Captain’s Log, Stardate 06- More particles of Space
##### Particle Psi-23 #####
More on Light Transmission Dynamics (LTD)
providing further proofs that Higgs Boson, CERN etc. are wrong
Note 1: Particle Psi-23 comes in 3 parts
Note 2: It is necessary that you familiarise yourself with Particle Sigma-18, the proofs that Newton's Opticks are wrong, and, ideally, with Particles therefrom
INDEX:
I – 1 - ONE – 1 – I (2015-01-08)
Refraction/Diffraction; Snell's Law proves light frequency spectrum is WRONG
There are further proofs that Newton's Opticks, as well as the attribution of frequency to light, are both wrong:
II – 2 - TWO – 2 – II (2017-03-07, updated from 2015-05-15)
Refraction is not Refraction; Diffraction is not Diffraction, Question mark against DNA testing
III – 3 - THREE – 3 - III (2017-03-26)
To understand the Universe we must understand FECK
Understanding the phenomena of Glare provides glaring PROOF that Higgs Boson, CERN etc. are wrong.
Emails:
-
Planck Satellite; ii. Peter Klappa (Kent) iii. Stephen Hawking
___________________________________
I – 1 - ONE – 1 – I (2015-01-08)
Refraction/Diffraction; Snell's Law
There are further proofs that Newton's Opticks, as well as the attribution of frequency to light spectrum, are both wrong:
Classical observations & experiments of Snell's law state that light transmitted through a glass cube causes light to be 'refracted' (appear bent) – experimentation reveals that the 'refraction' angle is non-proportional to the incident angle; that the ratio of the sines of incident to refracted angle for any two mediums is a constant ratio; that the emergent light beam is parallel to the incident light beam.
All of this can be verified by observation & experiment and is classical school/undergraduate physics.
But, all this does not prove that frequency is attributable to light – in fact the opposite is the case; vis: Snell's law CONCRETELY proves that frequency CANNOT be attributable to light.
Consider:
A regular glass cube is homogeneous (we can confirm this by observing that regular features as seen through homogenous glass are undistorted), hence the glass has linear and proportional properties i.e. we observe regular shapes through the glass & without the glass.
Scientists argue that the rainbow pattern is 'split' out from white light by a prism, that the colours are a frequency spectrum and that the light is bent according to the different frequencies; that any light colour is a fixed constant frequency within that frequency spectrum, and each frequency is bent to a different but constant angle, hence the frequency spectrum is linear and is proportional relative to the glass cube.
Therefore, for any linear & proportional system experiencing a linear & proportional input, the throughput light AND the output light will both also be proportional.
BUT, we observe from Snell's experiments & law that the refracted throughput light is NON-PROPORTIONAL, NON-LINEAR, i.e. the 'refracted' ray internal-angle to the cube does NOT change proportionally to the incident-angle of light at the glass cube surface; and since we can readily observe that the glass is homogeneous hence produces proportionality/linearity, it can only mean that the light itself is acting NON-PROPORTIONALLY, NON-LINEARLY hence, again, this contradicts the historical claim of frequency attribution, hence light cannot have frequency attribution.
A simple tabulation:
Input System Output
Linear → Linear => Linear
Non-Linear → Linear => Non-Linear
Linear → Non-Linear => Non-Linear
Non-Linear → Non-Linear => Non-Linear (invariably, but can be Linear by fudging)
Also, for a claimed fixed constant frequency, for each colour, producing a constant bend ('refraction') it would mean that light would be bent proportionally but with constant 'refraction' offset – which would still yield a proportional response to incidence-angle, which means that the sines ratio would not be a constant – i.e. again, a contradiction if we accept frequency attribution. Example: assume a colour 'refracts' to an angle of say 5 degrees, the ratio of incident to 'refracted' yields: sin 0/sin (0+5) which does not produce the same ratio as, for e.g., sin 45/sin(45+5) –> therefore frequency attribution does not produce a constant ratio, hence light colours cannot be frequency related pertaining to a particular 'refracted' angle.
And, as previously & repeatedly explained, if colours of different frequencies bent at different angles then coloured objects would appear distorted when viewed through glass, even through our eyes – but coloured objects are not distorted, hence colour 'spectrum' is not frequency related, nor does a prism 'bend' colours differently
Further: light & energy are transmitted through transmission lobes (as measured with e.g. radio/radar transmissions), a main forward lobe & two sets of twin side-band lobes; these are discrete lobes having symmetry but non-proportionality - it follows that the reason we see non-proportional responses in Snell's experiments is because of the non-proportional side-band lobes of the transmission phenomena that has been realised (through experimentation & measurement)
Further explanation on this dynamic will be dealt with in a separate paper, the purpose herein being to draw attention to the gross errors with previous & current Nobel Prize winning physics & economics models – but, it is clear that light is not 'refracted' but that with progressive rotation of a prism, a complex dynamic of decreasing side-band transmission through the prism glass coupled with partial & increasing (with decreasing incident angle, starting from 90 degree, perpendicular incident transmission) subtraction of the side-bands of the incident ray due to progressive side-band reflection of the incident ray on the glass surface, and until total reflection occurs at the critical incident angle.
Again, it follows that Edwin Hubble was wrong to use frequency & Doppler to claim receding stars, which wrongly 'proved' Einstein's Energy (& later Relativity) theories → and wrongly yielded: expanding universe (alternative interpretation of Hubble's observations can explain why we see stars as we do, and as Hubble did but wrongly interpreted, but this is left for schoolchildren to solve), hence Einstein was wrong, and Higgs Bosun is also wrong, and much/most/all of CERN's claims are also wrong.
It cannot be ruled out that with all the long-running dishonesties & deceptions, that CERN are not simply producing computer generated graphics to portray their claimed proton collisions – for, since an ether MUST exist, there being no adequate proof of non-ether, but AMPLE evidence of an ether & AMPLE contradictions of non-ether, and that everything is held together & functions as a consequence of that ether, then it is impossible for a composite component (the eye) of & held together by that ether, to observe fundamental components of that ether that gives the eye existence – this is like the eye seeing by itself alone its own eye in every minute detail, which is an impossibility because the eye is the receptor not the 'computer'.
It is also important to note that the aforegoing proof re Snell's Law is a singularly independent/separate proof that light is not frequency based, and as a proof is independent of my earlier proofs.
It follows that much science is wrong, that many physics models awarded Nobel Prizes are also wrong.
It follows from these errors that mathematics has become distorted which has also greatly impacted on economics models; and many economics models awarded Nobel Prizes are also wrong.
Consequently a full & proper transparent review is needed for at least the physics & economics Nobel Prizes previously awarded – a brief scan of the models for the 2014 economics & physics Nobel Prizes will quickly reveal that these models are also wrong, and that they also do not conform to Alfred Nobel's Terms of Will.
And it is largely the grossly defective economics models that are causing immense socio-economic disparities around the world, causing anger & generating irrational violence → fundamentalism & extremism.
Western Governments/Parliaments and Leaders are refusing to educate their people with these new sciences – hence people are purposefully misinformed, hence cannot make informed decisions regarding elections → hence elections are not democratic → hence Governments/Parliaments are illegitimate. As we see with the USA mid-terms recently.
Unreasonable western governments/parliaments are ignoring the Reason of new science in preference for unreasonable, old and defective science; hence their policies are irrational – and MASSIVELY destructive – increasing numbers of peoples are polarised & radicalised. Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte (Dirty Harry) has broken diplomatic protocols by referring to Barack Obama as a 'son of a whore' (6/9/2016) – Obama has squandered his Presidency by failing to educate the USA & the World as to the real circumstances of global economic crime & warfare by corporates/finance-powers. Duterte fights a socio-economic battle brought on by corpOrgCrime which maintains Philippines in mass poverty & squalor and blighted by drugs lords.
II – 2 - TWO – 2 – II (2017-03-06)
# More on Light Transmission Dynamics (LTD)
Refraction is not Refraction; Diffraction is not Diffraction, Question mark against DNA testing gets much much MUCH BIGGER; Right Hand/Cross Product Rule; Winter's gloomy skies -> why?????; etc.
….. and recognising Richard Feynman's FATAL ERROR
NOTE: To understand what follows you first need to understand why Newton's Opticks are wrong (see Particle Sigma 18) – if you are stuck in non-ether science-fiction then don't waste your time further.
Refraction is not Refraction
We have seen that refraction is not refraction:- what is happening is that the side-band lobes are either transmitted through or reflected off a transparent (glass) surface (depending on angle of glass to observer).
BUT, we need to explain why we observe a shift in the image when an object is viewed through a transparent medium (e.g. glass); and why we observe attenuation of the image as the angle becomes more acute (observation angle relative to glass surface)
We need to understand the fundamental ether transmission dynamic that causes this phenomena (wrongly called refraction) to occur.
We do not understand that basic functionality of the ether, and are brainwashed with bogus science backed-up by CERN's white-elephant god-machine – and CERN refuse to openly engage with the writer, and this because of CERN's vested financial interest – CERN was developed with fraudulent money, and pursues bogus science!
And, DNA testing is much like hi-tech witchdoctor bone-throwing – for three reasons: 1. we do not understand the ether so cannot understand DNA. 2. statistical claims of matching to 1 in 1M5 is a vague/baseless mathematical claim → it means in a global population of 7B that 5000 people share the same DNA, i.e. DNA is NOT unique. 3. that DNA testing is based upon spectroscopy, and spectroscopy is DEFINITELY not understood because it not only goes to the root of ether functionality, which is not understood, but also because it is through a destructive process, vis: burning of samples.
(A silly example, but to the point) - this is like burning a motor-car and deducing characteristics from spectral analysis – but this spectral analysis doesn't explain how the car functions – nor can we say with certainty that a certain spectral identity is due solely to a Ford, another to a VW, .............And the same applies to DNA testing -> wrongly arguing that a specific spectral identity belongs to Joe Soap, and not to Joan Conditioner, or other person .
Whilst DNA has proved extremely useful in all spheres of medicine, chemistry etc. it does not have precision in linking to a specific individual – certainly it is useful as circumstantial evidence to aid crime detection but not as concrete evidence.
Further: we now know from CDADD's R&D that the roygbiv spectrum is not a contiguous NOR a continuous spectrum, we now know that we observe 5 distinct lobes pertaining to light transmission (2 side-band r&y lobes, main 'white' lobe, and 2 opposite side-band b&v lobes). Hence there are 5 bands present giving 5! permutations (factorial 5 permutations = 120 permutations) which is far, far, far less than the 1 in 1M5 quoted; meaning that in population of 7B0 that there are 58M3 that could have the same DNA spectral match.
Add to this, that diffraction grids are used in analyses (so it appears) and that inaccuracies with grids can cause more confusion about a dynamic that has never been properly understood; AND add the very real possibility of purposeful manipulation of DNA material and/or of the test rig; AND add the CONCRETE PROOF of Police & Justice manipulation of evidence (again, Stephen Lawrence Trial & Appeal) → then it is ABSOLUTELY CLEAR that DNA testing has a serious question mark against it – that one can manipulate the DNA of Joe Soap to represent that of Joan Conditioner …..….. or of any other person !!!!!!
(And again, and again, and again, → the Stephen Lawrence murder convictions were obtained by:- bogus/fabricated evidence of blood spots being placed on the clothes after clothes being taken into police custody, and by gross Justice abuse in the Courts (Trials & Appeal).
Add this to other clear gross Justice abuses: Shrien Dewani rendition, Abu Qatada etc.; and to unlawful protections from prosecutions: Richard Branson,. Donald Gordon, Warren Buffet etc.)
So, how do we explain 'refraction' – how do we explain the image shift when viewed through transparent media?
Recall radar transmission patterns (see website link:
https://www.google.ie/search?q=radar+transmission+patterns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=n32qVOjtD62y7QbSr4HgDg&ved=0CE8QsAQ&biw=1510&bih=714#facrc=_&imgdii )
For broad radar transmission there are two distinct pairs of twin side-band lobes along with a main forward lobe – but these lobes are measurable because those are the lobes that are excited by the transmission; they are not the only lobes. Scroll down the website page of patterns (link above) and one can see images of patterns with multitude of lobes – it is simply a case of which lobes are excited as to which can be measured.
Rotate the image of multiple lobes about a diameter, it scribes a SPHERE with a multitude of lobes. The interconnection of all these spheres (ether components) is what makes up the ether. And the interconnection of lobes between these ether componentss determines what occupies any particular point in space: viz.: air, steel, plastic, insects, humans etc. - and these material differences are explained by the excitation of specific lobes for specific materials.
Hence the Bohr atomic model is incorrect & obsolete – this is not to say that the model does not correctly identify chemical interactions, simply that the Bohr model does not fully or properly explain how everything functions – it only partly explains.
Spectrophotometry, spectroanalysis looks at certain excitations of matter (by heating, resulting in it giving off light) and by this means one can see amplitude variation of excitation and also areas of non-excitation (dark spectral lines) – and this 'spectrum' is due to arc-angle displacements of the lobes (NOT due to frequency). NOTE: spectroanalysis observes destructive phenomena of various substances – it is NOT telling us how that substance is structured in terms of the lobes that are excited in its normal form, or of how those lobes interlink with other ether components to form a substance (be it air, water, steel, wood, plastic, humans, animals or whatever)
Peter Klappa (Bio-chemist, Kent) also raises his concerns regarding DNA, PK clearly sees the present benefits of DNA but also acknowledges its shortcomings (see attached below)
So, when we observe an object we (most of us) see through bi-ocular means, of which the light information is 'translated' into a composite image in our brains. How the ether functions and why we see what we do see requires careful thought – and, eventually, our development of understandings of the ether will require Thought-Experiments.
Take a piece of flat glass & pencil (the thicker the glass the more pronounced the effect) – hold the pencil so that you can observe the pencil perpendicularly both through the glass & directly (without the glass) – rotate the glass in the vertical plane and notice the image through the glass shifts relative to the direct image – this effect is what has classically been termed 'refraction' – it recognises the phenomena we observe BUT the term 'refraction' does not explain the ether dynamic that causes it – that is what we need to understand.
Back to perpendicular:- now position glass & pencil so that an object further distant is in relation to the pencil – rotate again and notice that the gap between pencil & distant object as observed through the glass becomes smaller, but that the direct observation remains as a fixed gap.
To explain this 'refraction' phenomena: Consider the smallest ether particle on either side of the pencil; it is a sphere that has multiple lobe positions - but only those lobes that give it the pencil's characteristics in terms of matter of which it consists are excited - and its colour which is also due to specific lobe excitations – and by which excitations the emanating light is transmitted to us - which is why we see it. The light that we observe from those lobes emit the light at angles in a range of 0 degrees to 45 degrees either side of the perpendicular. So, when we observe perpendicularly all appears normal, the direct image is in line with the image through the glass. Now, as we rotate the glass, the glass surface begins to reflect the larger angled lobe transmissions, hence they are not transmitted through the glass, hence it appears that the pencil has shifted position. As we rotate further the displacement is greater as more lobal information is reflected & less information is transmitted through the glass.
Double glassing gives increased effect, thicker glass also.
So, 'refraction' is the resultant lobe transmissions through the glass (the lesser acute angles) less the progressive lobal light subtraction due to reflection (more acute angles) by the glass.
(NOTE: we have not yet understood the ether dynamic that produces the 'reflection' phenomena that we observe – we are simply accepting it as so at present –> thus we have reflection & transmission factors – i.e. it is NOT 'refraction')
Also, as the angle of glass increases away from perpendicular, the more the light image of the pencil is attenuated – because fewer lobes are transmitting through the glass – and the greater the angle of the lobe the less the amplitude of the light pertaining to the pencil's characteristics as seen from the observer's position – and all more pronounced with double-glazing.
The reason for the perceived reduction in gap between near & far distant objects is that further distant objects have a narrower cone of light that we, the observer, can see, so the reflection of side-band lobes is much less with distant objects than with nearer objects so the distant objects do not shift as much as the nearer objects, hence the gap appears to close.
Similarly with objects in water.
Hence: light is NOT 'refracted', but that some of the lobe transmissions are reflected by the glass – hence subtracted from transmission through the glass.
HOWEVER: it seems that this does not FULLY explain the 'refraction' phenomena because when the light emerges from the glass it travels parallel to the incident light path, i.e. transmission direction appears to be fully restored – this could be explained by the fact that light simply excites the ether particle of air at the glass surface in normal manner (i.e. excites all the necessary lobes) but attenuated, and excluding those certain rays which are reflected by glass.
This could explain why extreme lobal light is not fully transmitted through glass – that it is attenuated, partly.
We do see with the prism the twin side-band lobes – so this would also indicate non-proportional responses.
Hmmmm!?!?!? Requires more thought.
Also see (below) issue of Forensics.
We can now also connect the lobular aspect of ether components to the theory of 'Right Hand Rule for Cross Products' – as applying, for e.g., to general electromotive force.
In short: a current flowing through a wire within a magnetic field (two forces at 90 degrees transposed) produces a force that is perpendicular to the plane of the current & magnetic field (i.e. orthogonal) Using one's right hand (Right Hand Rule), hold out hand as if to shake hands, point first, index, finger forward, take second finger and bend 90 degrees to index finger, hold thumb upright (90 degrees to first & second) – the Thumb (Thumb-motion) is the direction in which the resulting force will act → this is the Right Hand Rule.
BUT CONSIDER, we know that if we apply a horizontal force to an object on, say, a table the object will readily move; but if we now apply that same force vertically (90 degrees to horizontal) the object does not move, in fact its potential frictional/stictional force is increased. The frictional force progressively increases as the horizontal motive force progressively decreases, as the angle of motive force increases above 0 degrees (horizontal) to 90 degrees (vertical)
So the Right Hand Rule is contradicted by observation
Thus, we have reached a contradictory aspect of classical science meeting ether reality. It is simply that in not recognising the lobes of an ether component (Note: NOT particle) that we have wrongly accepted a simplified 2D Cartesian resolution of angular vector forces – forces that are in fact angular in 3D, not solely 2D as the Right Hand Rule presupposes. (Cartesian coordinates => 3D dimensions, length, breadth, height) – and this would explain why the operation of the ether produces a resultant force in the third dimension.
So, although we have classically resolved the ether forces into 2D, producing a resultant force in the third D, it is because we have wrongly simplified the functionality of ether transmission dynamics into two 90 degree transposed 2D forces producing a resultant third Dimensional force – instead of recognising 2 initiating 3D forces producing another 3D force.
Or, to put it another way – we know there is a resultant force, therefore we can deduce that the initiating vector forces CANNOT be in a plane 90 degrees transposed from the resultant force (because forces at 90 degrees do not cause resultant force into the third, 90 degree transposed orthogonal, dimension) – hence, again, the Right Hand Rule is incorrect as such, and we deduce that the initiating vector forces are at an angle greater than 90 degrees (obtuse, to resultant force) – which fits into the observable lobal characteristic of an ether component.
Also consider; we know from electrical generation that we produce 3 phase power and that the power can be useful or wasteful (real or reactive power) and we can regulate this by adjusting its power factor – is it not possible that we can usefully regulate the 'power-factor' of fuels/energy to make them more efficient? We presently, and dangerously, manipulate nuclear power, leaving massive headaches of nuclear waste – surely with this new insight to ether dynamics it might allow us to develop ways of consuming fuels to produce increased useful energy, more efficiently and safely. And, possibly, ways of consuming nuclear waste in further useful power generation so as to neutralise/reduce its dangers.
(If we think in terms of reactive (wasted, not useful, not real) power then we can consider that the Right Hand Rule is essentially resolving the 'reactive' component of the Vector forces)
All of which again proves CERN is wrong, Einstein, Hubble, Hawking, Higgs are wrong - !!!!!!!
Cancer treatment/research is also impeded because the medical establishment also block CDADD's R&D – UK's Royal Marsden blacklist the writer and hence counters its mission testament, vis: 'The Royal Marsden – Life demands excellence'.
To understand how the ether works we have to explain not only classical science but also its contradictions and, in light of these new realities, that Opticks (wrongly attributed to Newton) are wrong – understanding that 'refraction' is wrong gives us more, not less, insights.
[Forensic testing: 'Written in Blood, History of Forensic Detection – Colin Wilson & Damon Wilson ISBN 1-84119-8072-2; → page 360: concerning a Barclays Bank robbery & murder on Nov 10, 1966
' … police found fragments of glass. A forensic chemist … tested to determine refractive index …... by covering them with oil and gently heating, the refractive index of the oil changes as it warms up, and when the glass 'disappears', it means that the index of the oil is now the same as that of glass.... the glass proved to be identical with that in the cashier's screen.'
→ although the test proved identical/similar glass the argument is incorrect – it is due to similar reflection & transmission characteristics that the glass 'disappears' – one can argue semantics but the difference is important to recognise, and not to collapse explanations into simplistic, classic terms such as 'refraction']
Note: the robbery at Barclays Bank resulted in one tragic murder – BUT, Barclays Bank's ongoing criminal frauds globally, including fraud raid of SA's ABSA Bank, and 'buying-off' Johannesburg High Court Judge Jajbhay, are instrumental in the general starvation-genocides around the world due to Economy Terrorism, and to SA's ongoing decline.
Also note: Colin Wilson's interesting book follows the history, not the technical aspects, of Forensics – although technical matters are touched on, some incorrectly – but what is interesting is that with the frequency of not-guilty claims by convicted prisoners, and with the knowledge of Justice abuses, it is clear that science is often being wrongly used and/or wrong science is wrongly being used to wrongly convict people.
The fabrication of evidence in the Stephen Lawrence trial is proof itself of how 'evidence' & forensics can lead to wrong results, both witting or unwitting. See Wilson's outline re false conviction & death sentence against accused in Lindbergh child kidnap & murder.
With so much ignorance & focus on bogus sci-fi, non-ether, theories such as Higgs Boson, Expanding Universe, Big Bang, etc. it becomes clear that DNA testing has an even bigger question mark.
Ireland Police/Garda presently blacklist the writer and refuse to engage in constructive R&D to enhance forensics.
Ireland Chief Justice Susan Denham and colleague Justice Adrian Hardiman are both members of the RIA and both uphold RIA's cronyism & dishonesty.
The UK's Police & Judiciary likewise obstruct.
These errors of science add to the general dishonesty within Academia, and merge with general Parliamentary dishonesty – which explains why so much global turmoil exists.
Why are cloudy winter skies gloomy grey.
There are two reasons for this;
the sun being at a low altitude means that sunlight travels more horizontally through clouds, which causes side-band colours to be mixed for greater distances, hence mixing of r,y & b,i (red, yellow, blue, indigo) colours producing ever darker greys
2. the fact that the sun is lower means that the b,i side-band lobes predominate over the r,y – even on cloudless winter days one can observe that colours are 'cooler' (blue being 'cool', red being 'warm', in artistic terms)
[To observe another instance of ether rupture see: BBC documentary, 'Into the Volcano', presented by Kate Humble, episode 1, about 5 minutes into the programme. A volcano in Vanuatu islands erupts and shows clear ether rupture ripples]
….. and recognising Richard Feynman's FATAL ERROR on first Los Alamos atom bomb test
We can deduce now why Richard Feynman made a FATAL ERROR and from which, we are informed, he later contracted cancer & died at a young age.
Feynman was a key-player in the Los Alamos, Manhattan Project, atomic bomb development & experimentation – in filmed interviews (readily available on internet) Richard Feynman relates how he observed the atomic bomb test at Los Alamos in 1945 by observing it through glass; Feynman states that he observed because he knew that glass protected him from the harmful radiation.
This is entirely WRONG – and is where Richard Feynman made a FATAL ERROR, unwittingly, because of belief incorrect Opticks 'science'.
Feynman recognised (wrongly so) that Electromagnetic radiation had the harmful radiations at the upper end of the blue (high frequency) spectrum – BUT, we now know that these rays are at the extreme lobal arc-angle, beyond the extreme-ultra-violet lobal angle – so glass would reflect the harmful radiations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_spectrum
And, in theory, this would be true.
BUT, BUT, BUT, BUT – glass is imperfect, it has impurities, and glass can get dirty, and can hold surface moisture & oils, such as from palm/hand prints – so harmful radiation would be diffracted (?!?!? nnnnnnnhhhhhh – must stay away from misleading classical terminology; let's use...) ... scattered … by these 'impurities' - and hence the MASSIVE radiation from the test atomic bomb would have partially penetrated the glass and irradiated Richard Feynman – who years later contracted cancer, of some form.
So: a massive blast of irradiation outside - multiplied by - factor of scattering (admittedly limited) of that radiation through glass = sufficient irradiation into human body to cause harm => cancer and/or other horribles!
So Richard Feynman's exposure was a tragedy of unwitting belief in incorrect science!!!
We can also see that the aforegoing is a valid argument by considering ultra-violet band – we know that UV light is 'blocked' by glass – we readily see sunglasses stating UV protected – but this is simply due to two key factors: i. The arc-angle of the UV lobal transmission is large hence is largely reflected, ii: the concave shape (to incident light, convex to wearer) of the sunglasses accentuates the reflectivity at each & every point of the glass → hence UV reflected (wrongly termed: 'blocked')
We can also deduce that UV light is NOT 'blocked' because of its 'frequency' – because UV lights are made of glass, and hence would not radiate UV if the glass did block it. What is occurring is simply that UV light bounces around inside the glass (same as sunlight bouncing around raindrops to create rainbows or to mix as grey colours) until the incident angle is such that the UV can transmit through the glass.
Again, this also shows that frequency attribution to light is wrong
Diffraction is not Diffraction – the lobes of colour bands that we see are everywhere present, everywhere & all-time – we are able to see these with a prism because the prism filters out, through a double-reflection process, the ambient light – thus allowing us to see predominantly forward light. Ambient light swamps the colour bands in normal vision, and because of the shape of our eyes reflecting the larger arc-angled lobal light.
IMPORTANT NOTE:
The ether is the ether, it functions the way it does → plain & simple – even though we do not understand its workings. It does NOT behave like a Wave or like a Particle as we have historically argued in Classic Physics – it behaves EXACTLY like the ether and like nothing else.
When certain matters, such as water, occupies ether space then that matter, water, behaves like waves, as we readily observe; BUT, the ether does NOT behave like a wave, it behaves exactly like the ether; and when a particle occupies the ether space the particle behaves like a particle but the ether behaves like the ether.
Plain & Simple!!!
We, matter, and light & energy, move through ether-space by means of an ether switching mechanism.
III – 3 - THREE – 3 - III (2017-03-26)
To understand the Universe we must understand FECK
Understanding the phenomena of Glare provides glaring PROOF that Higgs Boson, CERN etc. are wrong.
Index:
Introduction:
Differentiate: Brightness, Brilliance, Iridescence, Glare
What the feck is FECK? (and understanding what drove Father Jack Hackett (Father Ted sitcom) to Drink. Drink. Drink.)
Eddington's error of interpretation of Solar eclipse of May 29, 1919.
NOTE:
IT IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT THAT YOU FIRST UNDERSTAND THE OBSERVATIONS AT Particle Sigma-18 (see fast-track link on Homepage)
Introduction:
The phenomena of Glare can be seen at the following website, and at the International Commission on Illumination
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glare_%28vision%29
http://www.cie.co.at/index.php/LEFTMENUE/About+us
BUT, the discussions at these sites do NOT reveal the manner by which glare occurs – the purpose of this section is to explain how Glare comes about, and in reaching this understanding it becomes clear that it disproves Higgs Boson & CERN etc.
The phenomena known as Glare is a debilitating & disorienting phenomena – and many hours night driving (& also bright-sun day driving) on South Africa's national routes in the late 1970s in a battered 1964 VW Beetle confirmed this. The flat windscreen of older model VW Beetles exacerbated the problem (although this was not understood at the time)
A technique was adopted whereby when oncoming headlights dazzled, dipping the head and focussing on the left-side road edge minimised the eye-strain (& kept the car on the road) – but the beetle's 6 volt yellow-puddles of dim headlights was another factor in eye-strain – but nevertheless the residual oncoming glare was tiring. Thirty hour drives to Harare or Bulawayo via Johannesburg (non-stop, barring gas & leaks) gave plenty staying-awake & thinking time as to how glare is caused – and coupled with the vagaries of 1st year physics at UCT, in which light experiments left more questions unanswered than those answered – it was frustrating in not coming up with an answer – until one recognises that ('Newton') opticks (with a 'k') are wrong, but that was some 35 years later.
Having now (c2007 & on) recognised Opticks errors AND recognised that Light Transmission Dynamics (LTD) MUST be ordered & orderly (for, how else could we see?) AND that radar transmission patterns clearly indicate global transmission of 2 sets of twin side-bands (r&y, and v&b) and main forward ('white') transmission lobe – we can reasonably deduce the nature of glare and how caused. BUT, having recognised that, we now need to deduce factors within this glare phenomena that gives 'rules' as to how LTD functions.
Recap: we can reasonably approximate the fundamental ether components as being similarly packed as marbles in a jar; and for simplicity we can approximate this to two dimensional model for the sake of explanation.
Take an A4 sheet of paper, landscape, top-middle draw a small circle (fundamental ether component – FEC, NOTE: the term 'particle' is purposefully avoided to prevent non-ether sci-fi 'scientists' from claiming correlation). Around this circle draw radial lines at 0 degrees (perpendicular, downwards) and at +/- 22.5 & 45 degrees, and of unit length of around 5cm. At each radial draw another circle & its radial lines, keep repeating until the page is full. Bearing in mind this is 2D NOT 3D we can nonetheless begin to see how the ether connects FECs to each other (& this is only representing forward light transmissions, radial lines would be all round each FEC component.
[Note also: Roger Penrose's 'endless' triangle diagram & MW Escher's creative & complex images all represent 2D distortion of 3D, but from specific viewpoints – Penrose then wrongly extrapolates his 'endless' triangle into cosmology – which explains partly why deep-space science has become grossly skewed into sci-fi. Hawking & others were no doubt wrongly influenced by these distortions.
BUT, BUT, BUT: - what Roger Penrose's 'endless' triangle does prove is that what we observe is not necessarily what is – which is exactly the issue with supernova & blackholes & other deep-space phenomena.
SEEING IS DEFINITELY NOT GROUNDS FOR BELIEVING – we have to carefully assess that which we do see from deep-space – and also reassess what we have historically & wrongly been led to believe around us.]
We know that Glare represents as a conic brightness whose intensity is far greater, but attenuating with increased arc-cone angle, than the 'ambient' intensity of light coming from objects otherwise in the path of the glare – how then can this be explained other than by accepting that the transmission of light not only is carried in the main forward lobe (as seen by an observer) but ALSO on the side-band lobes. It is because of the intensity of the bright light that it causes a swamping of the otherwise ambient light, thus we have a large cone of bright light, as opposed to a point light (being the forward light), i.e. we have glare.
And this side-band glare transmits through to adjacent FECs – but, obviously, since glare has a finite cone it follows that it attenuates with each transmission to each adjacent FEC, and attenuates on the side-band radial lobe the larger the angle from the forward transmission lobe.
[There is an alternative explanation:- that the orientation of FECs in 3D are such that if each FEC has fixed & identical lobe orientation then being packed like marbles would mean that each FEC in locality is not uniquely oriented in the same direction, because of packing, so forward lobes would cause an arc cone of forward light. Admittedly this explanation doesn't sound convincing alone, but it cannot be excluded until proof.
Also it could be a combination of both explanations – hmmmm! – this does not sound unreasonable]
[The 'non-ether' explanation (by those such as Einstein, Hubble, CERN, RS, RI, RIA, RDS, Higgs, Hawking, Cox, etc.) is that particles are zipping like bullets at speed c every-which-way and, somehow, creating order out of dis-order – clearly such disorderly non-ether model makes absolutely no sense, it is nonsense - BUT, vested interests, mainly financial, explains the purposeful professional & criminal negligence/dereliction and refusal by these institutions/persons to engage in the CONCRETE proofs that Opticks are wrong]
IMPORTANT POINT:- Glare is NOT the direct forward light from a direct source (or reflected source) – Glare is due to the side-band transmission of the intense light from that light source, as observed by an observer (no. 1) in line with the forward lobe transmission. The side-band to observer no. 1 is a forward lobe to observer no. 2 standing in line with that lobe, which lobe is side-band to observer no. 1 – think about this.
This point becomes semantic, to say seemingly trivial would be a gross error, because of the nature of FECs & its packing within space – since its very phenomena is forward light lobe AND 2 sets of twin side-band lobes, packed marble-like, thus it can easily become confusing, when thinking at FEC level, as to which is the forward lobe & which a side-band lobe. Nevertheless we can see that which is the light source and can readily approximate an explanation – and we must remember that we can only explain through thought-experiments because we can never see an FEC.
From understanding how Glare comes about we can easily deduce (as explained previously) why we see the bright spots with slit experiments (Young) – and, with laser lights being far more intense, why we see laser patterns greatly 'dispersed'.
This also explains what we have been told (wrongly so) are 'supernova' – simply LTD phenomena from various stars interacting with 'slits' created by various planets/bodies in the transmission path of particular light radials. Note: this argument does not disprove supernova, but it compels that the slit phenomena MUST be properly discounted before supernova can be claimed. Similarly with Blackholes, which are simply the dark-spots caused by slit phenomena (see later: Eddington's error)
(Higgs, Hawking, Cox, CERN, RS etc. also need to correctly explain that which Hubble incorrectly interpreted as being 'red-shift')
We also need to understand what is happening when light from deep-space is filtered by coloured filters (r, y & b) then merged to form colour image – can we claim that this correctly re-forms the colours as thought to be occurring in space (as claimed by those using the filtering & merging process)? i.e. are the colourful images of deep-space genuine representations of what appears in space?
Why does 'white' light produce colours when filtered but then remerges as 'white' when transmitting through all 3 filters?
The colour patterns, roy & vib, impinging on surfaces allows for certain of the colours to be reflected, wholly, partially, or not at all, and the retinal mergement of the collective reflections produces the resultant colour as observed.
BUT also, we know from glare that the side-bands contain 'white' light as well as the colour – so it appears the explanation is that with mixing of colour filters that the white light emerges because colours are subtracted by the filters.
Differentiate: Brightness, Brilliance, Iridescence, Glare
Because Opticks (with 'k') are wrong and, because for some 350 years we have derived incorrect theories & definitions therefrom we have a significant problem with terminology. Thus terms that are useful in Optics (no 'k' - new science that corrects old incorrect Opticks) necessarily contradict the meanings as held under Opticks, so confusion can easily come about – so what options? - new words to explain something that old words readily suffice?, or redefining old meanings?
This is a REAL problem!!!!
Herein, and to explain the differences, old words with new meanings are used – but it is not suggested this must be cast in stone – also, since we are breaking new ground the new definitions may themselves later need redefining – the point being that it is important to recognise & understand LTD (light transmission dynamics) and NOT the terms – the terms are tools to explain.
We need to differentiate the distinct phenomena of brightness, brilliance, iridescence & glare in terms of what actually is happening within FECs all around us.
Brightness is NOT Brilliance & is NOT Iridescence & is NOT Glare; Brilliance is NOT Glare & is NOT Iridescence; and Iridescence is NOT Glare – they are each distinctly different LTD phenomena (the phenomena is what occurs, the terms are simply descriptors).
It is also important to differentiate ambient colour of any objects to the colours from side-band transmissions of direct light
[Historically (& from Wikipedia):- Iridescence (also known as goniochromism) is the phenomenon of certain surfaces that appear to gradually change colour as the angle of view or the angle of illumination changes. Examples of Iridescence include soap bubbles, butterfly wings and sea shells, as well as certain minerals.
Herein is a MAJOR CONTRADICTION in defining a term that mixes up distinctly separate/different LTD phenomena – bubbles create different colour dynamics than do butterfly wings or peacock feathers – and it is important to recognise that one is iridescence the other brilliance.
The surface change of colour in (e.g.) bubbles refers to the prismatic 'rainbow' colour patterns of side-band transmissions.
The examples of butterfly wings (& e.g.: peacock feathers) refers to the ambient colour of the wings (feathers)
These two examples are distinctly different because they result from DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT LTD dynamics.
Which confirms the need to redefine old terms]
Brightness:- is direct (or reflected direct) light source
Brilliance:- of (e.g.) peacock feathers (wrongly explained by Helen Czerski) is explained by recognising that the curvature & thinness of the feather spines is causing the side-band transmissions to NOT be reflected towards observers, which thus allows only the main forward light to be reflected, which picks up the ambient colour of the feather spine – which thus gives it a full brilliance from that feather spine – and successive feather spines all closely compacted together, and all emitting forward light, is what gives it the regional brilliance - we can readily see this with (for e.g.):
- round objects such as street poles (a single 'spine') lit by street lights, notice that the pole has a high brilliance along its vertical line, this is because the main forward lobe is reflected off the 'line' of the pole curvature, and the side-bands hitting further round the pole not being reflected toward the observer (admittedly a pole is far larger in diameter than a peacock feather spine).
- with glitter nail varnish – small colour beads within the varnish that emit point specific light, i.e. side-bands NOT reflected to observer, thus only forward (brilliance) light.
Note: if flat surface then side-bands from any FEC will combine/merge with the forward light from adjacent FEC and yield 'normal' (non-brilliance) reflection of the object – i.e. adjacent side-bands interfere with forward transmission, similarly as occurs with glare
But, again, successive FECs in line-of-sight still transmit side-bands, but it is a narrower cone than if the object was flat instead of round/curved (as with peacock feathers/poles and transmitting ambient colour of the object)
Iridescence:- is the 'rainbow' colour patterns we observe on surfaces, soap bubbles, oil/water emulsions, rainbows – it is suggested herein that iridescence be defined as specifically the 'rainbow' phenomena (partially of fully present) through 'prismatic' attenuation of forward light thus permitting side-band colour light to predominate (i.e. active side-band colours as distinct from passive ambient colour of objects) – note: we can separate the side-band colours with successive prisms, but the separate colours are still to be defined as iridescence.
Glare:- as discussed earlier, from side-band transmissions of light source
→ hence:
brightness is direct (or reflected direct) forward light
brilliance comes from reflected forward transmission lobe only (enhancing/highlighting ambient colours)
iridescence are the colours from side-band transmissions with forward transmissions absent ('prismatic' dynamic).
Glare comes from side-band transmissions of light (relative to observer) swamping otherwise ambient light information
Again, the terms are NOT the issue, LTD dynamics are.
What the feck is FECK? (and understanding what drove Father Jack Hackett to 'Drink. Drink. Drink.')
A Fundamental Ether Component (FEC) is exactly that - the smallest component of the ether.
BUT, scientists/engineers have derived their knowledge from practical applications of science – trial & error – and so as to produce useful tools for progressing science further.
Man has progressively zoomed-into smaller & smaller particles in attempt to understand How & Why things work as they do – eventually we came to Bohr atomic model & zoomed-in further to electrons, protons, nuclei, etc., etc. - ALL of which has been useful – but also limiting BECAUSE the Bohr atomic model is wrong, and all this can be deduced from recognising that Opticks are wrong.
(A consequence of inadequate/incorrect Knowledge:- we can use nuclear energy for good & bad things, but both produce residual & dangerous 'waste' – the fact that the 'waste' has high potential energy means that we do not know how to make constructive use of that potential, and thereby reduce its potential & its dangers – by correctly understanding Optics (no 'k') we can possibly find ways to constructively use this residual 'waste' potential, thus reducing its potential and hence its dangers)
So, whilst we, as humans, can philosophise the dynamics of the universe we still do not properly recognise how the Universe & its ether functions in its primary state – i.e. from the perspective of the ether's most fundamental component – vis: FEC.
Recap: ether = packed 'marbles' → fundamental switching mechanism by which energy/light switched from one FEC to adjacent in all directions – matter (pencils, cars, air, etc.) switch across ether – each specific FEC stimulating lobes according to the type of matter occupying that specific space – i.e. orderly transmissions across ether – and all at a Fundamental Switching Frequency (FSF)).
BUT, all that each & every FEC 'sees' is that specific energy excitation at that specific moment – it has absolutely NO understanding or foreknowledge of what is going to come next, the FEC simply accepts what is switched to it & that which it switches/passes on to other adjacent FECs – so the FECs have NO understanding of 'potential' energy (i.e. future energy) – it only 'sees' the present KINETIC energy at any specific time ->
→ FECK
[And trying to explain this simple phenomena is extremely stressful as Father Jack Hackett can bear witness – the frustration of wanting to talk about FECK but with his audiences constantly refusing to listen is what drove Fr Jack to Drink. Drink. Drink.]
So, instead of thinking of particles in Physics, think of FECKs
Eddington's error of interpretation of Solar eclipse of May 29, 1919.
On the African Island of Principe, Eddington photographed a solar eclipse & stars, and later at night (sun not present) of the same stars - with the purpose of establishing whether stars immediately behind the sun would reveal a positional shift.
The point being that if it did reveal a shift that this would confirm Einstein's theory of gravitational fields affecting light transmission (i.e. 'bending' of light rays)
This interpretation by Einstein, seemingly confirmed by Eddington's observation photos, is incorrectly interpreted.
However, the sheer brilliance of deducing that light is 'bent by gravity' (even though incorrect interpretation) is in itself a massive leap in scientific research – for, to prove something right one must first eliminate all possible alternative explanations; and even when this is done (as with Eddington & Einstein) at any time there could later be explanations that changes the way we previously thought – as with opticks.
What Eddington, unwittingly, demonstrated was that light does transmit on its side-bands – and it is because of this side-band transmission phenomena that objects behind a foreground object can appear to an observer who is standing in front of the foreground object – hence why Eddington was able to photograph the stars behind the solar eclipse (NOT because of gravity 'bending' light, but because of side-band transmission)
This could have been established long-ago simply by observing objects through thick glass & observing the perceived positional shift of that object as the glass angle is increased (see Psi-23, Part 2, Refraction is NOT Refraction etc., herein)
BUT, since Newton had stolen the Opticks intellectual property, Newton had not properly understood LTD (light transmission dynamics) and thus misled the World for 350 years until CDADD's revelations (see Particle Sigma-18) which shows that side-band transmissions occur as well as forward light.
Whereas the originator of the Opticks stolen by Newton DID understand significantly more – but that person, it would seem, succumbed to the Great Plague that was then raging.
ALL of the points raised within Particle Psi-23 go to prove that Newton, Michelson, Morley, Einstein, Eddington, Hubble, Hawking, Higgs, CERN are wrong regarding their theories.
BUT, Einstein, Hubble, Eddington were sincere in their errors of interpretation, others are not.
There is still much work to be done in converting Bohr & Particle models into FECK dynamics – and until this is done it is unlikely that 'waste' nuclear material & other potential can be usefully developed.
As always, CDADD's R&D (www.cdadd.com or LinkedIn Chris Addington) is open to challenge & constructive debate is welcome........
Sincerely
Chris Addington Pr.Eng.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., +353 (0)86 168 4318
--------------------
Emails:
i. Planck Satellite; ii. Peter Klappa (Kent) iii. Stephen Hawking
Planck Satellite & telescope → new claim of insights to birth of stars, multiverses – science fiction!
-------- Forwarded Message --------
|
Subject: |
More defective 'science' - BBC News - Planck Telescope/Satellite - Planck telescope puts new datestamp on first stars |
|---|---|
|
Date: |
Fri, 06 Feb 2015 10:27:11 +0000 |
|
From: |
Chris Addington <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; |
|
To: |
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., |
to jo dunkley, richard mcmahon, george efstathiou your interviews on yesterday's bbc news report left the news presenters 'mind-boggled'' and no doubt left most viewers boggled as well since newton's opticks are wrong (see attached), hence einstein, hubble,hawking etc. are wrong, it raises the question as to what EXACTLY the planck satellite is observing. also refraction is not refraction but a dynamic of the ether that is not understood, hence is why the perceptions of received data from planck telescope is misunderstood, and creating sci-fi imaginations. all this leads to realisation that perceptions of present day astronomical observations are also wrong because based on incorrect science. would you please email a simple diagram of the various components of the planck telescope, with broad parameters, and clearly showing the optical/radiation paths and the method whereby this received data/information is converted into an image (esa website is very vague) please also describe how colour is added to images & details regarding any other signal processing stages (clearly, but briefly) for, as george efstathiou has stated "We don't need more complicated explanations" -> we need to understand the basics of what the planck telescope is actually receiving and processing. thankyou sincerely -- Chris Addington Pr.Eng.
---
On 15/12/2014 20:55, Peter Klappa wrote:
Dear Mr Addington,
I have now read your proposal re Newton Opticks (why do you actually spell it that way?) and I very much like your proposal, saying that our fundamental understanding of science is flawed and wrong. As a biochemist I am particularly fascinated by your assertion that our understanding of DNA is completely wrong. Having worked myself for many years with DNA I found that it is actually a solid! I am sure you are aware that DNA stands for 'deoxyribonucleic acid'. How can a solid substance be an acid, which is a liquid?? This very clearly demonstrates that our understanding of DNA is fundamentally flawed - and with it all the associated concepts as well, like medicine, biotechnology and even trivial things like maternity testing.
I am also intrigued by your proposal of the sun being a super dynamo with the planets being super motors. This does confirm my view that we seriously need to rethink details of the widely accepted heliocentric approach. Not only does your proposal support this view, it also shows very elegantly the presences of an ether (which of course Michelson erroneously dismissed in his experiment). I always suspected the existence of said ether - it clearly embeds everything, especially radio waves. I also know, although not a medical expert, that it has been used in medical operations, where it sends people to sleep. I guess this is why I always get very tired when I listen to broadcasts on the radio.
Anyway - thank you for your very elegantly written piece of work that truly opens new frontiers in science. I think it should be more widely disseminated - have you thought about publishing it in one of the high-impact factor scientific journals like Nature or Science? I am sure the editors would be very interested to receive your manuscript. If you require any further support or would like to discuss some of the points with me prior to publication, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Very best wishes and good luck with the publication of your ideas,
Peterxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Peter Klappa, PhD
Master of Rutherford College
Reader in Biochemistry
School of Biosciences
University of Kent
Canterbury
UK
On 15/12/2014 22:35, Chris Addington wrote:
to peter klappathankyou for your reply
nature & scientist are as hostile as rs, ri, ria, rds, academia in toto - media are also totally hostile because owned & controlled by corporates - and much of my r&d is focussed on developing engineering understandings of why economies boom/crash & to develop solutions, which means it opposes corporate organised crime (see attached: 'mastermind of organised crime')
school children & students are presently being taught defective science - the start-point is to bring opticks (spelling used to differentiate old form from new & to infer the centuries of defective understandings) errors to light - it is the start-point.
BUT, the issues do not rest there - mathematics has been grossly skewed by defective theories: expanding universe, big bang, higgs, etc. which spins off into generating defective socio-economy sciences and hence defective government policies; statistics also affected - every sphere of science is impacted. which is why nobel prizes being awarded to defective physics & economics works -> and purposefully so because nobel foundation hijacked.
all this is causal of gross global disparities and for conflicts past, present & future.correctly interpreting that which hubble misinterpreted (f attribution, doppler, red shift -> expanding universe) i have left for school children to discover.
also andrew wiles's 'proof' of fermat's last theorem is not a proof; there exists a classical proof (see attached 'overview...')
re dna - my view is that present theories have a serious question mark against it, ireland police/justice obstructed my request to visit forensic lab at police/garda hq in dublin, hence progress stalled - BUT in due course when we understand that least component of the ether then it would eventually yield precise identity of anyone and precise differentiation from any other person
solid/liquid/gas are terms we presently use in our slow stepping onto new stones - we/everything function & is held together because of the ether - we move (physically) through space by means of an ether switching-mechanism, which is the mechanism by which light/energy is propagated - eventually we will understand more fully what actually happens that brings about the phases solid/liquid/gas - but first we need to understand how we see, because presently we see but are blind, because science is wrong.it requires communication to government to progress but they are also hostile because academia hostile - so unfunded & persona non grata
isp operators also obstructing
if you are serious about bringing change then you need to communicate with cameron, miliband, clegg, farage etc. and demand transparency to address these new science issues
sincerely
Chris Addington Pr.Eng.
------------------
-------- Forwarded Message --------
|
Subject: |
To Stephen Hawking: you have free choice not to abuse people, so too did Jimmy Savile |
|---|---|
|
Date: |
Tue, 23 Dec 2014 09:03:20 +0000 |
|
From: |
Chris Addington <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; |
|
To: |
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., Anthony Woodman <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.;, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., Craig Mackay <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.;, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. |
To Stephen Hawking You have, like Jimmy Savile had, immense Social Power derived from decades of media promotion Next week the world will be duped into seeing the film: 'The Theory of Everything' - yet you know full well that your theories are wrong because they are based upon other defective/incorrect theories that all stem from Opticks (which intellectual property Newton stole) -> theories by Michelson-Morley, Einstein, Hubble are all wrong Even children are going to be duped into believing your false theories that this film will reinforce Jimmy Savile duped the people and abused a few (many, nonetheless) defenceless & vulnerable people. You are abusing millions of people and vulnerable children also by falsely maintaining your theories as being correct - the attached proves that you are wrong - you have long been fully aware of this. I urge you to make the right choice and put a stop to the gross abuses against people and vulnerable children that are generated by your maintenance of defective/incorrect theories Sincerely Chris Addington Pr.Eng.
##End of Particle Psi-23##