Maybe the orbs reflect conscious transmission, the clearer the symmetry and pattern and the bigger the orb, the more purer energy it contains. Intent and awareness will affect the size and position. We now have technology to make this event visible and therefore also a mean to monitor an individuals ability to impact reality..
1) the orbs you see are reflections from "Smart Dust"... ionic metal nano particles being sprayed from UN planes... chemtrails. If you look in the area where the flash on your camera illuminates in front of you when you take a flash-on picture in the night sky you can see the quatrilions of nano meatal particles light up as they are heavily falling... the camera captures the reaction of the highly charged ...
Controversial theory: none of these structures anywhere in the world, whether in Egypt, Mesoamerica, Europe, or anywhere else, were originally pyramidal. All were originally domes, constructed using an advanced form of ancient Atlantean nanotechnology and reality-bending. However, after destruction by "The Great Serpent", which was not just some meteorite, but a force able to decay reality itself, they were geometrized into simpler block structures that could exist in new laws of physics.
@bistrita12 - a billion times yes. it's the heart and feelings that r the best measure of truth and worth. the head is only going to be nasty without the heart and empathy. clever is good, but clever without heart is a terrible thing to behold. but heart without booky-knowledge is still going to be correct.
I used to create resonance in my bath tub as a kid lol sliding back and forth creating bigger waves each time,,,,,then getting yelled at for watery floor synchronicity
Is that mist on the camera lens supposed to imply the existence of metaphysical "orbs"? See it's goofy shit like this which places an air of unbelievability on true mystical phenomena. And these guys are all feeling around in the air as if they're in the midst of a bunch of special "orbs". Nothing more than liquid droplets on the camera lens. It's so obvious that these shots are not paranormal that I can only assume that the aim is to make people more disbelieving of paranormal things.
@amazinero ever have your camera stop taking video but continued recording sound? plain and simple some things just can't be recorded. some of the orbs i can explain the source others i can not. quartz under presure produces light, given water as a optic path it will project at different points. odd but true i seen this first hand in south dakota, was a trip watching the light just dance around. wasn't till day light you could see how far that light was traveling.world of color.
I read this and that theory that sounds about the same as this but if it was possible why can't anyone recreate it? People keep coming up withe theories but they are a bunch of kooks until they actually recreate this. You kooks should go out and do it rather than just try to convince people by explaining it.
reality check, digital cameras pick up more detail than ever, even if there is one singular microscopic dust particle on the lens it could show on the picture as an orb...or many. when you have ultra-fine dust on the lens(or in the air) it shows the same as on this vid if you go out into a fine misty field at night and take some pics with the flash..it will reflect off the water molecules in the air maiking very shiny orbs,,,try it..its not magic or supernatural...its NORMAL.
where do you people come from???? you talk utter SHIT if such things did work then modern man would still be doing it you are talking total crap just to fool people to make money for your self get a proper job Con Artist
@GRIDKEEPER LOL! its so funny how people get so defensive about such knowledge aka mysay2u. wow, freak outt... such closed minds. how sad. i thank my unconciouss mind everyday for bringing me on such a path of wisdom! halleluaah!!! thanks for posting gridkeeper! <3 <3
@GRIDKEEPER LOL! its so funny how people get so defensive about such knowledge aka mysay2u. wow, freak outt... such closed minds. how sad. i thank my unconciouss mind everyday for bringing me on such a path of wisdom! halleluaah!!! thanks for posting gridkeeper! <3 <3
@mysay2u Modern man is very primitive in his ways, because we've all been fooled. If knowledge was not kept secret, we would be far more advanced, and we wouldnt need to pay for energy. The way it is now, we work 9-5 5 days a week so that we have pieces of paper which goes to pay mortgage and for energy. Energy is free, but if it was aloud to be free then we would all have an equal chance in this life, which the minority at the top of the system dont want
@mysay2u negative attitude, personality, emotional state, heart condition is the very reason why modern man does not/cannot use these methods anymore. Your resonant frequency must be high, not low. A high resonant frequency is achieved via "love". not the "word" itself, but the thoughts and feelings one experiences when in a state of "love". "love" has many forms. you can "love" your partner. you can "love" your dog. they're different forms of "love" but both = high resonant frequency = positive
I'm not saying that orbs can't or don't exist but I just find it odd that they can only be seen (so far as I know) on analog film media. Not sure about digital media. The so-called orbs in this vid just look like moisture droplets which would be in the atmosphere on a damp night and the flash reflecting off of them. I'm still open though because who knows the myriad of forms energy can assume.
The one thing that puzzles me about orbs in photographs is how do we know that these are not just the camera flash reflecting off of moisture droplets in the air? That's what these look like. Enlighten me?
sorry the comments page ran out of characters, so i was saying, I didn't post these comments to put you down or destroy your work but only to bring you to reality. If you think i'm mean, that's your own opinion. Many things can be used for good or bad and as far as the Egyptian Kings are concerned, they were using deceit to control the populations, just like the NWO is doing today. I really encourage you to do some more serious research
people should beware of anything that is called secret knowledge, where you have to be initiated to know the truth of the matter, whatever the subject may be. People who really know truths from deception never claim to know secrets that are hidden. This philosophy of secret knowledge is only there to make people superior from others, so get real and come back to reality, where you can be honest with yourself and others. I didn't write these comments to destroy you but rather to bring you to
you claim to know all this knowledge and the techniques that were used, then i dare you to lift a 5 tonnes stone block, and by the way, if you were so smart, you would know that the green light that you're talking about is of evil origin, the green light represents the devil, not enlightenment. And by the way, if the Egyptians were so smart, they would have not perished the way they did. They couldn't even stop the Nile River from overflowing into their crops when they attempted to make a levy
wat u say sounds like the truth and also very wise but y do u sound like the village idiot and please explain wat the egyption staffs or sticks were for u really need to do more work on this and the voice quilety is awfull , but im stil impressed none the less.
mine was a golden starfish it was going to the right it was amazing it still comes around sometimes but it had more things then a starfish Lol would have goldish green moreso gold though
But where, pray, does this info come from? How can you narrate something in such an authoritatie manner saying "this is how they did it" when there is no evidence? If what the lady says is true, someone (the source of this "authoritative" information?) must be able to recreate it today. I would LOVE to believe the stones were floated etc. but I would like to see someone do it.
My point, I guess, is that if you make statements, prove them. If you can't prove them, then say you are surmising.
The info comes from Egypt. How can I narrate it like that? My point of view on all this has been a some sort of unique one. If I told you how I know you'd probably write me off as some nutter. lol. If I were to recreate this then I would need some serious money to do so. There lies the first problem, making the tools to do this and having the free time to do it. I have never asked anyone for money and don't expect it so now I have to try and do this on my own which we may never see, or will we.
Try me. I'm pretty open minded, takes a lot for me to write someone off. So, I'm all ears...
As for needing money... come on! If you really know how this stuff works, I believe it to be your duty to humanity to spread the knowledge - put it out there. If it is really just the cost that inhibits you, but the concept is valid, you will find sponsors. But just claiming to know how something works isn't enough... ;-)
Not only have I heard of it, I tried it myself - both lifting others and being lifted myself. It's fun and feels weird - everyone should have a go.
But it is easily explained through weight distribution: four people = eight arms = about 10kgs per arm if you lift an average sized man. To do that to a 10 ton bock of stone is a different matter...
No you missed it. The chair "trick" when done properly only works when you place all your hands above the head in the clockwise direction. If you have not done that part then we are talking about two different things as that principle works with solid objects also.
Okay. Please explain. It seems I am really missing something... So, one person sitting down on a chair, four other people stand around him, hands (or little fingers?) pointing in clockwise direction they put their hands on the sitting person's head and then... they can lift him up?
There are more of these pictures in the orb mysteries videos. The upload quality of these older videos isn't too great, if you could see the photos then you'd see the hundreds of faces looking back at you, something which is impossible to see in this video.
She is dyslexic which also causes her to pronounce certain words differently. Dyslexics do things in a sort of mirror mode. Some even put their shoes on the wrong feet.
Again the narration sucks, simiraly? Its similarly !! Really you have to speak correctly for people to take you seriously. Falling over your words isn't helping.
Well you understood it didn't you. For dyslexic people this is a common problem. Too bad for the listener if they are unable to get past that. Like you said before it is the information that is important.
i am surprised at how many times you said residence..... the word in resonance. no one is even going to give you a second thought if you can't even get the word right.
Is not in. You know what she meant, dyslexic people do this all the time. I don't care if you don't like that. Anyway you've watched another video so aren't you being contradictive.
wot if they had quartz.. which is millions of years old... and had ways of tuning these crystals to an interference frequency... thus creating movement????... and by the way.. al sorts of other things.. given time and energy???
i think the lady means RESONANCE not residence, lol. in my opinion this theory is rediculous and has no evidence to back it up, but it is interesting conceptually
What is to believe? One question has 100 answers but only 1 is correct. Which one is it? Stonehenge first was a planetary calendar, then it became a possible landing space for UFO´s now it´s a vortex. If this is the explanation to what it really is I would suggest, as a humble man, to first proof it before putting it as a fact, rebuild it or give some scientific data. Just shooting possibilities will make people go nuts, or is that the idea?
Why only one. Calender yes. Vortex yes. If people want to learn about ley lines and vortices then they should learn to dowse the lines and experience the proof for themselves. Thanks for watching.
i m sure 100% that nothing on this planet is more importend that developement that video and chanel is very valuable just as love and understanding, i woud like to tell thanks the person standing behind of this video
and the rest people keep look and have power to get over our poorness antony from czech rep. thx
re: some of these comments - u can lead a sheep to water but u cant make a silk purse out of the blood that u got out of the stone...or sumthin like that anyway..maybe
I agree with much of what you say but I believe the grail is not a solid object. The vortex which joins all leylines and your own meridian lines has been represented in history and the material world to stop us discovering the truth. The grail in the Davinci Code is shown as the Rose Line and in Chartres Cathederal they follow the line which itself follows the invisible but detectable Ley Ine or better known Scalar Wave.
What a load of tosh. This person cant speak properly and doesnt know the difference between the correct work RESONANCE and the word they use RESIDENCE which means to live somewhere. Oh dear. Orbs of light = dust infront of the tiny lens of your teeny camera. Oh well. You tube is for all.
Well I do hear lots of things and I assess them and grade them according to how good they are. Dust infront of camera lens = rubbish. Silbury is a residence tranmitter... hmmm... equally rubbish. Check out my channel for plenty of real research.
What a usual retarded thing to say. If I have a differing view which puts things in proper perspective I must be an AGENT. Wow. Well you must have an IQ of 5 to come out with such unsubstantiated dada. This video is a classic example of rubbish research. Dust infront of the camera lens and some guys wearing eyeliner. Wow.
Come on, get real. You have a differing view, fair enough; it puts things in "proper perpective" only in your view. How are you qualified to judge "rubbish research" as opposed to valid data? And, by the way, the fact that you back up your comments only with personal insults gives you away as someone with nothing to offer, the classic rubbish "debunker". Then again, feel free to surprise me...
Typical. When the author tells me to crawl under a stone, thats fine. When I return an insult its not fine. This is typical of kneejerk defence of the paranormal which exists with most people. I am presenting you with the solution to these photos... dust infront of the lens. I am not a debunker. I am a UFO researcher who has written for many magazines and done a lot of media work. I do not debunk. I explain. However these people seem dumb.
As a UFO researcher, I am surprised by your attitude and general tone in your comments. This is what I was reacting to. You think the images shown on the videos are caused by dust; fine - your opinion is as valid as any other. Your opinion regarding Silbury Hill equally fine but are you really qualified to say that someone elses opinion of what the structure was built for is "equally rubbish"? Your tone shows you as either closed minded/ignorant or a professional debunker.
Im fed up of seeing this rubbish thats all. Anyone can pick up a camera, especially ones with small focal lenses and take flash photos which will show up orbs. Im far from closed minded but I have seen my fair amount of dada over the years and this is at the forefront of pathetic research. I have seen real orbs and been chased around by them, and these photos are pathetic. Ask yourself why arent there video films of orbs! Dont think about it too long though ;-)
Yes I have had some success at dowsing. Had a bit of training by a famous dowser Dennis Wheatley, and no not the one who wrote the book The Devil Rides Out, but another Dennis Wheatley.
interesting. so H.A.A.R.P is the modern stonehenge i guess(scalar wave generator?). the solitron thing reminds me of the solfeggio tones, where also tesla said that it'd be the key to the universe if we could just understand the matter of 3, 6 and 9, regarding an elements chord mass.
It is unfortunate when people who are obviously intelligent decide to fight about nonsense. I am sure that if these powerfully minded people could work together, we might see a rediscovery of some of these awesome technologies. I invite you all as my friends in hopes that we may find common focus amidst our debate. We all must learn to stop fighting one another. Only then will we truly prosper until then we will all remain sheep be led by the wolves.
some people just will not stop fighting for what they stand for, for instance all of the christians, if HAARP is used to create a fake divination then it will only fuel the religion, if they realize its fake what will they become?
HAARP has the potential to really mess with the gnostic mind... all of these church dwellers will see jesus stand before them and it will be the second coming of christ, it will unite us but at the same time we will always know, can you imagine?
I need to brush up on string theory (the only theory I know of that uses dimensions past the 4th) but part of the reason why string theory is not taught in most grad schools is that it is still just in the theory phase.
If it IS true, then it would be a handy explanation for some things we don't currently get.
This however is not "proof"
A lot of "theories" that provide convenient explanations have risen and fallen over the years and while string looks better and better it is not fact, not yet
"theory of relativity is also , still in the theory stage.. as well as gravity."
Nope, although its nick name "theory of relativity" contains the word theory, this a is a classical misnomer, "relativity" as well as "gravity" are considered physical laws.
e=mc2 is a fact, if you create a reaction in which you smash a bunch if atoms and you measure what comes out, you always get e=mc2.
The fact that the math AND the experimental results are always perfect make e=mc2 a "law"
"i have yet to hear about the "law of relativity" though"
This is a misnomer(A term which suggests an interpretation that is known to be untrue)
Relativity is a Law because theory predicts it, and experiments verify it.
You can use relativity to predict what will happen in a scenario, then perform an experiment, or an observation of a natural phenomenon, and you see a perfect agreement
This is ONLY true for 4D, but that means it works for everything so far.
but im leaning on an idea that time is not actually a fourth dimension, but only yet another property of 3 dimensions.
in fact.. im led to beleive that both time AND space are properties of only three dimensions, time being a "reference point" for the calculation of objects in motion..
then again.. a reference point (perspective) is by nature an outside dimension (like looking at a 2d drawing.. your point ov view being the third (LW and your eye being depth H)
No, time is the 4th dimension, the fact that it is the 4th dimension is the reason why Einsteins stuff works
That is to say, when you do the matrix mathematics of the derivations of relativity(and all time based physics)time is a mathematical variable that is equivalent to an extra dimension.
This stuff gets kind of hairy and starts to require grad level math to be able to work out by I can personally vouch for the fact that time is indeed the 4th dimension.
thats what i was saying ...as a point of reference your perspoctive is the third dimension.
but you also perceive time... therefore it is relative. and cannot exist in the dimensions beyond. it is only existing in the element that it can.. mainly in 3D
i agree with what you say, in that you cannot measure relatitiy without time .. but.. time is linear and relative.. and included as part of three dimensional space/time..
not to mention that time is a unit of measure of a sort.
therrefore it is not REALLY the fourth but rather a property of three dimensions.
it is treated as the fourth i agree.. but it doesnt make it actually the fourth if there is no place.. then there is also no time.
Time is 4th dimensional, it is impossible to make an accurate physics calculation without this fact. Relativity proves this, it is the incorporation of time AS the 4th dimension. It is not "property" of the other dimensions because it does not require any or all of them in order to exist.
Also it is quantity, not a "unit", just like length and mass are quantities not "units".
Every since Einstein's paper in 1905, space time has been correctly referred to as being 4th dimensional.
Time it itself IS a dimension, both mathematically and literally
It is not identical to the other three dimensions, that is, the first three are ALL measures of length, which makes them similar
BUT you yourself assert that there can be more than just THREE dimensions, and since there are only THREE directions there MUST be dimensions that relate to quantities OTHER that just directions
Most importantly, time is its OWN dimension because it CANNOT be defined by using JUST the other dimensions
there are only three directions in three dimensions thats the limitation.. time is a measure of raction and reaction in those three.
.. but by extension of the picture on paper analogy the fourth dimension would seem to the sixth dimensional perspective as a "line" on a 6d "paper", becasue three would be a "dot"
then again zero point (the point of zero dimensions ) is supposedly filled with energy. but yet.. no time. energy is matter. matter is 3d therefore OUTSIDE 3d time is not a "dimension" but a property of dimensions.. its a mental dimension. .not a physical one.. shush that "physical is
This video, like you guys, is retarded! "The lines have always been there..." ...sure, and the Earth's plates have never moved. Zero evidence lends itself zero credibility. Nothing but a couple of old people talking about nonsense in this video.
"The fact that 4 is the smallest number of coordinates you could EVER use to describe an object means that we live in 4D space."
> This is actually correct, I'm a physics grad student and I know what I am talking about
Then you're going to fail! Just about everything you mention fails in some serious way. Just to take one comment...
> Time is independent of the other the dimensions
...space-time went well over your head I take it. Is time not a necesity when defining relative velocities? ...the whole distance over time thing? Does time not slow for objects with high velocity (observed from an outside reference)?
CONGRATS you just proved that TIME is related to DISTANCE/TIME
Get Walter Cronkite on the phone!
mooseflier is genius!
What are you so clumsily referring to is that time is related to you inertial frame of reference. But, inertia is a property of motion which is a property of change in distance and change in time.
Time itself cannot be effected by any of the other "dimensions", if dimensions can be defined be another dimension is it not really one.
Arm chair? I am a physics grad student on way to PHD
The physics you picked up off discovery channels/Newsweek articles is 'armchair'
No amount of movement in the X or Y direction can create a change in Z position
This is part of the definition of what it means for things to be Orthogonal to one another(look up this concept)and Orthogonality is one condition for something to be a dimension
Time is Orthogonal to X Y and Z and thus change in T cant be defined purely in terms of changes in XYZ
Hi Moosefflier I know nothing of physics but hear that the water vortex spins anti clockwise when you pull the plug out of the sink in the southern hemisphere and clockwise in the northern hemisphere. The theories that a positive vortex or orbs in positive vortexs spin clockwise is taken from observations of orbs in the Northern hemisphere at silsbury hill.
Is the spin of the positive and negative orbs inverted in the southern hemisphere? Is the spin of water vortexes in a sink when you pull the plug out inverted in the southern hemisphere or anti clockwise unlike the clockwise of the northern hemisphere?
ley lines" then they are lines in an energy field.. not on the ground.
you have an aweful lot of offensive comments for us.. but nothing to actually add... therefore im not paying attention to anything else you say unless it is constructive..
Now take your extra-large penis out of your mouth and also your foot, and put them back on earth after you get off of your high donkey.
i know what your saying and i agree with your reasoning behind it.
but when your speaking about 6th dimensional "space" then it may include time.. but that time is relative to the obvesrver.. only problem with THAT is again we are limited by our theories.
you know.. i am starting to thinkyou have a point about time.. but i still cannot do it.
even though anything beyond three dimensions is technicly not physical.. i think that is the problem i am talking about matter and trying to aply it in our three dimensions..
actually the way i see it.. fourth d is where the perspective of three d becomes a single dimensional point. 5 is a ray leaving from that.. but i cannot describe the "ray" or the "direction" because of the limits of my perception at this time.
Einstein's theories are limited to three dimensions. therefore time is inherant in them, but time is not directly a dimension because movement along any planes, whether it be third, eighth, or eleventh; has to take time. therefore it cannot be the fourth dimension and is really only based in our perceptions of our own reality. it is a creation of our mind.
Along time ago people only thought of our world in three dimensions(and small physics errors cropped up).
Einstein's equations are 4th dimensional adaptation/correction to this old outdated physics.
LITERALLY, relativity is the set of equations that PROVE that in order to be able to make ANY physics equation correct, time MUST be the 4th dimension.
Not only are Einstein's equations NOT limited to 3D, they are the PROOF that time HAS to be considered as the 4th dimension.
"according to string theory time is NOT a dimension."
Not according to what I have read, where did you here this? the closest thing I read was that
"Yet another central problem of string theory is that the best understood backgrounds of string theory preserve much of the supersymmetry of the underlying theory, which results in time-invariant space-times: currently string theory cannot deal well with time-dependent, cosmological backgrounds."
Acceleration CANNOT be a dimension because it changes both your Velocity AND your time coordinate
And Velocity cannot be a dimension because it changes both your Distance AND your Time coordinate
But that is as far as it goes because both distance and time are fundamentally indefinable(you cant define distance or time without the definitions of distance or time)
Everything else can be reduced to these, but no further, thats why they're dimensions
i suppose i could invent a new word for the idea but "movement" worked the way i wanted it to.
im not talking about "movement" over three dimensions im talking about movement over the planes above that.. and i see your point about time being a dimension now.. but i still need to shave it a bit.
i never said that velocity was a dimension.
also time cannot be a dimension because it changes the position
something has to be somewhere (or not somewhere ) for "X" amount of time. its integral to the existance of the obeect.. but its only in our head.. the actual time does not affect the object outside of the law of conservation.
exactly it must have place AND time.. in third dimensional space/time.. but beyond that.. im not sure.. though i beleive probably so as well.
"something has to be somewhere (or not somewhere ) for "X" "
All things have a component in each of the 4 dimensions
You bovinicusdivinicus have an X coordinate,Y coordinate,Z Cordinate,and T coordinate
You cannot be defined in simpler terms,you cannot use X and Y to describe your Z coordinate for example,and you cant use your X,Y,and Z to describe your T coordinate.
Its not in your head or else everything but position(movement,acceleration, force,interactions with fields) would not exist.
What is the evidence they played 'Greensleeves' to move the stones?
krsnakris 4 months ago
Residence? Or resonance?
BenBrowne82 7 months ago
@BenBrowne82 Resonance, mary gets her words mixed up sometimes, cheers.
GRIDKEEPER 7 months ago
silbury hill is the key to the puzzle
fatcharod 9 months ago
Maybe the orbs reflect conscious transmission, the clearer the symmetry and pattern and the bigger the orb, the more purer energy it contains. Intent and awareness will affect the size and position. We now have technology to make this event visible and therefore also a mean to monitor an individuals ability to impact reality..
MayaWix 1 year ago
1) the orbs you see are reflections from "Smart Dust"... ionic metal nano particles being sprayed from UN planes... chemtrails. If you look in the area where the flash on your camera illuminates in front of you when you take a flash-on picture in the night sky you can see the quatrilions of nano meatal particles light up as they are heavily falling... the camera captures the reaction of the highly charged ...
ChristyNiNe 1 year ago
please learn more because this is total bs
kargenlewis 1 year ago
2)... (ionic) particles to the intense light of the camera (and infra red for those that have the red eye on)
ChristyNiNe 1 year ago
Controversial theory: none of these structures anywhere in the world, whether in Egypt, Mesoamerica, Europe, or anywhere else, were originally pyramidal. All were originally domes, constructed using an advanced form of ancient Atlantean nanotechnology and reality-bending. However, after destruction by "The Great Serpent", which was not just some meteorite, but a force able to decay reality itself, they were geometrized into simpler block structures that could exist in new laws of physics.
YouKnowMeImJosh 1 year ago
@bistrita12 - a billion times yes. it's the heart and feelings that r the best measure of truth and worth. the head is only going to be nasty without the heart and empathy. clever is good, but clever without heart is a terrible thing to behold. but heart without booky-knowledge is still going to be correct.
randomlaughingman 1 year ago
I used to create resonance in my bath tub as a kid lol sliding back and forth creating bigger waves each time,,,,,then getting yelled at for watery floor synchronicity
INTENTIONPEACE2 1 year ago
Is that mist on the camera lens supposed to imply the existence of metaphysical "orbs"? See it's goofy shit like this which places an air of unbelievability on true mystical phenomena. And these guys are all feeling around in the air as if they're in the midst of a bunch of special "orbs". Nothing more than liquid droplets on the camera lens. It's so obvious that these shots are not paranormal that I can only assume that the aim is to make people more disbelieving of paranormal things.
amazinero 1 year ago
@amazinero ever have your camera stop taking video but continued recording sound? plain and simple some things just can't be recorded. some of the orbs i can explain the source others i can not. quartz under presure produces light, given water as a optic path it will project at different points. odd but true i seen this first hand in south dakota, was a trip watching the light just dance around. wasn't till day light you could see how far that light was traveling.world of color.
g11690102 1 year ago
My God. I have never heard such shit.
nickthelight 1 year ago
I read this and that theory that sounds about the same as this but if it was possible why can't anyone recreate it? People keep coming up withe theories but they are a bunch of kooks until they actually recreate this. You kooks should go out and do it rather than just try to convince people by explaining it.
exodous02 1 year ago
reality check, digital cameras pick up more detail than ever, even if there is one singular microscopic dust particle on the lens it could show on the picture as an orb...or many. when you have ultra-fine dust on the lens(or in the air) it shows the same as on this vid if you go out into a fine misty field at night and take some pics with the flash..it will reflect off the water molecules in the air maiking very shiny orbs,,,try it..its not magic or supernatural...its NORMAL.
the7real7michael7 1 year ago
"to argue with a fool shows there are two"
JACKnoSally 1 year ago
Why insist these such orbs are lost souls? Why don't grab it, and observe it? Have U ever try to?
JamesBisOlder 1 year ago
so recreate something like it
3runAz 1 year ago
where do you people come from???? you talk utter SHIT if such things did work then modern man would still be doing it you are talking total crap just to fool people to make money for your self get a proper job Con Artist
mysay2u 1 year ago
@mysay2u You're funny aren't you. Did you get charged to watch this film? No you didn't.
GRIDKEEPER 1 year ago 7
@GRIDKEEPER LOL! its so funny how people get so defensive about such knowledge aka mysay2u. wow, freak outt... such closed minds. how sad. i thank my unconciouss mind everyday for bringing me on such a path of wisdom! halleluaah!!! thanks for posting gridkeeper! <3 <3
justdewit6 1 year ago 4
@justdewit6 You're welcome.
GRIDKEEPER 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GRIDKEEPER LOL! its so funny how people get so defensive about such knowledge aka mysay2u. wow, freak outt... such closed minds. how sad. i thank my unconciouss mind everyday for bringing me on such a path of wisdom! halleluaah!!! thanks for posting gridkeeper! <3 <3
justdewit6 1 year ago
@mysay2u Modern man is very primitive in his ways, because we've all been fooled. If knowledge was not kept secret, we would be far more advanced, and we wouldnt need to pay for energy. The way it is now, we work 9-5 5 days a week so that we have pieces of paper which goes to pay mortgage and for energy. Energy is free, but if it was aloud to be free then we would all have an equal chance in this life, which the minority at the top of the system dont want
southstar999 1 year ago
@mysay2u negative attitude, personality, emotional state, heart condition is the very reason why modern man does not/cannot use these methods anymore. Your resonant frequency must be high, not low. A high resonant frequency is achieved via "love". not the "word" itself, but the thoughts and feelings one experiences when in a state of "love". "love" has many forms. you can "love" your partner. you can "love" your dog. they're different forms of "love" but both = high resonant frequency = positive
lejonvahi 5 months ago
residence?
....or resonance?
talkdonttalk 2 years ago
@talkdonttalk
resonance methinks
aimslayer1970 2 years ago
what what what
talkdonttalk 2 years ago
I'm not saying that orbs can't or don't exist but I just find it odd that they can only be seen (so far as I know) on analog film media. Not sure about digital media. The so-called orbs in this vid just look like moisture droplets which would be in the atmosphere on a damp night and the flash reflecting off of them. I'm still open though because who knows the myriad of forms energy can assume.
AceOfHeart2012 2 years ago
The one thing that puzzles me about orbs in photographs is how do we know that these are not just the camera flash reflecting off of moisture droplets in the air? That's what these look like. Enlighten me?
AceOfHeart2012 2 years ago
sorry the comments page ran out of characters, so i was saying, I didn't post these comments to put you down or destroy your work but only to bring you to reality. If you think i'm mean, that's your own opinion. Many things can be used for good or bad and as far as the Egyptian Kings are concerned, they were using deceit to control the populations, just like the NWO is doing today. I really encourage you to do some more serious research
TheDisinfector 2 years ago
people should beware of anything that is called secret knowledge, where you have to be initiated to know the truth of the matter, whatever the subject may be. People who really know truths from deception never claim to know secrets that are hidden. This philosophy of secret knowledge is only there to make people superior from others, so get real and come back to reality, where you can be honest with yourself and others. I didn't write these comments to destroy you but rather to bring you to
TheDisinfector 2 years ago
you claim to know all this knowledge and the techniques that were used, then i dare you to lift a 5 tonnes stone block, and by the way, if you were so smart, you would know that the green light that you're talking about is of evil origin, the green light represents the devil, not enlightenment. And by the way, if the Egyptians were so smart, they would have not perished the way they did. They couldn't even stop the Nile River from overflowing into their crops when they attempted to make a levy
TheDisinfector 2 years ago
wat u say sounds like the truth and also very wise but y do u sound like the village idiot and please explain wat the egyption staffs or sticks were for u really need to do more work on this and the voice quilety is awfull , but im stil impressed none the less.
jodiexxl 2 years ago
Watch all the parts to learn more about the rods.
GRIDKEEPER 2 years ago
have been chatting with a very enlightened soul recently grid, been learning a lot from her man ...
I feel am getting closer to the knowledge I'm seking .
peace beats 'n love
djmisplacedmarblesTV 2 years ago
The 'tether incident' has the best orbs (ufos)
ifurn0 2 years ago
has anyone successfully used the resonance technique to move objects in our day and age?
would be great if they have....
any feedback is much appreciated
thanks
willy martino
willymartino 2 years ago
Yes partly. Many people have done it yet they don't realise. There will be more videos on this subject coming over the next 6 months.
GRIDKEEPER 2 years ago
mine was a golden starfish it was going to the right it was amazing it still comes around sometimes but it had more things then a starfish Lol would have goldish green moreso gold though
jaso19 2 years ago
Search "coral castle". Unfortunately, the builder refused to tell the secret, and took it to his grave. Good luck.
Bludgeonier 2 years ago
the narrator should really get some sleep...
punkassscream 2 years ago
But where, pray, does this info come from? How can you narrate something in such an authoritatie manner saying "this is how they did it" when there is no evidence? If what the lady says is true, someone (the source of this "authoritative" information?) must be able to recreate it today. I would LOVE to believe the stones were floated etc. but I would like to see someone do it.
My point, I guess, is that if you make statements, prove them. If you can't prove them, then say you are surmising.
ohcrilll 2 years ago
The info comes from Egypt. How can I narrate it like that? My point of view on all this has been a some sort of unique one. If I told you how I know you'd probably write me off as some nutter. lol. If I were to recreate this then I would need some serious money to do so. There lies the first problem, making the tools to do this and having the free time to do it. I have never asked anyone for money and don't expect it so now I have to try and do this on my own which we may never see, or will we.
GRIDKEEPER 2 years ago
Try me. I'm pretty open minded, takes a lot for me to write someone off. So, I'm all ears...
As for needing money... come on! If you really know how this stuff works, I believe it to be your duty to humanity to spread the knowledge - put it out there. If it is really just the cost that inhibits you, but the concept is valid, you will find sponsors. But just claiming to know how something works isn't enough... ;-)
ohcrilll 2 years ago
have you heard of the lifting "trick" of four people lifting up anther with their small fingers?
GRIDKEEPER 2 years ago
Not only have I heard of it, I tried it myself - both lifting others and being lifted myself. It's fun and feels weird - everyone should have a go.
But it is easily explained through weight distribution: four people = eight arms = about 10kgs per arm if you lift an average sized man. To do that to a 10 ton bock of stone is a different matter...
ohcrilll 2 years ago
No you missed it. The chair "trick" when done properly only works when you place all your hands above the head in the clockwise direction. If you have not done that part then we are talking about two different things as that principle works with solid objects also.
GRIDKEEPER 2 years ago
Okay. Please explain. It seems I am really missing something... So, one person sitting down on a chair, four other people stand around him, hands (or little fingers?) pointing in clockwise direction they put their hands on the sitting person's head and then... they can lift him up?
ohcrilll 2 years ago
Its just close up particles of dust illuminated by the flash, not freaky at all
antscratch 2 years ago
It is not dust!
SurrealAspie 2 years ago
The only 1 I saw that might be a legitimate "orb" was at 1:29... most of them are simple dust particles.
AaronAlso 2 years ago
There are more of these pictures in the orb mysteries videos. The upload quality of these older videos isn't too great, if you could see the photos then you'd see the hundreds of faces looking back at you, something which is impossible to see in this video.
GRIDKEEPER 2 years ago
And why does the lady say "residence" FOUR TIMES
It's RESONANCE!
A lot of speech errors, hard to take you seriously :<
tjbayliss 2 years ago
She is dyslexic which also causes her to pronounce certain words differently. Dyslexics do things in a sort of mirror mode. Some even put their shoes on the wrong feet.
GRIDKEEPER 2 years ago
Again the narration sucks, simiraly? Its similarly !! Really you have to speak correctly for people to take you seriously. Falling over your words isn't helping.
GixxxerKim 3 years ago
Well you understood it didn't you. For dyslexic people this is a common problem. Too bad for the listener if they are unable to get past that. Like you said before it is the information that is important.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
Maybe you would enjoy the Vortex Energy series (17 parts) more than this one, cheers.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
i am surprised at how many times you said residence..... the word in resonance. no one is even going to give you a second thought if you can't even get the word right.
thisguysajerk 3 years ago
Is not in. You know what she meant, dyslexic people do this all the time. I don't care if you don't like that. Anyway you've watched another video so aren't you being contradictive.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
wot if they had quartz.. which is millions of years old... and had ways of tuning these crystals to an interference frequency... thus creating movement????... and by the way.. al sorts of other things.. given time and energy???
scottishsanny 3 years ago
i think the lady means RESONANCE not residence, lol. in my opinion this theory is rediculous and has no evidence to back it up, but it is interesting conceptually
SaintInferno 3 years ago
Yes that's what she meant. Have you studied Tesla? cheers.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
every heard of john hutchinson? there is evidence to back up moving objects through resonance frequencies. its crazy shit.
thisguysajerk 3 years ago
Orbs? No. Trick of the light? Yes.
thecringer 3 years ago
Come and see me and I'll prove to you it's not dust.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
Orbs are cool.
GordonMorrice 3 years ago
What is to believe? One question has 100 answers but only 1 is correct. Which one is it? Stonehenge first was a planetary calendar, then it became a possible landing space for UFO´s now it´s a vortex. If this is the explanation to what it really is I would suggest, as a humble man, to first proof it before putting it as a fact, rebuild it or give some scientific data. Just shooting possibilities will make people go nuts, or is that the idea?
pvtw1974 3 years ago
Why only one. Calender yes. Vortex yes. If people want to learn about ley lines and vortices then they should learn to dowse the lines and experience the proof for themselves. Thanks for watching.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
watch all videos of gridkeeper and add rysa5 and drunvalo melchizedek
practice yoga,tai chi or be just focust on your body... conecting betwen movements and respiration hasta luego amigo
Papiculaganja 3 years ago
The power called chi,prana,absolutly .. exist
we all are created of this
anywise u want event deny this fact
u will not change on this fact nothing
this video and the chanel and this chanel rysa5 and this video
Heart of Promise ~ Om Mani Padme Hum ~ Premieres com,
are about to exlain the way of manifastating
all existing things round us,called world
Papiculaganja 3 years ago
what is for me and u and all humans gol is to
achieve well body,body is home for soul, thru the body the soul is manifestated to this world,after u obtain proper balanced body
than u can star thinking how to chang this world,so u have body and
now is time to obtain a knowlege,and here they are
Papiculaganja 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
actualy it is imposible to accept this
becose u dont have own ,tangible experiance
befor i obtained mine,i was skeptic and depresive,but never sordid
i was seaking answers, i found the way of my own development,thrue yoga,
sure it cost effort,time,whith i could spend in pub or just funing
Papiculaganja 3 years ago
i m sure 100% that nothing on this planet is more importend that developement that video and chanel is very valuable just as love and understanding, i woud like to tell thanks the person standing behind of this video
and the rest people keep look and have power to get over our poorness antony from czech rep. thx
Papiculaganja 3 years ago
re: some of these comments - u can lead a sheep to water but u cant make a silk purse out of the blood that u got out of the stone...or sumthin like that anyway..maybe
butlincat 3 years ago
How true. Thanks for watching.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
didnt find the grail here, but it can be found on "TheQuestForTruth" channel. happy questing! ALex
TheQuestForTruth 3 years ago
I agree with much of what you say but I believe the grail is not a solid object. The vortex which joins all leylines and your own meridian lines has been represented in history and the material world to stop us discovering the truth. The grail in the Davinci Code is shown as the Rose Line and in Chartres Cathederal they follow the line which itself follows the invisible but detectable Ley Ine or better known Scalar Wave.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
off the wall off the beaten treak totaly off lol sounds totaly bull!
Dragonstud 3 years ago
Thanks for watching.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
that's rain you jackass
Rephilimatlantis 3 years ago
Not rain.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
haha gridkeeper u should just ban comments on ur vid's
glant2005 3 years ago
lol
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
this vid ruined it for me...really.. it's not dust, it's mist w/hard and soft water deposits...
and one more thing.. it's not residence.. it's resonance...k??
MajorUtah 3 years ago
lol cute
hmoobvaj2 3 years ago
I have seen orbs the size of a house, where you can actually walk into, very strange
zensualgreen 3 years ago
That I would like to see. Where did you see this?
truthseekers666 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
want free stuff? anything free?!!? watch the vid on my profile, PLEASSSEEE!!!
loprya211 3 years ago
What a load of tosh. This person cant speak properly and doesnt know the difference between the correct work RESONANCE and the word they use RESIDENCE which means to live somewhere. Oh dear. Orbs of light = dust infront of the tiny lens of your teeny camera. Oh well. You tube is for all.
truthseekers666 3 years ago
you're not a very good truth seeker are you.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
Well I do hear lots of things and I assess them and grade them according to how good they are. Dust infront of camera lens = rubbish. Silbury is a residence tranmitter... hmmm... equally rubbish. Check out my channel for plenty of real research.
truthseekers666 3 years ago
You are either an idiot or an agent, truthseeker666. Either way, why don't you crawl back under your stone?
abig1403 3 years ago
What a usual retarded thing to say. If I have a differing view which puts things in proper perspective I must be an AGENT. Wow. Well you must have an IQ of 5 to come out with such unsubstantiated dada. This video is a classic example of rubbish research. Dust infront of the camera lens and some guys wearing eyeliner. Wow.
truthseekers666 3 years ago
Come on, get real. You have a differing view, fair enough; it puts things in "proper perpective" only in your view. How are you qualified to judge "rubbish research" as opposed to valid data? And, by the way, the fact that you back up your comments only with personal insults gives you away as someone with nothing to offer, the classic rubbish "debunker". Then again, feel free to surprise me...
abig1403 3 years ago
Typical. When the author tells me to crawl under a stone, thats fine. When I return an insult its not fine. This is typical of kneejerk defence of the paranormal which exists with most people. I am presenting you with the solution to these photos... dust infront of the lens. I am not a debunker. I am a UFO researcher who has written for many magazines and done a lot of media work. I do not debunk. I explain. However these people seem dumb.
truthseekers666 3 years ago
As a UFO researcher, I am surprised by your attitude and general tone in your comments. This is what I was reacting to. You think the images shown on the videos are caused by dust; fine - your opinion is as valid as any other. Your opinion regarding Silbury Hill equally fine but are you really qualified to say that someone elses opinion of what the structure was built for is "equally rubbish"? Your tone shows you as either closed minded/ignorant or a professional debunker.
abig1403 3 years ago
Im fed up of seeing this rubbish thats all. Anyone can pick up a camera, especially ones with small focal lenses and take flash photos which will show up orbs. Im far from closed minded but I have seen my fair amount of dada over the years and this is at the forefront of pathetic research. I have seen real orbs and been chased around by them, and these photos are pathetic. Ask yourself why arent there video films of orbs! Dont think about it too long though ;-)
truthseekers666 3 years ago
Hi Matt, we should meet up sometime.regards, Gridkeeper.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
Nerly forgot, Ive been meaning to ask you this for ages. Have you ever tried dowsing? cheers.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
Yes I have had some success at dowsing. Had a bit of training by a famous dowser Dennis Wheatley, and no not the one who wrote the book The Devil Rides Out, but another Dennis Wheatley.
truthseekers666 3 years ago
could not agree.. more! only, it's not dust, it's mist w/hard and soft water deposits...
and one more thing.. it's not residence.. it's resonance...k??
MajorUtah 3 years ago
Not a single sentence of this guff stands up to scrutiny. It is complete, utter and outright drivel.
McAloonzebra 3 years ago
greensleeves was not celtic! it is a known fact that henry-viii wrote greensleeves for the "recorder"
jamierourketen 3 years ago
What's with the people standing in the rain?
crazycoco1028 3 years ago
thats all it is...RAIN,NOT ORBS!!!!!!
caltontongs73 3 years ago
I know the difference between taking pictures of rain and spirit orbs thankyou. Maybe you should watch the Orb Mysteries videos.
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
oooh! hand bags at dawn! "i know the difference between rain and spirit orbs"!
jamierourketen 3 years ago
lol
GRIDKEEPER 3 years ago
It's funny how people try to explain things they themselves cannot recreate or prove.
caesar3693 3 years ago
interesting. so H.A.A.R.P is the modern stonehenge i guess(scalar wave generator?). the solitron thing reminds me of the solfeggio tones, where also tesla said that it'd be the key to the universe if we could just understand the matter of 3, 6 and 9, regarding an elements chord mass.
ICgraFX 3 years ago
LOL! Just... LOL!
mooseflier 3 years ago
Demonstrate this old world knowledge with your new world genius, plzzz. Oh and I missed the last episode of X-files, fill me in. Thx
zinfandel66 3 years ago
rain
jamierourketen 3 years ago
It is unfortunate when people who are obviously intelligent decide to fight about nonsense. I am sure that if these powerfully minded people could work together, we might see a rediscovery of some of these awesome technologies. I invite you all as my friends in hopes that we may find common focus amidst our debate. We all must learn to stop fighting one another. Only then will we truly prosper until then we will all remain sheep be led by the wolves.
crowtheconquerer 3 years ago 5
I agree 100%,
some people just will not stop fighting for what they stand for, for instance all of the christians, if HAARP is used to create a fake divination then it will only fuel the religion, if they realize its fake what will they become?
HAARP has the potential to really mess with the gnostic mind... all of these church dwellers will see jesus stand before them and it will be the second coming of christ, it will unite us but at the same time we will always know, can you imagine?
MrPatrickBateman 3 years ago
Herbzilla11:
dude... we so totally took over this comments thingy. what country are you in btw?
im in canada.
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
US, how old are you? what do you do for a living? family?
herbzilla11 4 years ago
im 30.. computer tech analyst for HP. no kids.
i agree we know some answers.. but .. hehe.. more beleiving.. hehe..
and i agree that "e=mc2" DOES explain things "relatively" well.. but as it applies to 3 dimensions only, thats the problem..
it occurs to me that the things attributed in this video are abilities that lie outside of 3 dimensional physics.
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
I need to brush up on string theory (the only theory I know of that uses dimensions past the 4th) but part of the reason why string theory is not taught in most grad schools is that it is still just in the theory phase.
If it IS true, then it would be a handy explanation for some things we don't currently get.
This however is not "proof"
A lot of "theories" that provide convenient explanations have risen and fallen over the years and while string looks better and better it is not fact, not yet
herbzilla11 4 years ago
theory of relativity is also , still in the theory stage.. as well as gravity.
im not saying its proof of possability.. im saying its proof that theoretical proof is not proof of non-possability.... did i say that right? lol
try to remember that e=mc2 is not a fact.. it is still a theory as well.
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
"theory of relativity is also , still in the theory stage.. as well as gravity."
Nope, although its nick name "theory of relativity" contains the word theory, this a is a classical misnomer, "relativity" as well as "gravity" are considered physical laws.
e=mc2 is a fact, if you create a reaction in which you smash a bunch if atoms and you measure what comes out, you always get e=mc2.
The fact that the math AND the experimental results are always perfect make e=mc2 a "law"
herbzilla11 4 years ago
they are only "laws" because people have gotten lazy and just made a line somwhere.
i have yet to hear about the "law of relativity" though
while i agree on its application here.. in the case of 3d again.. i disagree that thats all there is..
if there is a discrepancy. then it is not accurate and therefore , flawed. or..
maybe its just that we havent found the correct "case" in which these"laws" apply
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
"i have yet to hear about the "law of relativity" though"
This is a misnomer(A term which suggests an interpretation that is known to be untrue)
Relativity is a Law because theory predicts it, and experiments verify it.
You can use relativity to predict what will happen in a scenario, then perform an experiment, or an observation of a natural phenomenon, and you see a perfect agreement
This is ONLY true for 4D, but that means it works for everything so far.
Its as accurate as anything can be
herbzilla11 4 years ago
check out bosonic supersolids as well.. it will blow your mind.. and you might even agree with me ;)
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
im not sure..
but im leaning on an idea that time is not actually a fourth dimension, but only yet another property of 3 dimensions.
in fact.. im led to beleive that both time AND space are properties of only three dimensions, time being a "reference point" for the calculation of objects in motion..
then again.. a reference point (perspective) is by nature an outside dimension (like looking at a 2d drawing.. your point ov view being the third (LW and your eye being depth H)
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
No, time is the 4th dimension, the fact that it is the 4th dimension is the reason why Einsteins stuff works
That is to say, when you do the matrix mathematics of the derivations of relativity(and all time based physics)time is a mathematical variable that is equivalent to an extra dimension.
This stuff gets kind of hairy and starts to require grad level math to be able to work out by I can personally vouch for the fact that time is indeed the 4th dimension.
herbzilla11 4 years ago
It is hard to think of time visually because every dimension has to be perpendicular to the others.
When you have a 1D line, to go to 2D you add a line at a 90 degree angle.
To go to 3d you add a new line that is at 90 degrees to each of the other lines, this means that it has to come out of the paper.
when you add time it ALSO has to be at 90 degrees from all three of the other lines.
Visually this is not possible which is why the geometry of relativity physics can be a real pain in the head.
herbzilla11 4 years ago
thats what i was saying ...as a point of reference your perspoctive is the third dimension.
but you also perceive time... therefore it is relative. and cannot exist in the dimensions beyond. it is only existing in the element that it can.. mainly in 3D
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
i agree with what you say, in that you cannot measure relatitiy without time .. but.. time is linear and relative.. and included as part of three dimensional space/time..
not to mention that time is a unit of measure of a sort.
therrefore it is not REALLY the fourth but rather a property of three dimensions.
it is treated as the fourth i agree.. but it doesnt make it actually the fourth if there is no place.. then there is also no time.
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
Time is 4th dimensional, it is impossible to make an accurate physics calculation without this fact. Relativity proves this, it is the incorporation of time AS the 4th dimension. It is not "property" of the other dimensions because it does not require any or all of them in order to exist.
Also it is quantity, not a "unit", just like length and mass are quantities not "units".
Every since Einstein's paper in 1905, space time has been correctly referred to as being 4th dimensional.
herbzilla11 4 years ago
yes.. i ment quantity.. but again.. it is a quantity in three dimensions though.
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
Time it itself IS a dimension, both mathematically and literally
It is not identical to the other three dimensions, that is, the first three are ALL measures of length, which makes them similar
BUT you yourself assert that there can be more than just THREE dimensions, and since there are only THREE directions there MUST be dimensions that relate to quantities OTHER that just directions
Most importantly, time is its OWN dimension because it CANNOT be defined by using JUST the other dimensions
herbzilla11 4 years ago
there are only three directions in three dimensions thats the limitation.. time is a measure of raction and reaction in those three.
.. but by extension of the picture on paper analogy the fourth dimension would seem to the sixth dimensional perspective as a "line" on a 6d "paper", becasue three would be a "dot"
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
"there are only three directions in three dimensions thats the limitation.. time is a measure of raction and reaction in those three."
You cannot define "reaction" with out using the word "time".
A "reaction" is how the other three dimensions change over time.
You cannot define "time" purely in terms of the other three dimensions.
Time is independent of them.
Time is its won dimension, physically, and mathematically.
herbzilla11 4 years ago
time is a measure of action and reaction in those three."
agreed, but this action/re-action is measured in 3d, for 3d.
ill agree also that time may be the 4th D, but beyond this it has no reference. it relies upon the (re)action in 3dimensional space/time..
hmm there may be somethign to that
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
thats right
therefore time is inherant in three dimensions.
then again zero point (the point of zero dimensions ) is supposedly filled with energy. but yet.. no time. energy is matter. matter is 3d therefore OUTSIDE 3d time is not a "dimension" but a property of dimensions.. its a mental dimension. .not a physical one.. shush that "physical is
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
Time is not inherent to ANYTHING.
Time is independent of the other the dimensions.
The PROOF?
You cannot define an objects time using its position in the other three dimensions.
If we lived in 3D space, you could use 3 coordinates to totally define a thing.
As it turns out, it is impossible to use space to define an objects position in time.
The fact that 4 is the smallest number of coordinates you could EVER use to describe an object means that we live in 4D space.
herbzilla11 4 years ago
This video, like you guys, is retarded! "The lines have always been there..." ...sure, and the Earth's plates have never moved. Zero evidence lends itself zero credibility. Nothing but a couple of old people talking about nonsense in this video.
"The fact that 4 is the smallest number of coordinates you could EVER use to describe an object means that we live in 4D space."
LOL! Sure, rock-solid physics there... haha. Numb-skull!
mooseflier 4 years ago
""The fact that 4 is the smallest number of coordinates you could EVER use to describe an object means that we live in 4D space."
LOL! Sure, rock-solid physics there... haha. Numb-skull!"
This is actually correct, I'm a physics grad student and I know what I am talking about.
If you want to catch up the convo look orthogonality in either a math-physics text book.
herbzilla11 4 years ago
> This is actually correct, I'm a physics grad student and I know what I am talking about
Then you're going to fail! Just about everything you mention fails in some serious way. Just to take one comment...
> Time is independent of the other the dimensions
...space-time went well over your head I take it. Is time not a necesity when defining relative velocities? ...the whole distance over time thing? Does time not slow for objects with high velocity (observed from an outside reference)?
mooseflier 3 years ago
Velocity is a product of space and time,
CONGRATS you just proved that TIME is related to DISTANCE/TIME
Get Walter Cronkite on the phone!
mooseflier is genius!
What are you so clumsily referring to is that time is related to you inertial frame of reference. But, inertia is a property of motion which is a property of change in distance and change in time.
Time itself cannot be effected by any of the other "dimensions", if dimensions can be defined be another dimension is it not really one.
herbzilla11 3 years ago
Dimensions are by definition orthogonal, which means that no amount of change in X direction can ever add up to movement in Y direction.
herbzilla11 3 years ago
"Time itself cannot be effected by any of the other "dimensions", if dimensions can be defined be another dimension is it not really one."
=) Close... try again though!
God damn armchair physicists... ugh
mooseflier 3 years ago
Arm chair? I am a physics grad student on way to PHD
The physics you picked up off discovery channels/Newsweek articles is 'armchair'
No amount of movement in the X or Y direction can create a change in Z position
This is part of the definition of what it means for things to be Orthogonal to one another(look up this concept)and Orthogonality is one condition for something to be a dimension
Time is Orthogonal to X Y and Z and thus change in T cant be defined purely in terms of changes in XYZ
herbzilla12 3 years ago
if there's a thing i hate more than selfish ignorance, it's arrogance.
ICgraFX 3 years ago
Hi Moosefflier I know nothing of physics but hear that the water vortex spins anti clockwise when you pull the plug out of the sink in the southern hemisphere and clockwise in the northern hemisphere. The theories that a positive vortex or orbs in positive vortexs spin clockwise is taken from observations of orbs in the Northern hemisphere at silsbury hill.
fixget 3 years ago
Is the spin of the positive and negative orbs inverted in the southern hemisphere? Is the spin of water vortexes in a sink when you pull the plug out inverted in the southern hemisphere or anti clockwise unlike the clockwise of the northern hemisphere?
fixget 3 years ago
moose if your referring to the
ley lines" then they are lines in an energy field.. not on the ground.
you have an aweful lot of offensive comments for us.. but nothing to actually add... therefore im not paying attention to anything else you say unless it is constructive..
Now take your extra-large penis out of your mouth and also your foot, and put them back on earth after you get off of your high donkey.
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
i know what your saying and i agree with your reasoning behind it.
but when your speaking about 6th dimensional "space" then it may include time.. but that time is relative to the obvesrver.. only problem with THAT is again we are limited by our theories.
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
We are empowered by theories, not limited by them, they can be adapted to if our changing understanding of the world.
being relative to the observer is not something unique to the time dimension, position too is, both observed to be and in actuality is, relative.
herbzilIa11 4 years ago
you know.. i am starting to thinkyou have a point about time.. but i still cannot do it.
even though anything beyond three dimensions is technicly not physical.. i think that is the problem i am talking about matter and trying to aply it in our three dimensions..
hmm.. lemmi think about this for a bit..
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
The best way to think of it is,
A dimension is like a direction that is independent of all other directions.
Draw the X axis on a sheet of paper,
Can you draw a new axis that when something moves along it, it gains noting thing the X direction?
Sure, you can draw the Y axis. Movement in the Y direction does not change your X position.
Can you do it again? draw a new axis along which you could move, but not move in X OR Y?
Sure, you can go upwards from the paper and make the Z axis... CONT
herbzilla11 4 years ago
Movements in Z do not change your X or Y positions.
Can you do it again?
Spatially the answer is no, space has only 3 dimensions.
But, there is another when in which you can move, and keep your X,Y,and Z all the same.
You can add a time axis for your 4th dimension.
That is why time is a dimension, you can change in but remain the same in the others.
You can move in all 4 at simultaneously, but the fact that they are all separate means that they are all separate dimensions.
herbzilla11 4 years ago
actually the way i see it.. fourth d is where the perspective of three d becomes a single dimensional point. 5 is a ray leaving from that.. but i cannot describe the "ray" or the "direction" because of the limits of my perception at this time.
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
"actually the way i see it.. fourth d is where the perspective of three d becomes a single dimensional point."
You are not allowed to see it that way because you cannot define your own words.
The definition of a dimension is a direction of travel that is perpendicular to all other dimensions.
In math this means that they are all at 90 degree angles to one another.
herbzilla11 4 years ago
Einstein's theories are limited to three dimensions. therefore time is inherant in them, but time is not directly a dimension because movement along any planes, whether it be third, eighth, or eleventh; has to take time. therefore it cannot be the fourth dimension and is really only based in our perceptions of our own reality. it is a creation of our mind.
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
Along time ago people only thought of our world in three dimensions(and small physics errors cropped up).
Einstein's equations are 4th dimensional adaptation/correction to this old outdated physics.
LITERALLY, relativity is the set of equations that PROVE that in order to be able to make ANY physics equation correct, time MUST be the 4th dimension.
Not only are Einstein's equations NOT limited to 3D, they are the PROOF that time HAS to be considered as the 4th dimension.
herbzilla11 4 years ago
i see what your saying.. but i still do not agree.. according to string theory time is NOT a dimension.
mainly because we are not talking about tiem we are talking about place.. in an area where time and place dont "really" exist.
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
"according to string theory time is NOT a dimension."
Not according to what I have read, where did you here this? the closest thing I read was that
"Yet another central problem of string theory is that the best understood backgrounds of string theory preserve much of the supersymmetry of the underlying theory, which results in time-invariant space-times: currently string theory cannot deal well with time-dependent, cosmological backgrounds."
herbzilla11 4 years ago
and currently theory of relativity and quantum mechanics cannot deal with forces that are inherant in relativity they can only account for them.
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
You talk about movement but here is an issue
Acceleration CANNOT be a dimension because it changes both your Velocity AND your time coordinate
And Velocity cannot be a dimension because it changes both your Distance AND your Time coordinate
But that is as far as it goes because both distance and time are fundamentally indefinable(you cant define distance or time without the definitions of distance or time)
Everything else can be reduced to these, but no further, thats why they're dimensions
herbzilla11 4 years ago
when i said movement.. im aproximating.
i suppose i could invent a new word for the idea but "movement" worked the way i wanted it to.
im not talking about "movement" over three dimensions im talking about movement over the planes above that.. and i see your point about time being a dimension now.. but i still need to shave it a bit.
i never said that velocity was a dimension.
also time cannot be a dimension because it changes the position
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
"also time cannot be a dimension because it changes the position"
You can move forward in time and not move in position,
Velocity requires changes in time AND changes in position.
Position and time are not inherently linked, one does not REQUIRE the other, one does not DEFINE the other.
Since you cannot define one as the other, an accurate description of an object cannot be reduced down simpler than a position AND a time.
Objects have 3 positions coordinates 1 time coordinate.
herbzilla11 4 years ago
something has to be somewhere (or not somewhere ) for "X" amount of time. its integral to the existance of the obeect.. but its only in our head.. the actual time does not affect the object outside of the law of conservation.
exactly it must have place AND time.. in third dimensional space/time.. but beyond that.. im not sure.. though i beleive probably so as well.
bovinicusdivinicus 4 years ago
"something has to be somewhere (or not somewhere ) for "X" "
All things have a component in each of the 4 dimensions
You bovinicusdivinicus have an X coordinate,Y coordinate,Z Cordinate,and T coordinate
You cannot be defined in simpler terms,you cannot use X and Y to describe your Z coordinate for example,and you cant use your X,Y,and Z to describe your T coordinate.
Its not in your head or else everything but position(movement,acceleration, force,interactions with fields) would not exist.
herbzilla11 4 years ago