solar system but, why do we think that our time is the only time measurement in the universe, and why do we assume,every stage of events taking place out there is measured by our time?
It is by us here on earth, but not necessarily by everyone in the universe.

We know there are enormous planets in deep space within our vision, and when we can reach even further we will discover solar systems in a very much bigger scale than ours.

If,life does exist on one of these massive planets,(which it will, of that I have no doubt) their time scale will be very different to ours, as it will be measured according to their solar system which, if so very much larger, will reflect a very much slower pace of time, therefore, their measurements of time and distance to other planets, and galaxies, even their lifespan itself, will be calculated in a completely different manner.

Our solar system, in comparison to one like that, will seem to them, like theirs in a fast forward motion, and our lifespan merely a blip in time, which of course it is, but we have never stopped to think just how insignificant our solar system is, and always assume that we are the superior race in the universe.

Mankind as we know it has many weaknesses, one of them being his lifespan, cut short by sickness, wars, or other disasters that can befall earth, or simply old age which in most cases lasts less than one hundred earth years. A blip in universal time.
We are barely here in this form, before we are gone again, leaving our ideas, or discoveries for future generations to elaborate on, which limits the progress we make.

Another life form evolving in a solar system so much larger than ours, that works in a completely different way to ours, will have evolved much stronger than us, with less weaknesses to shorten their lifespan.
The very fact that their time measurement is so much longer than ours will make their lifespan longer, if not eternal, as their solar system having evolved billions of years before ours would have given them time to perfect life, also given the fact that their ideas and discoveries will not have been hampered by death.

Another reason to believe such a planet as this would have a different time scale is, that if it used our time scale, one side of the planet would be earth years behind the other, or earth years ahead, just as we in Britain are hours behind Australia, or ahead of America, so in theirs, they will have calculated time to suit their solar system, long before time was needed on earth.

Now that puts the measurement of time and distance into a different prospective, which would make the universe a much smaller place for them and would enable them to travel through space without having to worry about distance.

If you look at the universe through their eyes, the galaxies they, or we can see are not billions of light years away, but only a short journey away in the exceptional conveyances they will have perfected on that planet, therefore they will have reached these stars. They will be able to confirm my theories in my last post that what you are seeing out there is happening now, and not some light reflection from an event that happened light years ago.
It stands to reason that the light source HAS to be there if we can still see it in a structural form, solid or gas, otherwise it would just be light energy we would see, and have nothing to travel to in the case of dying stars.

Scientist contradict themselves by looking out at other solar systems light years away, and recognize a planet orbiting around a star, and when telling us about it lead us to believe what they have witnessed is occurring out there now, but then they try to tell us that the forming galaxies or the light from the dying star they see, happened billions of light years ago, and the event is only reaching us now.
What is the point of looking out into the universe for other life forms if you think the light reflection you are looking at happened many light years ago, because according to their theories, how would we know if the promising planet that could hold life still exists, or if it died, and the light reflection of its death throes have not reached us yet?

If we want to unfold the mysteries of space, we have to take into consideration, that we are only a speck of dust in the universe in comparison to the enormous planets with life on them, and our life span is only a fraction of time in comparison to theirs.
We have to admit our inferiority in the universe, accept that other life forms that may look the same as us, can reach us, and have reached us.
That is what the bible is all about, people from another solar system being on earth.
You do not have to believe the bible but you do have to admit that if such a planet exists, everything I said is possible, and given everything I have said, you have to admit that more than likely such a planet does exist.
Out there in the universe, the measurement of time, and distance IS completely different,and will bring a whole new definition to our observations, and calculations, that we have surmised from our lowly position in space.

Einstein made many observations about our solar system.

2009-09-10T13:05:00.000-07:00

Image via Wikipedia

I was going to leave unfeatheredangels as a finished work, but as I feel this post is important, I have decided to add it on here at the end, with the possibility of other editions in the future.

Having read the book "The Bible Code" thanks to my good friend Claire from York, my conclusions are somewhat as controversial as The bible code itself.

Too much time is spent discussing the same subjects,and to use a nuclear holocaust as a prediction as to how the world will end in reference to Armageddon in Revelation, is all too predictable for a book written in the nineteen nineties.

There must be enough similarities between the Hebrew version of the Bible, and the English version of the bible to show some of the so called coded predictions in each of the versions, as there cannot be too many words that do not transfer, otherwise the task would never have been achieved in the first place.
Although it might not show up in the same context, there would be a way to compare the code in the given texts to show where the words arise from. Why has this not been done, and only the Hebrew version used as an example, especially when very few folk speak or understand the Hebrew language now.

If I, or someone else wrote this book now, only a decade later, I, or they, could construe the letters in the bible to tell of incidents that have already occurred, such as the "twin towers catastrophe," as the way the letters in the Hebrew version, has no real pattern, with the words being formed from letters at random. There are a few examples that are similar, but not enough to be convincing.

The thing that hit me most was the fact that the writer leaves an escape route in case the predictions he made for the years after the books first publication did not come to fruition.
What I mean by an escape route is, he makes a prediction, shows you the code, then gives us a reason why it might be wrong.
If he was so confident that the code really was in the bible there would be no need for any doubts or excuses.

That is just my opinion, but it brings me to the point I wanted to make in the first place.
Quantum Physics, although using certain scientific calculations, also leaves room for error, or as I have called it an escape route, to save face should their theories be proved wrong in the future.

Stephen Hawking's "Brief history of time" is a theory, and just because it is logical, does not make it right, it has still to be proved right, and will remain a theory until proved otherwise.

Although Einstein made many observations about our solar system, he died leaving theories that have still to be proven today, but some of our scientist take them as fact and make important calculations using them, then IF Einstein is proved to be wrong someday their conclusions from these calculations will be wrong also. In fact some of his theories have already been proved wrong, and the scientist have had to go back to the drawing board for new answers.
"The distinction between past present and future is only an illusion" is one of Einstein's theories, also the one that made him famous, is obvious by its name "THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY"
theory being the operative word.

How many calculations have been made from "The theory of relativity" and it has still to be proved to be correct?
If it ever comes to light (nice pun) that this theory on the speed of light is wrong, which I am not suggesting IS wrong, then all the calculations will be wrong.
What I am suggesting though, is the assumption that as light travels through space the images we see from our telescopes on earth, means that the source of the light we are looking at happened so many light years ago.

We are misusing Einstein's theory, omitting the fact that you need the source of the light to still be active in its visual form, if it is being sighted as such.

Light does travel, and light, and the energy emitted from other galaxies reaches earth, and as it travels it widens and disperses throughout the parts of the universe it travels through, introducing the energy back into the universe.
The image of the source of the light, or the object itself, does not travel through the universe, only it's light and energy, WE are reaching out to that image, therefore the source is still active.

If you take away the source of the light then you just have the light, and energy from that source travelling through space without form, and no visual sighting of the now defunct planet or galaxy.

The idea that what Hubble is seeing as it reaches farther out in space, is planets and galaxies that were formed at the beginning of the universe just after the "big bang" and that the light reflected in Hubble's mirror are events that took place then, is a wrong assumption, simply because as I said, "you need the source to be still active to be able to see the image"

Proof of this is the fact that Hubble is getting closer images of these forming galaxies, and dieing stars and the image remains the same, no matter how close a picture it takes.
If my theory was wrong, it would mean that when Hubble 's closer images came through there would be changes to that image even though it is only magnified.
What I am trying to relate is, the closer Hubble gets, the less light years there are between images, therefore the image should change, but it does not, because the source of light is still there, what Hubble is seeing now, is happening now, and until that realization hits the scientists who hope to view events from the big bang, then they will make wrong assumptions, and calculations.
I have touched on this subject before, and my theory is, "you need the source of the light to be active in solid form to project the images we are now recieving from hubble, therefore these Galaxies are forming now, and the dieing stars are still in the process of dieing"
If I am wrong, and we could span all those light years, at what point would we go through the image of a dieing star and reach the void, or the image of the forming Galaxy to reach it fully formed and in working order, and why would the light energy from a dead star reflect as we see it and not disperse as light energy throughout space, as light does?

It only takes one factual discovery to blow a theory right out of the water, and it wouldn't be the first time it happened in science.

Which brings me to my next post "TIME" and the way we measure it, and its relevance to this post, but as I say "that is for next week."

Links to unfeatheredangels.

2009-06-03T09:18:00.000-07:00

If the articles in this blog catch your imagination, you can recieve more of my views in http://thephilosopherschair.com/ if you log into Donald's views.
Thanks for your interest.
Cheers.

2009-04-29T03:24:00.000-07:00

This is an award I received and of which I am proud to display.
Thanks to Khris.

Lemonade award from my group. Thanks.

2009-04-14T00:25:00.000-07:00

the final question

2009-01-20T23:18:00.000-08:00

Image via Wikipedia

There is one final question which I cannot answer, and to which the answer is not even coded in the Bible and, will probably never be answered as we just do not know where to begin,YES BEGIN! That is almost the question! Where did the first grain of dust or atom come from? Or, where did the chemicals that produced the gas to create the first Big Bang originate from? The ultimate question in other words, how, out of absolutely nothing, did these ingredients appear, and accumulate to cause such an astounding chain reaction, exploding and creating such splendour and beauty throughout the vast emptiness that we now call outer space, (Which from Heavens point of view it is) but was once a complete void. To make any of it possible it had to come from somewhere, just like God and, us had to evolve from the aftermath of that first chemical reaction. This book should at the very least prove to you that the Bible holds the key to our evolution and show how it is possible for life to go on without end. I’ll leave you to draw your own conclusion from my theories and hope they coincide with mine, bearing in mind the strides mankind has taken over the last two thousand years. I do not want to finish this book with “The End” like most books do as we know the potential is there to go on forever. As we started with “In the Beginning.” we will simply close with.
“AMEN”

the time is near

2009-01-20T02:49:00.000-08:00

Image by penmachine via Flickr

They will have telescopes billions of times more powerful than Hubble, powerful, enough to pinpoint any planet in the Universe, magnifying whichever part of that orb they wish, relaying it back to three dimensional receivers on their own planet. We can barely envisage the awesome wonders of their achievements; we will just have to hope that we will be among the lucky ones who will see it all first hand when we get to their planet. They still patrol the skies but they will never fall captive to our primitive race THAT, they have made sure of but they will be here when we need them.

have I cracked the code?

2009-01-19T02:06:00.000-08:00

I have used many assumptions and suppositions throughout my translation of the Bible, but to me it gives us a more realistic insight into what the records in the Bible are trying to tell us. We have come through the last two thousand years basing the Bible on the assumption of others who, have tried to come to terms with it, leading us into the myth and mystique that still surrounds it. I feel I have come closer to cracking the hidden messages in it by accepting that we are not the only race in the Universe and certainly not the supreme race. When you look at the solid facts, even without the suppositions there is enough evidence to justify the idea that a superior race from a distant planet has already landed on earth, leaving the Bible as their legacy behind them for us to come to terms with, hoping someday we will be advanced enough to fully understand it before its too late. The next time you are staring up at the sky and notice an unusual cloud formation, maybe, just maybe, it could be one of their spaceships in disguise patrolling the galaxies keeping a watchful eye over us or maybe just maybe you might be lucky, enough to spot one of their ships, as some earthlings already claim, but have not been able to produce enough convincing evidence to satisfy the naive or sceptical people on earth.

have we been here before?

2009-01-18T03:42:00.000-08:00

Image via Wikipedia

When we get that feeling of having done this before or, having been in a certain place before, but, know we haven’t in this lifetime. Have we really been here before and it is triggered off in our mind by some of these unused cells in our brain? Would the Universe really form exactly the same way again from another Big Bang? Whatever the conclusion is, the evil will always be out there, and the good will always, triumph over it. I prefer to go with the first option and have faith in that supreme race to keep their promise of immortality to us as, the second option although it lets us live again is not continuous, having billions of years between births, making the first more likely. In any event it proves life in the Universe can go on and on forever one way or the other.

eternal life

2009-01-17T04:06:00.000-08:00

Image via Wikipedia

The second option we have is slightly different and would mean the gravitational pull of the largest rock left at the centre of the last Big Bang (which we have established as the planet Heaven) would be too great even for the masters of the Universe to prevent, resulting in everything closing and latching on to Heaven! Remember the aspirin in the glass and what happened to the particles that did not dissolve, YES, they gathered together forming a mass at the bottom of the glass. All the matter that had ever been in the Universe, gathered together again in one big ball rotating as the chemicals, liquids, gases and solids intermingle creating another vortex resulting in the same explosive mixture that set off the last Big Bang! The billions and billions of years and the shear volume of space this would cover is unimaginable but the ingredients will be all there until eventually ….………………………………………….. ………………………………….BANG!!!!!!
Will the same Heaven evolve at the centre after the blast, producing the same God from the remnants? Will the constellations and galaxies reform in the exact same way? Will the matter we were formed from in the first place, regroup on a planet that will become earth? Will I in billions of year’s time be sitting writing a book about it all? Is this, what is meant by eternal life having to be reborn billions of years apart, time and time again?

another chemical reaction

2009-01-16T05:39:00.000-08:00

After billions of years all the matter that has been congealed into one big firmament will react again causing the same chemical reaction that caused the last Big Bang to occur, and the whole process will begin again. The rocks, gases along with all the other ingredients that formed the Universe before, will be sent hurling out into space again, to start a new beginning. The evil that had accumulated on Hell will have been scattered back into space along with all the debris, and could rear its ugly head again in a reformed Universe, where God will have to do it all again, to rid outer space of crime and evil by going out to the forming planets to try and control events just as they did before. Perhaps they too will learn more in the years that will pass, and have invented even better equipment enabling them to make the Universe an even safer place to live, eliminating the need to transport any more people between planets, or over populate their own planet with evacuees. As the earth has become much smaller to us with our speedy forms of transport, so too did the Universe become to these space travellers with their amazing technology. We must assume, with their assurance of eternal life that they will have safeguarded against their own planet getting caught up in a rebirth of the Universe by preventing the retracting matter from entering their air space.

the gravitational pull of Heaven

2009-01-15T08:07:00.000-08:00

Image via Wikipedia

There are two possibilities of the outcome of this natural occurrence, one where Heaven will be involved only by its gravitational pull and the other where it will play a bigger roll. In both cases the beginning of the end will start in the same fashion. As each planetary system retracts with the gravitational pull of Heaven, some individual planets will be engulfed by their own suns growing out of all proportion as their gases expand. The once life giving stars in the Universe will retract through fields of untouched gases in the black matter causing them to react with an overpowering force that takes charge of any encountered spheres, engulfing them completely as they entwine into each others orbits. Galaxy’s will become one mass again trapping all the minerals, chemicals and gases they consist of, reverting to similar conditions before the Big Bang although, this time the objects will stay large and not revert to the minute particles that the universe originated from. Scientists have already forecast an event that runs along the same lines, now they know the real phenomenal occurrence that will cause it. As each inhabited planet gets caught up in this reversal, the space rescuers will be on hand, to evacuate all the good people from each individual planet, much the same way as is described in Revelation about the demise of earth. Every person who ever lived across the vast Universe will be accounted for and either taken to Heaven or Hell. The planet Hell on the very edge of the Heavens constellation will be the last planet to get caught up in all this. If the promise of eternal life we have been given is kept, then as the stars, asteroids, comets, planets, and gases congeal, they will form a roof around Heaven, which will be billions of miles away above it. Far enough away in fact that it will never interfere in the perfection of Heaven. What a fantastic sight for us to observe from the safety of our eternal home, to see this taking place knowing we won’t be affected by it while watching the power of nature interact. We will watch Hell and all the evil that has been in the Universe get caught up in all of this.

Unfeathered Angels

Hubble reaches out into space for us.

Related articles

We cannot time travel.

Related articles

Comment from Prof. Brian Cox. "science can be wrong"

Related articles

Kepler is proving my point.

Planetary News: Kepler (2011)

Kepler Discoveries Suggest a Galaxy Rich in Life

Related articles

Published blog.

Related articles

Time has no mass or substance.

Related articles by Zemanta

Electromagnetic radiation, our universal penetration.

Light years away from the truth.

2012 will not be the end of the world.

In the beginning.

The star in the east.

The puzzle of gravity

Biblical nuclear missiles

The measurement of time.

Einstein made many observations about our solar system.

Links to unfeatheredangels.

Lemonade award from my group. Thanks.

the final question

the time is near

have I cracked the code?

have we been here before?

eternal life

another chemical reaction

the gravitational pull of Heaven