There’s truth, and then there’s Truth
Sven Gelbhaar
10:10 AM 1/2/2019
It appears as though the calling of the intellectual class is
to romanticize and validate the struggles and achievements
(past, present, future) of the other classes. We see this with
contemporary philosophy, literature, and even in physics (which
I’ll focus on here).
In Physics there is something called the Heisenberg Uncertainty
Principle (after the Physicist who thought of it). Under this
principle, we can’t, so it goes, determine all three attributes
of sub-atomic particles; viz. location, speed, and trajectory.
As we have to bounce other subatomic particles off the same,
our sampling of the subject (subatomic particle) is altered
per se. This is all well and good, but then you have the
populist physicists (Drs Tyson, Michio Kaku, et alia) who claim
that it is our consciousness perceiving the subject that changes
it, through consciousness alone, instead of the interference and
uncertainty inherent in how we observe and manipulate the same.
This is utter madness, and it is a complete departure of the truth
to blatantly appease the masses and make them feel powerful.
Now we have whole generations of people believing that the universe
cannot exist in any definite state without a human-being casually
glancing at it and single-handedly reducing it to order and
definition.
This lie tends to be corrobarated by the famous Double-Slit
Experiment. Electro-magnetic radiation is fired at a target
which detects where and when the radiation hits it, but inbetween
the light emitter and the target there is a barrier which allows
the radiation to only go through one of two slits. This results
in an interference pattern on the target. Furthermore, when
(positively ionized) EM detectors are placed on one of the two
slits, the radiation always goes through that slit. This is taken
as proof positive that light and electrons are the natural
equivalents of probability functions (called “waves”), and that
our consciousness observing light reduces it to sharp definition
in the form of a point-particle. All this is not true, of course.
This effect is easily explained by applying electric theory to the
experiment, wherein the matter (the electrons, in particular) that
comprises the working edges of the slits end up sending the
photons into a neat little pattern over time. Meanwhile, the “
collapsing” of the “wave function” is merely the electro-
magnetically-active radiation seeking the path of least resistance,
if not downright being attracted to and consumed by the positively
ionized photon detectors.
It goes beyond this, naturally. Einstein, I presume, set out to
fool the public intentionally in much the same way, but only after
his work with Brownian Motion and the quantazised view of EM
radiation. The Faraday Effect stipulates — and was proven to do
this through experimental means — that EM radiation (including
visibible light, naturally) diverges in trajectory in the presence
of an external and proximal magnetic field. Since all sub-atomic
particles with the exception of neutrons, supposedly (and also
incorrectly) are known to have a magnetic charge, it stands to reason
quite readily that light will bend around massive celestial bodies of
matter. This is not Space-Time (a reincarnation of the already
debunked Luminiferous Ether) “bending” light, but rather the magnetic
subatomic particles imparting momentum on said light. This is
incredibly obvious, and would’ve been so even in Einstein’s days as
Dr. Faraday’s work far precedes Einsteinian Relativity.
I have no qualms about making the lay population feel important in
this vast, unforgiving Universe.. The price of lying in the field
synonymous with objective truth and reality is more
than pointless, it will hold back technological innovation that
could’ve been gained were the intellectual class not so obviously
and unabashedly deceived.