Nassim Haramein has discovered the Unified Theorey of Physics (???)

snafu said:
Not at all, I recently discovered Haramein and found alot of what he said compelling.

Alright. Take one particularly compelling and original idea, specific enough to be scientifically discussed, and let's discuss the details. OK? Avoid general and fuzzy statements such as those that can be written by any New Ager. Let's come to math and physics and logic.

ark said:
snafu said:
Not at all, I recently discovered Haramein and found alot of what he said compelling.

Alright. Take one particularly compelling and original idea, specific enough to be scientifically discussed, and let's discuss the details. OK? Avoid general and fuzzy statements such as those that can be written by any New Ager. Let's come to math and physics and logic.

very well, he notes (accurately I think) that most physicists dislike the concept of infinities as it wreaks havoc with their formulae. But in a non-linear system (a loop say) there is no beginning and end. For example, take a compass and go ahead and draw a circle on a piece of paper. There are two ways of looking at it; you can take exact measurements of the circle and say that the line that makes up the circle is precisely 'x' cms in length, OR you can say that the line is of infinite length as it has no beginning or end, it is a continual loop. So one of the most compelling parts to me was the notion that there is no ultimate fundamental particle of which all matter is made up because you can divide and subdivide to infinity: first we had atoms, then we had electrons, then quarks and leptons and now its bosons I believe. But why can't it be cyclic instead of finite, certainly everything else in the universe is cyclic?

Frankly, I do not understand where this trolling is taking to. OK, this guy claims he has written The Unified Theory of Physics as many others. So what?
He has just to publish a paper and receive the Nobel Prize. We are told for long that this theory of everything is the holy grail of physicists. The problem is that a global theory of physics does take into account matter and energy, and not necessarily consciousness. This is a digression. The point is that I don't see the pertinence of this "discussion" <-- not really a discussion because non-physicists defend a physics thesis, which is absurd academically speaking!

snafu said:
very well, he notes (accurately I think) that most physicists dislike the concept of infinities as it wreaks havoc with their formulae.

Blatantly incorrect. Why Dirac's delta function carries the name of Dirac? Every physicist learning probability theory. learns about infinity. Every physicist in a good university learns about Cantor and cardinal numbers. But infinities are disliked for a good reason, when the answer evidently should be finite.

snafu said:
But in a non-linear system (a loop say) there is no beginning and end.

That is evident, but it has nothing to do with infinity.... WEll, it may have, because the infinite line can be mapped onto a loop in such a way that one point on the loop represents "infinity" of the straight line. This map is called stereographic projection. It is a part of what is called "projective geometry". Some mathematicians and engineers who consider themselves as followers of Rudolf Steiner play a lot with projective geometry and thinking about infinity in this way. Very interesting and well known subject.

snafu said:
For example, take a compass and go ahead and draw a circle on a piece of paper. There are two ways of looking at it; you can take exact measurements of the circle and say that the line that makes up the circle is precisely 'x' cms in length, OR you can say that the line is of infinite length as it has no beginning or end, it is a continual loop.

This is evident. You learn it when you learn about Fourier series and integrals. Every good engineer must learn it.

snafu said:
So one of the most compelling parts to me was the notion that there is no ultimate fundamental particle of which all matter is made up because you can divide and subdivide to infinity: first we had atoms, then we had electrons, then quarks and leptons and now its bosons I believe. But why can't it be cyclic instead of finite, certainly everything else in the universe is cyclic?

It can be cyclic in a more elaborate way. Fractal mathematics and fractal physics, bot are dealing with these ideas. You can find a lot of serious scientific papers dealing with exactly this subject. It became popular when fractals, self-similarity, scaling, bifurcations, have been discovered some decades ago.

If you have more questions or would like me to point you to some particular reading about these interesting things - let me know. Nowadays it is very popular and very well and deeply developed not only science but also art.

Or if you would like me to eleborate on the specific point with details, pictures, computer code, equations - let me know as well.

Blatantly incorrect. Why Dirac's delta function carries the name of Dirac? Every physicist learning probability theory. learns about infinity. Every physicist in a good university learns about Cantor and cardinal numbers. But infinities are disliked for a good reason, when the answer evidently should be finite.

Haha, really got your physicist ire up with that one. That statement was vague and I wasn't clear sorry, your statement "But infinities are disliked for a good reason, when the answer evidently should be finite." sums it up perfectly for me actually, I think its the 'should be finite' part that causes the problem sometimes, esp in quantum physics.

This map is called stereographic projection.

Thank you for giving it a name, now I can read up.

This is evident. You learn it when you learn about Fourier series and integrals. Every good engineer must learn it.

Evident yes, but often forgotten or overlooked. If physicists have a fault its that they are SO deeply immersed in the individual ingredients of the soup and how they interact that they forget to taste it.

If you have more questions or would like me to point you to some particular reading about these interesting things - let me know. Nowadays it is very popular and very well and deeply developed not only science but also art.

Or if you would like me to eleborate on the specific point with details, pictures, computer code, equations - let me know as well.

Indeed, the recursive and self-similar nature of fractals has always been fascinating to me. Perhaps more specifically what I'm interested in is what I would call 'mutations' within this system allowing for evolution or variation within the fractal's pattern. Does that make sense? I guess what I'm trying to resolve is the relationship between the natural chaos and order in our universe and how that might transfer to fractals and other such patterns. I realize thats a simplistic way of phrasing it but if you have further reading on this I would be very interested, thank you!

snafu said:
Haha, really got your physicist ire up with that one. That statement was vague and I wasn't clear sorry, your statement "But infinities are disliked for a good reason, when the answer evidently should be finite." sums it up perfectly for me actually, I think its the 'should be finite' part that causes the problem sometimes, esp in quantum physics.

Not only in quantum physics. In classical electrodynamics we have the problem of self-energy of the electron. Mass calculated from the energy of the electrostatic field of the electron is infinite. This tells us something that the electro is not a point particle. That our mathematical model has limits of applicability. And this will probably happen to EVERY model.

Thank you for giving it a name, now I can read up.

You can read some interesting things related to stereographic projection here: http://www.nct.anth.org.uk/counter.htm

Evident yes, but often forgotten or overlooked. If physicists have a fault its that they are SO deeply immersed in the individual ingredients of the soup and how they interact that they forget to taste it.

There are many species of physicists. Generalizing misses the point.

Indeed, the recursive and self-similar nature of fractals has always been fascinating to me.

I wouldn't say it always fascinating to me. But it was fascinating since I read the book by Douglas Hofstadter "Godel, Esher, Bach".

Perhaps more specifically what I'm interested in is what I would call 'mutations' within this system allowing for evolution or variation within the fractal's pattern.

These as you call them "mutations" are being nowadays used in what is called "genetic algorithms". Artificial intelligence, pattern recognition, such things.

Does that make sense? I guess what I'm trying to resolve is the relationship between the natural chaos and order in our universe and how that might transfer to fractals and other such patterns. I realize thats a simplistic way of phrasing it but if you have further reading on this I would be very interested, thank you!

You may like to read a little bit of a nice stuff about IFS and fractals here and also play with Jeff Wekks geometrical toys - Topology and Geometry Software here

There is another important point that you did not mention: NUMBERS and their role.

thank you for the resources, I will read up :)

what are your personal thoughts on Haramein? Does anything from his theories/ideas appeal to you or do you think he's a charlatan?

PS: NUMBERS are a given but thats a whole other can of worms IMO

snafu said:
thank you for the resources, I will read up :)

what are your personal thoughts on Haramein? Does anything from his theories/ideas appeal to you or do you think he's a charlatan?

PS: NUMBERS are a given but thats a whole other can of worms IMO

Laura twice mentioned (once directly to you) that Ark considers Haramein to be a smart kid who is being used. Laura and others also mentioned you could stand to read what is being said here more closely.

I may like the Kerr-Newman equation at large and small scales and I may like a 24-dim GUT with Kaluza-Klein-like 5-dim space (and 6,7,8) for Electroweak (and strong) and SU(4)-like gravity with 4 complex-dim spacetime but these are ideas from elsewhere. Haramein is not doing much new to tie things together and where he tries it looks very weak as in I'm not sure how a spinning black hole helps galaxies, the sun, hurricanes and tornadoes? Dark matter relates to missing mass for the universe not just rotations of galaxies and I wasn't aware the sun, hurricanes, and tornadoes had a problem. I like dark matter both in theories and in observations:

http://cosmicvariance.com/2006/08/21/dark-matter-exists

That strange group theory sentence Ark mentioned is quite strange even for me (an electrical engineer who has read a lot about physics). One is tempted to look for a typo but that just at best seems to turn a strangely wrong statement into a strangely redundant one. Using Ark's clue about rewrites I could try to be more inventive about it but it gets too inventive and someone would be reading it during the rewrite. It's a glaring proofreading miss.

snafu said:
thank you for the resources, I will read up :)

what are your personal thoughts on Haramein? Does anything from his theories/ideas appeal to you or do you think he's a charlatan?

Smart kid, with ideas, certainly. However, when a smart kid is being used there is always a danger that he will start to cheat. Think of Uri Geller.It's quite probable that he has real unusual abilities. But then, he has to "perform". And because of this need to perform and because of his smartness, he would cheat once in a while.

Now, when you cheat once or twice, it becomes hard not to cheat the third time.

Then, with Haramein we have additional problem: he is using math terminology with only intuitive understanding of math. This is not necessarily "bad". We had the case of the Indian mathematician Ramanujan with no serious mathematical education and yet he produced thousands of new mathematical results. He has not been able to provide rigorous proofs of these results. Was claiming that a Goddess was giving him the answers in his dreams. But his results were very precise, not vague like the dreams of Haramein.

So, possibly someone got the idea that Haramein might be like Ramanujan. Then they got disapointed - as Haramein's goddess was not as smart as the one of Ramanujan's ;)

Also, one does not have to be a professional scientist to discover something new. Think of this story that Laura pointed to me yesterday:

Once upon a time in 1883, was born a woman named Margaret Morse. In the early 20th century, she married and became Margaret Morse Nice, mother of five. Mrs. Nice was a midwestern housewife. She didn't have a PhD. But Mrs. Nice was bright, and Mrs. Nice was determined. She corrected some scientific misconceptions that had been held by biologists for time out of mind. She published over 250 scientific papers. The great ornithologist Dr. Ernst Mayr (whom I met once long ago), said that Mrs. Nice almost singlehandedly revolutionized the study of birds in America. How could Margaret Nice accomplish this all by herself in an era when there were few professional women, and no one would listen to an amateur woman? Mrs. Nice did not assume. She observed. It was that simple. In doing so, Margaret Morse Nice became a scientist.

One of the misconceptions that Mrs. Nice corrected was that of the incubation period of the Golden Eagle. All the scientific papers on bird-egg incubation stated that it took a certain exact number days for a Golden Eagle egg to hatch (I cannot now remember how long, but think the number was 22 days). Mrs. Nice began to look through the scientific literature to see which scientist had done the original observations of Golden Eagle egg incubation time. She dug through mountains of published papers. Dr. X quoted Dr. Y's paper. Dr. W's paper quoted Dr. X's paper, Dr. U's paper quoted Dr. W's paper, and Dr. Z's paper quoted Dr. A's paper, but nowhere could she find a paper in which someone had written, "I observed Golden Eagles and checked the nests each day to determine how long it took the eggs to hatch." She waded through thousands of pages, leafing back through hundreds of years of scientific history, seeking the primary source.

At last, Mrs. Nice came to this source. The ultimate source of wisdom on Golden Eagle egg incubation time was none other than Aristotle! And, wait! Something was wrong here. Aristotle's paper stated that since Golden Eagles were about the same size as domestic geese, their incubation periods should be the same. So there it was, uncovered at last. The information fixed for two millennia in the scientific literature as fact, was only a guess. The incubation period of the Golden Eagle, in other words Aristotle's surmise, had been quoted in a procession of documents down the years by great numbers of scientists as being exactly a certain number of days -- but the actual observations had never been done! And, in fact, the scientists were all, irrevocably, wrong.

Now, this Mrs. Nice first studied the subject. It was a hard work. I do not see the hard work of Haramein. Perhaps he did, but we do not know the results. Taking into account E. Rausher's past work for the Navy it is quite possible that Haramein's results, if any, have been used, or at least tried, along the same or similar channel. We will never learn about them - if they exist. And it is also possible that Haramein himself is not aware about the ways he has been used.

But perhaps it s too much of a conspiracy theory, perhaps.

Anyway, Haramein is good with his artistic imagination. Probably he will finally make a career as an artist. Much like Dan Winter. Hopefully he will avoid the pitfalls of becoming a con-artist.

I just wantd to mention I followed Ark's Dan Winter link to the Daily Grail website. Apologies if this information is known but i didn't find a reference to it after searching the cass forum. There is a button in the upper corner of the site titled "Red Pill." It links to this wikipedia page which describes this project:

The Red Pill is a project to catalogue all of those things on the stranger side of reality, from new paradigm science to alternative history and the mysteries of consciousness. This grew out of Wikipedia's tendency to avoid 'fringe' issues. Additionally, this gives community members a place to browse through the collective thoughts and interests of those who like the taste of the proverbial 'red pill'. So far we have 144 articles written and edited by the community. Check out the Help page to see how you can join in and start contributing right now.

Take the Red Pill
Alien Life
Alien Abduction, Ancient Astronaut Theories, Astrobiology, SETI, Ufology

Alternative Health
Books, Practitioners

Alternative History
Books, Researchers and Writers, Theories, Mysteries

Conspiracy
Books, Conspiracy Theories, Researchers, Secret Societies

Cryptozoology
Books, Creatures, Places, Researchers

Entertainment and Arts
Art, Documentaries, Movies, Music, Television

Folklore and Mythology
Christmas Traditions, Creation Myths, Ghosts and Hauntings, Grail Myths, Flood Myths

Literature and Websites
Documents and Essays, Fiction Books, Magazines and Journals, Non-fiction Books, Websites

Maverick Science
Alternative Theories, Books, Maverick Scientists
Mind Mysteries
Books, Researchers, Theories

Occult and Esoterica
Books, Occultists, Theories

The Paranormal
Books, Ghosts and Hauntings, Poltergeists, Researchers

People
Actors, Artists, Authors and Researchers, Experiencers, Notable Figures, Musicians, Organisations, Skeptics

Religion and Spirituality
Shamanism, Divination, Eastern Mysticism, Kabbalah, Wicca

Sacred Sites and Constructions
Crop Circles, Historical Sites, Natural Sites

Skepticism
Books and Magazines, Skeptics, Skeptical Explanations

Survival of Death
Mediumistic Communication, Near Death Experience, Past Life Regression, Reincarnation, Researchers
Welcome
Welcome to TRP, Help, FAQ, Creating an account

The Red Pill Project

General Information, Advise us of possible copyright infringements, Request immediate removal of material

Miscellaneous
Believe you're being unfairly treated?, Help expand our stubs

The Red Pill is meant as a catalogue of topics which sit on the margins of reality, and which are often not published by mainstream sources. The Red Pill is a Wiki, which means that it is a community-driven site - articles are written and edited by interested people from around the globe. You too can join and write articles, add a sentence here or there, or just fix some bad punctuation. Dive in!

For help topics, questions and contact information, see Help:Contents.

The Red Pill: History
The Red Pill was begun at the start of November, 2005. Greg Taylor, owner/editor of The Daily Grail, conceived of the idea and created it as an adjunct to his website.

Contributing to The Red Pill
Anyone, including you, can contribute to The Red Pill, by clicking on the Edit this page tab at the top of each article. Before starting to contribute however, you should check out some handy helping tools such as this Wikipedia tutorial.

All the text on The Red Pill, and most of the images and other content, are covered by the GNU Free Documentation License. Contributions remain the property of their creators, while the GFDL license ensures the content will remain freely distributable and reproducible. Please note, however, that your personal contribution to 'The Red Pill' is allowed to be edited/deleted by others in the community. This is not a violation of your copyright (you remain free to reproduce the text elsewhere).

An email from the Resonance Project

"After some 20 years of tireless dedication to his in depth research on unification, Nassim Haramein’s most recent scientific paper, “The Schwarzschild Proton,” received an award at the University of Liège, Belgium during the 9th International Conference CASYS'09 (Computing Anticipatory Systems).
Chosen by a panel of 13 peer reviewers, Haramein's paper won the prestigious "Best Paper Award" in the field of “Physics, Quantum Mechanics, Relativity, Field Theory, and Gravitation.” This significant paper marks a new paradigm in the world of quantum theory, as it describes the nuclei of an atom as a mini black hole, where protons are attracted to each other by gravitation rather than some mysterious undefined “strong force.” This radical new view of the quantum world produces a unification of the forces and appropriately predicts measured values for the nucleon of atoms.
Much more work must be done to complete the picture, yet this simple paper is already producing remarkable results!"

Hi drugs66,

Welcome to the forum. You should read the entire thread on this topic and check out some of the links mentioned earlier on Nassim Haramien.

As this is your first post, it's usual to give a brief introduction about yourself in the Newbies section.

I have searched the forum about reiki tummo and couldnt find anything, I am about to start a workshop and would like to know if there is any danger in that practice I should be aware of.

Also I would like to call the attention of the forum to the work of Nassim Harramein, a physicist who has gone great lengths of research and reached very interesting conclusions about the universe, the unified field, black holes, dimension travel, UFOs piramids and all the package...

For example he concluded by his own research that the arc of the covenant must have been some kind of technology/power cell and I was delighted to read that the C's have confirmed just that!

His theory goes that everything is a black hole, and he points out the flaws of mainstream physics like max planck distance and dark matter as being the easy way out of what they haven't been able to deal with ie infinity.

His work is aligned with the scientific principles and method, supported by personal spirituality and meditation share the goal of trying to find a technology among the answers that might result from his endeavours.

His lecture which is available online 40 parts or so, is very interesting as he goes cronologically explaining the steps of his life long quest, it is mind blowing at times and worth watching until the end. Some of the subjects might be incomplete when cross checked to the C's material or even wrong while some others are certainly on track from what I can grasp, of course.

Would love to hear what the C's and Laura have to say about him.

R

Hi eliansito,

Try searching the forum using this spelling: Nassim Haramein.

Oh boy do I need reading and awareness, being in this forum is such a humbling experience and hope not to create much noise in the process...

r