Nassim Haramein

[Taomeow]

This guy is either the answer to my prayers or I don't know how to pray.

 

I have been praying for a physicist/mathematician to do what I've been trying to do with my limited physics/math access. To wit, debunk "mainstream modern science" scientifically, incorporate fractals in doing so, link in the I Ching, other taoist and ancient systems of tackling reality, bring the live real observer (the scientist himself/herself) back into the picture whence he or she has been kicked out by "mainstream modern science" to observe "objectively" (where's that objective galaxy not connected to anything in the universe that they all have to go to in order to achieve the feat?..) and so on.

 

Nassim Haramein, who is a physicist in good peer reviewed standing, has done all of the above and more. There's many hours of his lectures for lay people out there on the youtube, and they are golden. Take a look whoever is interested. Highly recommended. Very far out. Too much fun.

 

He was born in Switzerland but his dad is Iranian and his granddad was a professional guide for pilgrims visiting Mecca and lived to be 128. I sense a lineage sage, kids...

Edited November 9, 2009 by Taomeow

[steve]

I'm very much looking forward to checking him out, thanks!

If you like him, check out the work of Amit Goswami, if you haven't already.

 

Edit: Just looked at his webpage

 

From The Resonance Project website

 

"Instead of seeing ourselves as separate from everything around us, this view allows us to recognize that we are embedded in a fractal feedback dynamic that intrinsically connects all things via the medium of a vacuum structure of infinite potential. This research has far reaching implications in a variety of fields including theoretical and applied physics, cosmology, quantum mechanics, biology, chemistry, sociology, psychology, archaeology, anthropology, etc. A fundamental understanding of the dynamics of this interconnectivity redefines the lens through which we see the universe and our place in it, and leads to theoretical and technological advancements that move us towards a sustainable future. This new approach to the physics of universal forces has the potential to solve the most pressing issues of our times."

 

Here's another quotation that I really like that shows that others have had a glimpse at truth through science:

 

"A human being is a part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feeling as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."

 

Any guess at who said that?

 

.....

 

 

.....

 

 

 

......

 

 

 

 

 

Albert Einstein

Edited November 9, 2009 by steve f

[Gerard]

Deleted.

Edited November 10, 2009 by durkhrod chogori

[Capital]

Nassim Haramein is a pseudoscientist and his page in the wikipedia has been deleted for not meeting the necessary requirements to be considered as a notable scholar:

 

A completely unbiased action that has nothing to do with the fact that he does not agree with modern science, right?

[Taomeow]

A completely unbiased action that has nothing to do with the fact that he does not agree with modern science, right?

 

Reminds me of the completely unbiased way Jiordano Bruno was burned at the stake for saying the earth rotates around the sun rather than vice versa. All the mainstream scientists of his time were outraged! Oh, but Galileo who said it was rotating to begin with rather than sitting still had to renounce his views, bow to the sitting-still model and repent -- peer pressure... totally unbiased. Oh, and that medical guy, forget his name, who said doctors should wash their hands before sticking them in the private parts of women during labor because it might prevent what used to be a common cause of death of young women and newborn children, postpartum "fever" (septic infection in modern terms, introduced by doctors who didn't believe in infections) -- his outraged colleagues had him locked up in the lunatic asylum for the rest of his life.

[Gerard]

Deleted.

Edited November 10, 2009 by durkhrod chogori

[宁]

I tried to tell you.... Make a search on Nassim on TTB's engine.

[Taomeow]

Well your comments are funny. If you don't agree with Science how would you call yourself? I have an answer to it: pseudoscience.

 

Curiously none of the Resonance Project papers are published in any standard journal. I very much doubt any of their work is even cited by any paper published in any real journal.

 

By the way, you should be aware that the world (and especially the internet) is loaded with physics cranks. They all have certain features in common: they claim to have discovered some grand new theory, one which resolves all sorts of (imagined) problems with standard theories. There are literally hundreds of such theories (which they all contradict each other). They form a kind of background noise for real research, and for a non-physicist, it can sometimes be difficult to distinguish signal from noise (publishing in real journals is a good clue, though).

 

From a non-scientifical perspective, I would stick to Buddha's and Fu Xi's approach of understanding reality instead of these new breed of con-artists and their new revelations of Science.

 

I'm aware of physics cranks on the internet, my trusty friend... also buddhist and pseudobuddhist blockheads and maoist and laoist morons and all kinds of riff-raff of all kinds of denominations. However, I have a pretty darn reliable mind of my own to judge the possible level of validity of theories presented, a family of four generations of Ph.D.s, a house choke-full of books on quantum mechanics and a pro on premises to explain them to me. Now then -- why the condescending tone, and why are you calling a scientist you know nothing about a con artist based on no information other than he's unorthodox? Huh?..

 

I was blown away by parts of his theory precisely because I've been working (albeit very on and off) on something fundamentally similar for ten years and the reason I started was, it started appearing to me in hardcore, very demanding meditations. Who has been conning me in my meditations?.. Certainly not Nassim Haramein.

 

Ah well... maybe I would have been better off just sticking to my first reaction to your entry, which was to inform you that you left me speechless. Well, apparently not quite.

 

By the way, taoism is science to me, and you reference Fu Xi as though you know what he was up to -- well what he was up to is Hetu and Luoshu, and that's the basis of not some but all taoist sciences, arts, and spiritual pursuits... so taoism Fu Xi style is a science, shockingly enough.

 

As for buddhism, you might have to make do with one less buddhist in the world than you hoped there would be. God knows there's quite enough of you without my humble involvement. The only buddha I ever had a chance to communicate with was Maitreya, and only because He-She initiated the contact, I wasn't seeking it at all. But Maitreya is the future buddha, the buddha yet to come once the dharma of yesteryear has expired completely. So I don't think you would be interested. He-She is into science too, you know.

 

I'm very much looking forward to checking him out, thanks!

If you like him, check out the work of Amit Goswami, if you haven't already.

 

Edit: Just looked at his webpage

 

From The Resonance Project website

 

"Instead of seeing ourselves as separate from everything around us, this view allows us to recognize that we are embedded in a fractal feedback dynamic that intrinsically connects all things via the medium of a vacuum structure of infinite potential. This research has far reaching implications in a variety of fields including theoretical and applied physics, cosmology, quantum mechanics, biology, chemistry, sociology, psychology, archaeology, anthropology, etc. A fundamental understanding of the dynamics of this interconnectivity redefines the lens through which we see the universe and our place in it, and leads to theoretical and technological advancements that move us towards a sustainable future. This new approach to the physics of universal forces has the potential to solve the most pressing issues of our times."

 

Here's another quotation that I really like that shows that others have had a glimpse at truth through science:

 

"A human being is a part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feeling as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."

 

Any guess at who said that?

 

.....

.....

......

Albert Einstein

thanks, Steve, cool quotes!

 

Little1, it didn't work for me --- nothing came up -- what's up?

[宁]

THIS is the best worshop with him...

I tried to advertise the film on the TTB, but with little succes... I learned a fiew things listening to it...

It's good! What does She tell you about him?

[Taomeow]

THIS is the best worshop with him...

I tried to advertise the film on the TTB, but with little succes... I learned a fiew things listening to it...

It's good! What does She tell you about him?

Thanks! I think this is the one I watched (over a few days, in 45 parts on youtube), I recognize the shirt.

 

I think I saw an early episode a couple of years ago and made a mental note -- aha, sacred geometry, up my alley, I will have to find out what the guy is up to sometime soon... and then I forgot. So you beat me to it. So timing is everything, as always.

 

SHE didn't tell me anything about him. Of human beings, She educated me only regarding my immediate family members. Most beings She chose to introduce were not human. Which makes me think Haramein must be human after all.

[Gerard]

Deleted.

Edited November 10, 2009 by durkhrod chogori

[witch]

You can say whether or not someone's science is bad without asking about gender. I strongly believe there are differences in the way the sexes think, but I have faith that women can be analytical, just as men are able to feel emotion.

 

I'm glad to see you edited more than your typo!

[witch]

Yes, that man is a fool

 

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap030224.html

 

You can see by looking that the comet itself is small, it is simply the comet's flare that is twice the size of Jupiter.

 

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/come...acy_030228.html

 

"The actual comet itself, the chunk of rock and ice, is only a few miles across," he said. "What we see in the [sOHO] images is the cloud of gas surrounding the nucleus, evaporated off the surface by the heat of the Sun. That cloud is huge, but the comet itself is tiny."

 

And by the way, Nibiru is Eris of course.

[witch]

*sniffs armpits* Was it something I said? I was agreeing with you!

 

Anyhow, my posts were in response to a youtube video in the deleted post showing the scientist in question saying that the comet NEAT which flew by the sun in February 2003 was twice the size of Jupiter, demonstrating that his scientific training was quite poor.

Edited November 10, 2009 by witch

[宁]

Haramein must be human after all.

there's this vid on youtube that was posted here a while ago on Orgasmic birth... and who do you think I saw there? his wife! I think he's into Hindu practices, his wife looks Ayurvedish also:)

He's changed over the years, the later videos show him a bit old and tired... much of the enthusiasm you see in the first movie... it's lost.

Freaky...

What I've learned good was his view on the infinite. Infinitely small and infinitely big. Great ideas...

[witch]

Should have said fool when it comes to astronomy and physics.

[dwai]

Nassim Haramein, who is a physicist in good peer reviewed standing, has done all of the above and more. There's many hours of his lectures for lay people out there on the youtube, and they are golden. Take a look whoever is interested. Highly recommended. Very far out. Too much fun.

 

 

I wonder how long he will remain in "good peer reviewed standing" if he maintains his locus standi. I'm not saying that it is wrong..in fact it is commendable...but the Science Fascists have a tendency to follow this trademarked process of tyranny, wrt anyone who challenges the ideas accepted as bona fide:

 

1) First ignore them

2) then laugh at them

3) Then get angry and fight them

 

The forth step happens very very rarely (and history stands testimony to that)...

 

4) Accept defeat

 

Unfortunately most independent thinkers who defy the edicts of the dominant culture (which is Science these days), tend to get ostracized, ridiculed and end up living a very lonely, dejected life...

 

Sad but true!

 

 

There are many Indian-American scientists who have tried to change the dominant/popular myths and ended up being labeled "Pseudo-scientists". I will present one such scholar who is widely respected in the Indian-American community of intellectuals and academics -- Dr Subhash Kak.

 

If you read the discussions about him on his wikipedia page, the bias will become self-evident.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Subhash_Kak

 

Here we have a bunch of semi-educated foot-soldiers of mainstream academia who feel they have the wherewithal to talk smack about someone who is obviously several miles above them in both intellectual and academic accomplishments...

Edited November 10, 2009 by dwai

[rain]

I wonder how long he will remain in "good peer reviewed standing" if he maintains his locus standi. I'm not saying that it is wrong..in fact it is commendable...but the Science Fascists have a tendency to follow this trademarked process of tyranny, wrt anyone who challenges the ideas accepted as bona fide:

 

1) First ignore them

2) then laugh at them

3) Then get angry and fight them

 

The forth step happens very very rarely (and history stands testimony to that)...

 

4) Accept defeat

 

Unfortunately most independent thinkers who defy the edicts of the dominant culture (which is Science these days), tend to get ostracized, ridiculed and end up living a very lonely, dejected life...

 

Sad but true!

There are many Indian-American scientists who have tried to change the dominant/popular myths and ended up being labeled "Pseudo-scientists". I will present one such scholar who is widely respected in the Indian-American community of intellectuals and academics -- Dr Subhash Kak.

 

If you read the discussions about him on his wikipedia page, the bias will become self-evident.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Subhash_Kak

 

Here we have a bunch of semi-educated foot-soldiers of mainstream academia who feel they have the wherewithal to talk smack about someone who is obviously several miles above them in both intellectual and academic accomplishments...

 

 

It is horrible but true. they are so many. first they are ridiculed then misunderstood then ignored

 

My poor teflon brain cant remember all I read and should prhps not believe it all either but I do believe I heard that

Galileo was ridiculed even after just reciting some ancient greek who's name began with an A..and the neo platonists seem to have gotten it all wrong..Einstein they thought to be a looney moron..for a while and Tesla..is gone..Ibsen flunked norwegian..van gogh cut off his ear because nobody wanted his work..

 

hey this could become a great list. in another thread.

Edited November 10, 2009 by rain

[witch]

People, the guy doesn't know the most basic things about comets. He can't possibly be an actual trained physicist. I have no problem with thinking outside the box, but you have to at least be aware of the box to think outside it.

[Taomeow]

People, the guy doesn't know the most basic things about comets. He can't possibly be an actual trained physicist. I have no problem with thinking outside the box, but you have to at least be aware of the box to think outside it.

Scientific "evidence" is heavily edited before being released to the public as a matter of routine, and the official version is pretty much always a lie. Which makes anyone who offers a version of the event that doesn't match the official version look like a fool. There's lots of things the guy says that might be a far-out stretch, but what size the comet really was may not be one of them.

 

I told someone near and dear that I saw a UFO and he was foaming at the mouth on account of, "UFOs don't exist." Then what did I see? He said, a bird, a plane, Superman... anything but a UFO. Well. It was something I saw, and it was no Superman and it didn't behave consistently with any mainstream explanation whatsoever, but what can seeing it mean to a true believer whether he or she believes one way or the other?.. Interpretations of what we actually see are a matter of -- gasp -- belief. Astronomical data is interpreted based on beliefs as much as any other, and that's where "objective science" always goes down the drain, nothing is "objective," everything we get we get in the form of someone else's interpretations which might have fundamentalist beliefs behind them which might be wrong, or ulterior motives, or, occasionally, sheer stupidity. I'll give you an example...

 

A few years ago I got into a car accident and fractured my sternum. The doctor in the emergency room of a prestigious local hospital looked at the X-rays and said, everything is fine, you just have a contusion, some bruising, nothing serious. I told him, this is impossible. I told him, it can't hurt the way it does from anything other than a fracture. I told him, have another look at the X-rays, please, you may have made a mistake? He became very, very angry. I have been doing this for thirty-five years, he said. I have NEVER made a mistake, he said. Ever. I don't make mistakes. You have no fracture, period. Thank you, doctor, I said, and was taken home, meowing pathetically over every tiny bump in the road, and then spending two hours trying to find a livable position on the couch, and then the phone rang. It was the doctor. You know, he said, the radiologist took another look at your X-rays and pointed out to me that there was a shadow masking this hairline fracture that you have, so I looked and like I said, there's a fracture, didn't I tell you? You had no reason to doubt me. I was in too much pain to laugh, but I bit the bullet and laughed. Thank you, doctor.

 

That, in a nutshell, is how it works... pretty much always.

Edited November 10, 2009 by Taomeow

[witch]

Taomeow, I respect your judgment more than anybody's on this board and the man may be a spiritual sage, but he doesn't know the first thing about physics. I wish durkhrod chogori hadn't deleted the youtube video he posted, but you can see with your own eyes the man is clearly not a physicist. He confuses a comet's tail with an actual planet and says that the comet is twice the size of Jupiter, when clearly it is no such thing, you can see from looking at it. Just the shape of it shows it is a plume rather than a planet.

[Andrei]

Taomeow, I respect your judgment more than anybody's on this board and the man may be a spiritual sage, but he doesn't know the first thing about physics. I wish durkhrod chogori hadn't deleted the youtube video he posted, but you can see with your own eyes the man is clearly not a physicist. He confuses a comet's tail with an actual planet and says that the comet is twice the size of Jupiter, when clearly it is no such thing, you can see from looking at it. Just the shape of it shows it is a plume rather than a planet.

 

 

He says is a physicist. I checked his background education and I couldn't find any reference about his past education. Maybe he doesn't have any master or PhD, but to me what he says make sense. I am not a physicist, but I am an engineer and just about to finish my PhD. There are plenty of PhD physicists that share similar visions, the only thing is that he has put all the theories together and had the courage to show.

 

He said that the aparent size of that comet is twice the aparent size of Jupiter. And this is not from the Earth point of view but from the SOHO point of view which is closer to Sun than the Mercury orbit. And by the way what SOHO sees is not visible neither to the naked eye nor earth telescopes, because is infrared spectra. And the Nibiru planet or whatever it may be (dwarf brown) is not visible with anything but only with IRAS or any other infrared orbit telescope which are all under guvernamental control.

 

I don't like the idea that quantum theory and relativity don't mix, I don't like the idea that for everything that don't fit from the observations they invent another equation, or if they see something odd in experiments they add a constant or change the sign or something to the equations just to fit the "theory". I really believe the universal laws are much simpler in principles. I like more the idea of an "ether", I like more Gurdjieff's cosmology and cosmogony, I like more the idea of a fractal Universe, a holographic Universe, the idea that everything are just vibrations of electromagnetic nature (which is called the electric Universe theory), I like the idea that every particle is in fact a vibrational pattern of a certain frequency, I like the idea that the vibrational patterns are just geometrical patterns, shapes and forms... and so on. Do you know there is a guy who demonstarted all the relativistic physics only with the Maxwell's equations and waves equations? Just considering the electron a stationary wave, you can demonstrate mathematically that you don't need the photons or the gravity or any other particle, because they are just the effects of the wave interference patterns between the electrons. Same with protons and neutrons. He demonstarted that with only a few equations discovered a couples of century ago you can demonstrate all the quantic and relativistic physics. Of course mathematically you can demonstrate anything, what is important are the starting hypothesis. And what are the predictions versus experiments. Until now the experiments are on his side. And the more the theory is elegant the more is closer to reality, because the Universe is elegant.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V026kSw4XCs

http://www.glafreniere.com/matter.htm

[witch]

He said that the aparent size of that comet is twice the aparent size of Jupiter. And this is not from the Earth point of view but from the SOHO point of view which is closer to Sun than the Mercury orbit.

 

But if he were a physicist or any sort of scientist at all he would know that that's hardly remarkable. The plumes of comets can get visible to the naked eye. Of course. Just because something is the size of Jupiter doesn't mean it has the mass of Jupiter. He seems to be confusing those two things.

[Andrei]

Just because something is the size of Jupiter doesn't mean it has the mass of Jupiter.

 

I don't remeber saying this, I will check though.

[voidisyinyang]

This is an excellent primer on why Haramein is considered to be a "genius" -- also explains the esoterica about mass and volume via relativity and quantum unification....

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8IcciRHGvQ