We Hollow Earth researchers need to save mainstream scientists from their "intelligent approximations" :))

List members , I think the time has come for us Hollow Earth researchers to begin "reforms" in the way science is done - let's at least make a start .

I feel the starting point of this "course correction" in science are the "first principles" that have been forgotten and this malaise of intelligent approximations (short cuts) which have lead scientists in the wrong direction .

I believe the first among the first principles is Geometry , rather Sacred Geometry . We need to understand that just like "nature does not make straight lines/squares/cubes" , so also "nature does NOT make circles/spheres" . I am sure this sounds shocking at first , but it is the hard truth . Just think about it - spiral galaxies , elliptical orbits of planets , oblate spheroid shapes of stars and planets...where are the spheres in nature ?? Why do we keep seeing evidence of Phi or the Golden ratio everywhere in nature ? Why is the egg NOT spherical but toroidal , why is even DNA following helical patterns ????

Now one may argue that the sphere is a special case of the toroid , so why can it not be ASSUMED to be the fundamental shape in the Universe ? Well , it cannot be , because the building block of our Univerise is the toroidal vortex , NOT a sphere !!

Again , some may counter argue - that the oblate spheroid shape of stars & planets is so close to a spherical shape , then why bother with this minor difference ? The Devil is in the details (I never liked that phrase !) , rather GOD is in those very details .

The volume of a sphere is calculated by the formula : 4/3 * Pi R^3 . The volume of a torus of similar proportions is slightly different and that difference becomes significant when we look at celestial bodies collectively . The way mainstream science has extrapolated spherical forms across all scales has skewed our understanding of the way the Cosmos really works . Even the likes of Einstein & Newton used to assume stars , planets and atoms as spheres - from which they derived their flawed understanding of Gravity and General Relativity .

***Even the most "respected" of Physics text books MISGUIDE students by depicting electrons and atoms as HARD (!) , shiny billiard balls (!!) , then go on to calculate the radius of even fuzzy sub-atomic particles , that have wave/particle duality :)) How did those geniuses even measure the radius of an object (if we can call an atom that , given it is 99.99 % empty space !) which is NOT spherical , but a toroidal vortex ??

**Maxwell's original 20 equations actually had a toroidal perspective , but when Oliver Heaviside came along and "summarised" them to just 4 equations we now study , he eliminated that toroidal perspective !

To be fair , this approach of "intelligent approximations" , which is greatly favoured by mainstream scientists , has enabled humans to develop a lot of technology and gadgetry , but our science has a fundamental flaw that has prevented humans from building UFO like spacecraft and reaching the stars.

****Someday , when we do make contact with the inner Earth civilisation or with aliens in their UFOs , we will realise that their "playbook" is built on the torus , NOT the sphere (!!) and that even their detailed diagram of an atom looks quite different to ours :))

I am keen and curious to know your thoughts about what I've written here .Thanks !

Regards

1 Like

Folks , here is a good video on the pervasiveness of the "Golden Spiral" of Phi in nature and another video on the Quaternion - that great mathematical tool used by Maxwell in his original 20 equations , that were UNFORTUNATELY discarded when Oliver Heaviside "summarised" those original 20 equations to just 4 - the ones that are now studied as Maxwell's equations :-

Regards

1 Like

@sidharthabahadur i always look forward to reading your posts.. you have a vast knowledge bank but it seems that many of the ponts mentioned in this post need refining.

I would like to add something which you may have missed or have a different perspective on...

image

Methane is the simplest molecule I know of that takes the shape of a platonic solid — in this case, the tetrahedron. Wikipedia has a page on platonic hydrocarbons that includes molecules with tetrahedron, cube, and dodecahedron shapes. There are lots of molecules that have octahedral geometry (e.g. sulfur hexafluoride).

The molecule C60, buckminsterfullerene, which takes the form of an Archimedean solid, the truncated icosahedron.

There are so many others, even salt is a cube
image

There countless others... The T4 bacteriophage is a icosohedron...

image
this is actually what can now be programmed and used as a vaccine....

I could go on and on... What you all have to realise is that the fundamental state of our existence is PLATONIC... I keep stressing this bit it is falling on deaf ears.

It is very hard for me to explain but the only way a torus or toroid is created is by the energy and oscillation of platonic geometry... and reason of transfering of energy (tetrahedron/triangle) is what differs from a sphere which is stable (cube/earth).

The very inner core of earth is filled with giant crystals...
image caves in Mexico...

The sphere and torus/vortex re just different versions of themselves depending on the core energy, pressure or environment. It is an affect not a cause. All polygons or everything that spins/rotates will create a sphere..at y= pi at x= pi. Add centrefuge and spirals will form from the oscillation...

The complex plane has negative values (which are man made and do not exist) so even though seem correct give the wrong calculations...

So we are inside looking out into the inside walls of a sphere or plane.

It's all about perspective but you are correct in that the spheres are not perfect circles, this due to Cardinal and Ordinal systems of ratios and why the Golden, phi, Fibonacci, Archimedean etc spirals exist is because of the different phases from our perspective of the universe and planets giving us a specific time based ratio in which the spirals exhibit.specific character.

The reason science is the way it is is because they do not want you to have this perspective...to figure out yourself your own truth.... Forget what they teach and teach yourself .your own calculations to be corrected. They will never express to us the simplex unified system as was once known worldwide.

M

1 Like

Thanks a lot for the insights you've provided @Echo_on !

This is such a vast subject....an entire lifetime maybe inadequate to study it . As someone who has
deep interest in Sacred Geometry , how can I not acknowledge the profound truths of nature hidden inside the Platonic solids ?

Ultimately , this leads towards a Unified Theory where the Platonic Solids and Toroidal forms blend seamlessly into one whole that defines our Cosmos . Amongst others , Nassim Haramein has also done a lot of work towards such a Unified Theory :-

Article 102A: Physics - Aether Units - Part 6 - The Torus & Nassim Haramein

In this article we will continue our discussion of Aether units, showing how various sources are similar to one another, bringing the concept of Aether and Aether units into sharper focus.

Remember, that an Aether ‘unit’ is not a thing. It is a flow of fluid-like Aether motion. At the center of each unit is a torus, or rotating sphere. These tori are not things. They are a flow process and are similar in nature to ‘force fields’, yet they are more properly called “Aether flow fields”. They result from the two opposite yet harmonious pressure forces in the universe – that is, the inward spiraling centripetal force of gravity and the outward spiraling centrifugal force of radiation.

In the last article we discussed the torus in some detail, looking at ideas that came from Dan Winter and Cosmometry.

Now we will take a look at analogous ideas coming from Nassim Haramein in Part 6 and Buckminster Fuller in Part 7.

Analogous Ideas of “Harmonic Oscillators” – Toroidal Vortex Flow

We have been discussing the idea of ‘harmonic oscillators’ at each point in space. These ‘points’ in space are not things yet we refer to them as ‘Aether units’. They are vortex flows made of fluid-like Aether that result from the oscillation of polarity. That is, the oscillation from the metaphysical realm of time/space to the physical realm of space/time. This oscillation results in the inward flowing gravity and outward flowing electromagnetic radiation. This inward and outward flow – these opposing yet harmonious pressure gradients – is the torus process itself.

What we now find, is that it is not a single torus, but a double torus.

The Double Torus

The double torus is formed by stacking two torus forms together and rotating them in opposite directions. Energy flows either inward or outward at both poles of a system, rather than in one pole and out the other as in a single torus system.

Energy goes in at the north and south poles. Energy comes out at the Equator.

The Double Torus – Nassim Haramein

The double torus plays an essential role in the physics of Nassim Haramein. We have discussed his work with black ‘wholes’ in Article 22. These black ‘wholes’ are the tori at the center of each point in space, and at the center of each body of mass. As the mass grows in size, the strength of the torus flow gains in intensity. A larger sized body of mass creates a stronger gravitational flow due to the existence of a larger number of atoms coalesced together to form a body. Hence, a human body has a stronger gravitational flow than a single atom; a planet has a stronger gravitational flow than a human; and a galaxy has a stronger gravitational flow than a planet.

It is the same process, yet on different scales.

Cosmometry, which we began to cover in the last article, is based heavily on the work of Buckminster Fuller and Nassim Haramein. We will therefore have a large amount of overlap of this information.

As Bucky Fuller writes in Synergetics, “It is the writer’s experience that new degrees of comprehension are always and only consequent to ever-renewed review of the spontaneously rearranged inventory of significant factors. This awareness of the processes leading to new degrees of comprehension spontaneously motivates the writer to describe over and over again what-to the careless listener or reader-might seem to be tiresome repetition, but to the successful explorer is known to be essential mustering of operational strategies from which alone new thrusts of comprehension can be successfully accomplished.”

What we have described by Haramein is the Vacuum (Aether) being composed of Field Bubbles (Aether Units). These field bubbles are close-packed spheres that go out in all directions. Each sphere is a central harmonic oscillator at its center.

The oscillation created is a result of the flow of Aether. It is not a thing. The flow forms a double torus. That is: one torus is on the bottom, one is on top and they are spinning in opposite directions.

“There is nothing ‘solid’ about structure.”1

Each sphere contains all the Platonic solid geometry, Archimedean geometry and all associated stellations, truncations and compounds in potentiation.

The geometry is fractal, recursive and holographic. This means the geometry is within geometry, within geometry, within geometry, outwards and inwards, infinitely.

It is also important to note that all Platonic solids can be built from close-packed spheres.2

The tetrahedron, star tetrahedron, octahedron, cube, icosahedron and dodecahedron.

Below we see the inward spiraling pressure and outward spiraling pressure. This creates the double torus. This same phenomenon can be seen when looking down the poles of a magnet. The result is a double torus, not a single torus.

The Flower of Life & Aether Units

The Flower of Life is a revered symbol found all over the world. It is a two-dimensional representation of close-packed spheres. This structure can create the platonic solids from spheres packed in a close formation.

This is beautifully illustrated by the transformation of the seed of life into the flower of life into the fruit of life, into Metatron’s Cube.

Metatron’s cube is formed by connecting all the centers of the circles in the fruit of life. These form the Platonic solids.

The torus is a manifestation of the seed of life that is rotated. As is spirals out it forms the Flower of Life. A rotating Flower of Life forms the two-dimensional torus shape seen below.

The Platonic Solids

The Platonic solids are the most harmonic shapes in the universe. They have more symmetry than any other shapes. They fit perfectly inside of a sphere with all points touching. Every side is the same length. All angles are the same angles. Every side is the same polygon.

Furthermore, all Platonic solids nest within each other.

There are five Platonic solids:

  • Tetrahedron – fire/4 sides
  • Octahedron – air/8 sides
  • Cube – earth/6 sides
  • Icosahedron – water/20 sides
  • Dodecahedron – Aether/12 sides

You can vibrate pure sound frequencies in water and get these shapes. This is seen in Cymatics and is discussed thoroughly in Cosmic Core.

Cymatics patterns. Credit: Hans Jenny

Platonic solids are the core of how the universe is built from a living fluid-like universe.

Platonic Solid Duals

Duals are two polyhedra whose faces and vertices correspond perfectly.

This illustrates the Principle of Inversion.

As a Platonic solid oscillates it can turn inside out.

To find the dual:

  • Define the midpoint of each edge. Connect the points with in 3D space.
  • Or join the face centers. Define the midpoint of each face. Connect the center of each face with a line.

The following are duals:

The Cube is with the Octahedron.

The Dodecahedron is with the Icosahedron.

The Tetrahedron is dual with itself.

This forms a Star tetrahedron. Otherwise known as a stellated octahedron, a Merkaba, or a three-dimensional Star of David.

Nested Platonic Solids

Platonic solids are fractal in nature. All the geometries perfectly nest into one another. There are many ways they do this. Some of these are discussed in other articles.

One way they nest is as follows:

The Dodecahedron grows out of the cube.

A rotation of a cube in 5 ways creates the dodecahedron. These 5 cubes are seen in 5 different colors: red, green, blue, black and yellow.

Furthermore, placing the following specific ‘roof’ shape on each of the 6 faces of a cube creates the dodecahedron as seen below.

In another way, the dodecahedron grows out of the cube by cantellating the 12 edges of the cube. Cantellation refers to truncating the edges of a polyhedron, rather than truncating corners. This creates new faces.

Credit: Frank Chester

The Tetrahedron is inside the Cube.

A tetrahedron fits perfectly inside a cube. It’s four vertices line up with 4 of the 8 cube vertices.

Two interlocking tetrahedra fit perfectly inside a cube. The 8 vertices of the two tetrahedra align with the 8 vertices of the cube. In other words, a star tetrahedron fits perfectly inside a cube.

The star tetrahedron from its ‘star’ angle and its ‘cubic’ angle.

The Octahedron is inside the tetrahedron.

There is also an octahedron inside of every star tetrahedron. A star tetrahedron is technically called a “stellated octahedron”. If you put 8 tetrahedron on the 8 faces of the octahedron you get the star tetrahedron as seen here.

The Icosahedron is inside the octahedron.

When an icosahedron fits into an octahedron, the 8 faces of the octahedron are cut into the golden section by 8 of the triangular icosahedral faces. This can be seen with the purple triangle (representing an icosahedron face) cutting the larger black triangle (representing an octahedron face) at the golden ratio.

The Dodecahedron is inside the icosahedron, and vice versa, because they are duals.

This forms the sequence of: Dodecahedron – Cube – Tetrahedron – Octahedron – Icosahedron – Dodecahedron – and so on and so on…infinitely.

And keep in mind, this is one of the many ways in which this can be done.

Platonic Solids as Spheres

Each Platonic Solid can be illustrated as close-packed spheres:

The tetrahedron is composed of 4 spheres.

The octahedron is composed of 6 spheres.

The cube is composed of 14 spheres.

The dodecahedron is composed of 32 spheres.

The icosahedron is also composed of 32 spheres.

The cuboctahedron, or vector equilibrium, is another very important shape. It is an Archimedean solid and the compound of a cube and an octahedron. That is, when the two shapes transform from one into the other, the half-way or equilibrium point between the transformation forms a cuboctahedron.

The cuboctahedron, or vector equilibrium can also be illustrated as close-packed spheres. It is composed of 12 spheres around 1. This is the maximum number of spheres that touch in three dimensions. This 12-around-1 system is very important in geometry and spiritual teachings. It is discussed many times in Cosmic Core.

All this is beautifully illustrated in Keith Critchlow’s excellent book Order in Space. It is also illustrated on the website D’Source at: http://www.dsource.in/course/geometry-design/concepts-3-dimensional

The Platonic solid relate to spheres in yet another way. Each Platonic solid face can fractalize out in infinite iterations until they create perfect spheres. For example, a tetrahedron can fractalize into a star tetrahedron, and then into an isotropic vector matrix (IVM), and then into a more complex version of the IVM, and so forth, to infinity. As they grow smaller the shape gets smoother and rounder until finally it forms a perfect sphere.

The Fractal-holographic Theory of the Universe as presented by Nassim Haramein vs. The Mainstream Standard Model3

Topic Fractal-holographic Model Standard Model
Space/Field/Aether Utilizes a super-fluid, superconducting lattice of spherical PSU bubbles in all directions. The Aether is an omnidirectional flower of life lattice. Matter arises from this field through co-spinning units, giving them relativistic mass compared to the surrounding medium. Each PSU [Aether Unit] is a tiny black hole. It is a self-contained gravitational/electromagnetic flow packet. The Aether is full of energy; however the geometry of its structure allows equilibrium – the cuboctahedron (vector equilibrium) – which yields no force vectors in any direction at rest. It is the ground state. The vacuum of space is empty. All matter was created instantaneously in a single Big Bang moment. Quantum virtual particles can pop into and out of existence here. [Note these quantum virtual particles can now be understood as plank spheres (Aether units or Consciousness units) becoming coherent for a small amount of time.]
Mass The spin of space allows mass to arise. Everything harmonically oscillates creating a dual torus of implosion and expansion. It is not a sphere, but a flow of Aether. Matter is Aether spinning and curling. The proton’s source of mass is because there are a higher amount of volume PSUs than surface PSUs and the surface ones are terminations of wormholes to other protons. Unknown. It is thought an elusive Higgs field brings mass to particles, but the idea has not been nailed down. [Note “this theory had trouble modeling nuclear interactions”. This is because it is flawed and incorrect.]
Black Holes Einstein’s field equation solutions were solved with the Schwarzschild solution. This solution showed that everything in space was part of a singularity curve that would eventually coalesce into infinity. Almost every self-sustained system is either a black hole or a virtual black hole. However, these black holes are not the traditional space-time tunnel to a singularity, they are an implosion/explosion flow field towards a single PSU that is not spinning relative to the PSUs around it, a true vacuum. This makes them stable, and from outside the event horizon could be a star (the white hole or radiation outwards), or a proton. Mainstream has no real explanation for the structure of black holes. They are waiting for quantum gravity.
Dark Energy & Cosmological Constant ‘Dark energy’ causes the expansion we see in the Universe. If you simply take a 1055g proton, and blow it up to the size of our Universe, you end up with the exact energy density of the cosmological constant (10-29 g/cm3). This implicates that perhaps our Universe started as a proton in a high density other Universe, and popped out, causing massive expansion due to the pressure difference. Unknown. We place an X in our equations equivalent to the fluctuations we see previously. It is now starting to be linked to the vacuum fluctuations of space.
Gravity Gravitation has been literally linked to the geometry of space. The geometric collapse of the space (the isotropic vector matrix plus jitterbugging) allows this toroidal flow inwards. Unknown.
Strong Force/Quantum Gravity The strong force is simply another facet of gravitation at the quantum scale, due to the black hole proton. Unknown. This is where most of Quantum Physics and decades of work on unsolved Quantum Chromodynamics arise from: attempting to explain how such energetic particles like protons could stick together. So again – we came up with a force, mediated by made-up ‘gluons’ with the exact force to satisfy this.
Entanglement The vacuum of space is a superfluid, superconducting light lattice. This allows instant harmonic communication between all particles – via Schwarzschild Wormholes. Since all protons are connected through Einstein-Rosen bridges, we can literally think of all protons as touching. Entanglement is a shadow of this holographic network. Unknown – spooky action at a distance.
Light Light is an excitation of the Aether medium. Light is not moving through the vacuum, light is vacuum fluctuating. Although we have the famous equation e=mc2, these terms are almost meaningless. We don’t know why C is C, and both mass and energy are undefined terms.
Sacred Geometry Phi/Fibonacci Flower of Life This is called geometrodynamics and is the attempt to describe all physical phenomenon in terms of geometry. The PSUs are packed in a 3D flower of life, which is the holographic interference pattern of the universe. The first fractal iteration of the vacuum geometry lattice is a 64 tetrahedron matrix, in which the flower of life and Metatron’s cube can be extracted.

PHI is the ratio at which the different harmonic octaves of space manifest – due to the simple tetrahedron/sphere relationship.|Bunk, silly woo. Pattern recognition.|
|Consciousness|This Planck lattice makes up everything, and it is a hyper-instantaneous-information network that is in feedback and feed-forward loop with itself due to the dual torus. It is most likely that consciousness arises from the feedback-feedforward loop from the quantum vacuum<–>physical reality.|A magical property of the brain.|
|Life|Since the universe contains a holographic storage medium, the Universe now has a mechanism to preserve novelty/complexification, or what can be called syntropy/negentropy. The current state of the Universe’s information is available in all matter. It is much like biological evolution, but across time and space for all matter. What is more prevalent has more ‘resonance’ in the holographic mass.|A magical statistical impossibility, random, chaotic accident.|

Nassim Haramein, Galactic Creation & Stellar Evolution

In Nassim Haramein’s great documentary, The Black Whole he discusses galactic creation and stellar evolution as a result of geometry and the toroidal flow process.

In Haramein’s model, two Isotropic Vector Matrix (IVM) are surrounded by a toroidal flow field. Each IVM represents a polarity of the Coriolis effect.

The isotropic vector matrix (IVM): the ground-state or balanced state of the Aether according to Nassim Haramein.

At the center of every IVM is the vector equilibrium, or cuboctahedron.

Toroidal flow field around a single vector equilibrium.

The double torus structure. Each IVM has a toroidal flow field around it. One rotates clockwise, the other counter-clockwise.

When all the components are producing equilibrium at the center, the result is singularity, and creation emerges from it.

This relationship between the structure of the vacuum (Aether) and the dynamical division of the vacuum (Aether) based on spin, torque and Coriolis effect produces a complete understanding of space and how stars and galaxies are formed.

This theory predicted that galaxies are products of black holes and not the cause. The material reality we see emerging is being produced by the central heart of the galaxy, the black hole.

There is continuous creation at all levels of singularities. Not just one big bang.

Things emerge from the center and move in a spiral path away from it. At the edge they enter into the galactic halo which is the edge of the double torus and they fall back in at the top.

Black holes are found occurring prior to galaxies.

Black holes are actually ‘Black Wholes’. They absorb and radiate information. They are black/white holes.

From the inside of the event horizon the universe appears black. From the outside it appears white, very bright, like stars.

The galactic halo surrounding a galaxy is seen here in blue. The halo is the ‘white hole’. The black hole is the entrance/exit point at the center of the galaxy.

See Articles 90-92 for more information on these topics.

All this relates nicely to ancient concepts. For example: the God or Buddha in the center; the kingdom of heaven residing within (in the center of us); the perfect alignment of the apex of the great pyramid, and so forth.

“Beyond the Vector Equilibrium’s primary zero-phase symmetry, the 64 Tetrahedron Grid, as it is known, represents the first conceptual fractal of structural wholeness in balanced integrity. It is noteworthy that the quantity of 64 is found in numerous systems in the cosmos, including the 64 codons in our DNA, the 64 hexagrams of the I Ching (Chinese Book of Changes), the 64 tantric arts of the Kama Sutra, as well as in the Mayan Calendar’s underlying structure.”9

The Isotropic Vector Matrix – The 64 tetrahedral grid structure of the Aether.

Conclusion

In this article we have seen how the work of Nassim Haramein regards the structure of the Aether, or the medium of space and time. In the previous article we explored the Aether through the lens of Cosmometry and Dan Winter and in the next section, Part 7 we will look at the work of Buckminster Fuller and how it relates to the physics of Nassim Haramein.

We are viewing these ideas from many angles to recognize how each of these brilliant thinkers have important pieces of the puzzle to add to the complete picture of the new paradigm of Aether science. No one person has the full picture. Put together, however, we can come much closer to viewing a comprehensive view of reality that is accurate, unified, and understandable to all.

Regards

2 Likes

@sidharthabahadur well yes there is a lifetime of info... But as I've studied this in a way that is unique I have experienced an understanding of how this geometry fits and many of the interpretations here (as all have) are not correct in many ways ...

For example my video (although basic) is describing a double torus... That is the interpretation is of two torus each rotating oppositely. This is the authentic nature (as I've been trying to say) ONE oscillation! And I have proof not theory or conjecture on this.... please :pray: look over it again...

In quantum mechanics all forms are digital (platonic) in relativety they are quantised to form curves (our reality)

If I have a square rock and put it in the water for many years you will find the rock becomes smooth and curved... It is so with data and matter....

If I walk on a spinning floor, even though I walk straight I will curve depending on the spin and it's speed.

We have not even touched upon the human form and it's makeup...all platonic ....and oscillating...

M

1 Like

Wow @Echo_on , this is so interesting - even what you said about the human form...I saw this diagram in the article from your earlier post and do you know what it immediately reminded me of ? Kundalini energy rising like a serpent through the human spinal chord during Kundalini Yoga !

Regards

2 Likes

@sidharthabahadur

Science has fragmented our world into millions of individual expressions...like Lego...though
all the pieces are made the same...

My calculations will prove this is all a Cyclic Notation (Unity) based on the simple principle of platonic oscillation. The numbers will speak for themselves.

Creation 0 <1

1 is a copy (vibration)

Ps...the kundalini as everything connected to our self is oscillating..the heart the lungs etc...through the spine.

The oscillation is the energy of our consciousness and it can and does communicate, resonanate and phase correctly when authenticated by our heart and nervous system. Throughout our body through our senses and pupils to create a detailed perspective or high definition!

pps...would just like to show how a cube magnet is really creating a torus by watching this video. @ 7.47 minutes you can see clearly the cube magnets and in the ferrocell creates the torus or one part of the oscillation is viewed by the ferrocell.

M

1 Like

Thanks for sharing this insight @Echo_on . I believe the ancient beliefs in Platonic solids are 100% proven by the sciences of crystallogy , gemology and crystal healing/meditation...among Hollow Earth researchers , there is even a view that inner Earth civilisations may be harnessing "crystal energies" for driving their technology :-

**I think energy at rest or that which is crystallised , is "locked up" in the form of Platonic solids as represented by crystals and gems , whereas energy that has been "unlocked" or is in the "flow" state , takes the form of a toroidal vortex . So , they are both two aspects of the same basic , underlying phenomena in nature .

***As for the chakras , or the subtle energy centers of the human body , it is fascinating to note the striking similarity in the symbolism of intertwining serpents found in the ancient Caduceus (used by the medical fraternity) , the Kundalini rising up the spine and DNA Helix - all 3 of which are converging towards the same truth about the nature of reality . Here is the Yogic view :-

The Seven Chakras – Vortexes of Power

The chakras represent our power – both when dealing with the external, physical world as well as with the astral and spiritual world.

However it is a mistake to think that chakras will fully express their power without the ascent of the kundalini. Unlocking the power of each chakra happens by the use of mental practices and mantra, while ultimately the full power blossoms as the kundalini pierces each chakra.

Beyond the balancing of chakras there is awakening of the chakra’s power, which is a complex topic and part of the Tantra teachings.

What are the 7 chakras and why do they matter?

The seven chakras have been written about in ancient texts of Tantra and yoga as important psycho-energetic centres which allow us to align with matter and the material world, with the mental and emotional world as well as with the subtle world of spirit. They are not anatomical organs but rather subtle energy centres which coordinate the flow of prana (vital energy) through our body.

Chakras are closely related to the endocrine glands, and hence imbalances in the chakras will be mirrored in disease, affecting the region of the chakra in the physical body and also as imbalances in the hormone secretion of the related gland.

To maintain physical health and emotional well-being it is crucial to constantly work on stabilizing and balancing the seven chakras. A chakra imbalance will express itself in physical disease. For example a person often suffering from a sore throat or difficulty speaking and expressing herself could point to an imbalance of the throat chakra. Chest and chronic lung diseases as well as diseases like bronchitis could point to a clogged heart chakra.

Strong mental and behavioural tendencies can also be curbed and one troublesome tendency after another can be eliminated by strengthening and balancing the chakra. The science which explores the relationship between the nervous plexi and endocrine glands on one hand and the chakras on the other is called bio-psychology, a new science.

The seven chakras are also controlling points of the 5 elements the human body is made of: the solid, liquid, luminous, aerial and ethereal factor. The highest two chakras are not controlling any element, but are rather the seat of the mind and soul. Even though there are many chakras in the human body, there are 7 main chakras:

The first three chakras, starting at the base of the spine are chakras of matter. They are more related to the physical, the manifested world.

Muladhara chakra

Muladhara chakra

  1. Muladhara Chakra, also called root chakra is located at the base of the spine and controls the solid factor in the human body. This chakra is related to our basic needs and survival. When out of balance we experience existential fear. When fully balanced we feel safe and secure and gain control over our physical needs, for ex. food, sleep, reproduction.

Svadhisthana chakra

Svadhisthana chakra

  1. The sacral or Svadhisthana chakra is located two fingers below the navel, controls the liquid factor and is related to the testes and ovaries. It concerns our relationships with others (this includes all types of relationships) and the inclination to enjoy pleasure. When out of balance we tend to overindulge. When fully balanced we will have harmonious relationships and a balanced mind.

Manipura chakra

Manipura chakra

  1. The navel or Manipura Chakra holds our sense of power and enthusiasm. When out of balance it may cause a person to become domineering and a power monger. On the other hand feeling powerless or disempowered, depressed or worthless also points to a chakra imbalance. This chakra is located at the navel and controls the luminous factor in the body, related to energy and heat production. The navel is also the seat of the digestive fire, called Agni in Sanskrit. Manipura chakra related to the adrenal glands and pancreas. A fully balanced chakra is a source of enthusiasm, a sense of empowerment and the ability to materialize one’s goals.

The 4th or heart chakra is the bridge between the physical and spiritual world. This chakra is also spiritual in nature but it is the connecting point, the bridge between the lower and higher chakras.

Anahata chakra

Anahata chakra

  1. The heart or Anahata chakra is the chakra of love and connection, both human and divine love. Out of balance could be expressed as extreme possessiveness and the desire to constantly seek attention. It is located in the centre of the chest and controls the aerial factor. It is related to the thymus gland. When blocked we are not enjoying interactions with others and avoid company, while fully balanced and open we experience an expanded consciousness, seeing others as part of ourselves. We start to blossom and wherever we go we spread the fragrance of love.

Vishuddha chakra

  1. The throat or Vishuddha chakra is located at the centre of the throat and relates to the thyroid and parathyroid glands. This chakra is the controlling point of the ethereal factor. It allows us to speak our truth. When blocked we feel the inability to express ourselves properly. It is also the chakra of purity and creativity. When this chakra is fully open we become artists, poets, even our smile will have a unique aroma. On the other hand when the chakra is blocked one will feel dull, devoid of ideas and listless.

Ajina chakra

Ajina chakra

  1. The Ajina (pronounced Agya) chakra, also called the third eye is located between the eyebrows and is the seat of the mind. It is related to the pituitary gland. This is also the centre of intuition. When blocked or imbalanced, we are unable to connect to the voice of the higher Self. Furthermore, this chakra when fully open will allow us to command our mind and body. Whetever we tell our mind that will be executed. What we call willpower is actually a fully active and open Ajina chakra. When this chakra is blocked a person becomes like a slave to one’s unconscious thoughts, impulses and past behaviour or habits.

Sahasrara chakra

Sahasrara chakra

  1. The crown or Sahasrara chakra is related to the pineal gland. This is the chakra of enlightenment and spiritual connection to our higher selves, and ultimately, to the divine. It is located at the crown of the head and is considered the seat of the soul.

It is fascinating that each chakra determines our relationship to the world of matter, emotion and spirit, yet the chakras are also the energy vortexes of psychic propensities or tendencies, as for example, fear, hatred, lethargy, shyness, effort, pride, jealousy, etc. Yoga teaches the exact location of each psychic propensity and how we can free the mind from troublesome psychic propensities to find peace and tranquillity – the requirement for meditation.

Awareness to which of the chakras is out of balance is key to aligning them. Pointers are for ex. Physical problems in that region, as in frequent constipation which could be a sign that the first chakra is weak. Certain recurring strong emotions are also pointers that a particular chakra is out of balance. Asanas or yoga postures as practiced and taught in Rajadhiraja yoga will have a profound effect on the glands and chakras and an experienced teacher will be able to prescribe asanas to each person individually prescribed for deep inner chakra work.

Regards

1 Like

Folks , the famous Caduceus symbol (universally used by the Global medical fraternity) may be from ancient Sumer and could be as old as 4,000 B.C. !

***Nobody knows it's true origins , though this mysterious symbolism of 2 intertwined snakes is also seen in ancient Hindu temples - possibly depicting how the Kundalini energy rises up the spinal chord .

Could the ancients have been trying to depict the double helix structure of DNA itself ??

Caduceus

Jump to navigationJump to search

This article is about the Greek symbol. For the (mis)usage as a medical symbol, see Caduceus as a symbol of medicine. For the medical symbol with one snake, often mistakenly referred to as a caduceus, see Rod of Asclepius. For other uses, see Caduceus (disambiguation).

Modern depiction of the caduceus as the symbol of logistics

Hermes Ingenui[a] carrying a winged caduceus upright in his left hand. A Roman copy after a Greek original of the 5th century BCE (Museo Pio-Clementino, Rome).

The caduceus (☤; /kəˈdjuːʃəs, -siəs/; Latin: cādūceus, from Greek: κηρύκειον kērū́keion "herald's wand, or staff")[b] is the staff carried by Hermes in Greek mythology and consequently by Hermes Trismegistus in Greco-Egyptian mythology. The same staff was also borne by heralds in general, for example by Iris, the messenger of Hera. It is a short staff entwined by two serpents, sometimes surmounted by wings. In Roman iconography, it was often depicted being carried in the left hand of Mercury, the messenger of the gods.

Some accounts suggest that the oldest known imagery of the caduceus has its roots in Mesopotamia with the Sumerian god Ningishzida; whose symbol, a staff with two snakes intertwined around it, dates back to 4000 BC to 3000 BC.[3]

As a symbolic object, it represents Hermes (or the Roman Mercury), and by extension trades, occupations, or undertakings associated with the god. In later Antiquity, the caduceus provided the basis for the astrological symbol representing the planet Mercury. Thus, through its use in astrology, alchemy, and astronomy it has come to denote the planet and elemental metal of the same name. It is said the wand would wake the sleeping and send the awake to sleep. If applied to the dying, their death was gentle; if applied to the dead, they returned to life.[4]

By extension of its association with Mercury and Hermes, the caduceus is also a recognized symbol of commerce and negotiation, two realms in which balanced exchange and reciprocity are recognized as ideals.[5][6][7] This association is ancient, and consistent from the Classical period to modern times.[8][9] The caduceus is also used as a symbol

***Symbolism from an ancient Hindu temple :-

image

Regards

List members , suppose we were stone masons who had been given a blueprint and asked to build a palace , one of our first questions would be - what kind of brick/building block would be made available for that construction ?

Keeping the logic of the above analogy , how then can our scientists claim they know the structure & workings of our Universe , if they haven't even properly understood the building block of our Cosmos - the HOLLOW , FUZZY atom (which is 99.99% empty space !) :))

I have often been sarcastic about the "billiard ball" approach of scientists when it comes to understanding the behaviour of atoms and sub-atomic particles...if you ever needed proof that this is true , just consider the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) experiment of CERN , built at a cost of over US$ 10 billion (and counting) . What CERN scientists do essentially is smash tiny miniature "billiard balls" (atoms) and then observe it's fragments , to figure out the secrets of nature !! Even 14 years after the LHC was powered on , the result is ZILCH :)) It is said that only the insane will keep repeating the same steps and expect a different result each time , but this elite group of PhDs at CERN have done just that - secured mega bucks funding to build an even bigger collider , than the one that failed to deliver any meaningful results !!

When will mainstream scientists learn to be truly objective , even though they often lecture citizens about it ?? SCIENCE 2.0 is crying out for a different approach !

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-objectivity/

There's a Giant Mystery Hiding Inside Every Atom in the Universe

By Rafi Letzter published January 02, 2020

No one really knows what happens inside an atom.

3D illustration of an atom and quarks.

(Image credit: Shutterstock)

No one really knows what happens inside an atom(opens in new tab). But two competing groups of scientists think they've figured it out. And both are racing to prove that their own vision is correct.

Here's what we know for sure: Electrons whiz around "orbitals" in an atom's outer shell. Then there's a whole lot of empty space. And then, right in the center of that space, there's a tiny nucleus — a dense knot of protons and neutrons that give the atom most of its mass. Those protons and neutrons cluster together, bound by what's called the strong force. And the numbers of those protons and neutrons determine whether the atom is iron(opens in new tab) or oxygen(opens in new tab) or xenon(opens in new tab), and whether it's radioactive or stable.

Still, no one knows how those protons and neutrons (together known as nucleons) behave inside an atom. Outside an atom, protons and neutrons have definite sizes and shapes. Each of them is made up of three smaller particles called quarks, and the interactions between those quarks are so intense that no external force should be able to deform them, not even the powerful forces between particles in a nucleus. But for decades, researchers have known that the theory is in some way wrong. Experiments have shown that, inside a nucleus, protons and neutrons appear much larger than they should be. Physicists have developed two competing theories that try to explain that weird mismatch, and the proponents of each are quite certain the other is incorrect. Both camps agree, however, that whatever the correct answer is, it must come from a field beyond their own.

Since at least the 1940s, physicists have known that nucleons move in tight little orbitals within the nucleus, Gerald Miller, a nuclear physicist at the University of Washington, told Live Science. The nucleons, confined in their movements, have very little energy. They don't bounce around much, restrained by the strong force.

In 1983, physicists at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) noticed something strange: Beams of electrons bounced off iron in a way that was very different from how they bounced off free protons, Miller said. That was unexpected; if the protons inside hydrogen were the same size as the protons inside iron, the electrons should have bounced off in much the same way.

At first, researchers didn't know what they were looking at.

But over time, scientists came to believe it was a size issue. For some reason, protons and neutrons inside heavy nuclei act as if they are much larger than when they are outside the nuclei. Researchers call this phenomenon the EMC effect, after the European Muon Collaboration — the group that accidentally discovered it**.** It violates existing theories of nuclear physics.

Or Hen, a nuclear physicist at MIT, has an idea that could potentially explain what's going on.

While quarks, the subatomic particles that make up nucleons, strongly interact within a given proton or neutron, quarks in different protons and neutrons can't interact much with each other, he said. The strong force inside a nucleon is so strong it eclipses the strong force holding nucleons to other nucleons.

"Imagine sitting in your room talking to two of your friends with the windows closed," Hen said.

The trio in the room are three quarks inside a neutron or proton.

"A light breeze is blowing outside," he said.

That light breeze is the force holding the proton or neutron to nearby nucleons that are "outside" the window. Even if a little snuck through the closed window, Hen said, it would barely affect you.

And as long as nucleons stay in their orbitals, that's the case. However, he said, recent experiments have shown that at any given time, about 20% of the nucleons in a nucleus are in fact outside their orbitals. Instead, they're paired off with other nucleons, interacting in "short range correlations." Under those circumstances, the interactions between the nucleons are much higher-energy than usual, he said. That's because the quarks poke through the walls of their individual nucleons and start to directly interact, and those quark-quark interactions are much more powerful than nucleon-nucleon interactions.

These interactions break down the walls separating quarks inside individual protons or neutrons, Hen said. The quarks making up one proton and the quarks making up another proton start to occupy the same space. This causes the protons (or neutrons, as the case may be) to stretch and blur, Hen said. They grow a lot, albeit for very short periods of time. That skews the average size of the entire cohort in the nucleus — producing the EMC effect.

Most physicists now accept this interpretation of the EMC effect, Hen said. And Miller, who worked with Hen on some of the key research, agreed.

But not everyone thinks Hen's group has the problem worked out. Ian Cloët, a nuclear physicist at Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois, said he thinks Hen's work draws conclusions that the data doesn't fully support.

"I think the EMC effect is still unresolved," Cloët told Live Science. That's because the basic model of nuclear physics already accounts for a lot of the short-range pairing Hen describes. Yet, "if you use that model to try and look at the EMC effect, you will not describe the EMC effect. There is no successful explanation of the EMC effect using that framework. So in my opinion, there's still a mystery."

Hen and his collaborators are doing experimental work that is "valiant" and "very good science," he said. But it doesn't fully resolve the problem of the atomic nucleus.

"What is clear is that the traditional model of nuclear physics … cannot explain this EMC effect," he said. "We now think that the explanation must be coming from QCD itself."

QCD stands for quantum chromodynamics — the system of rules that govern the behavior of quarks. Shifting from nuclear physics to QCD is a bit like looking at the same picture twice: once on a first-generation flip phone — that's nuclear physics — and then again on a high-resolution TV — that's quantum chromodynamics. The high-res TV offers a lot more detail, but it's a lot more complicated to build.

The problem is that the complete QCD equations describing all the quarks in a nucleus are too difficult to solve, Cloët and Hen both said. Modern supercomputers are about 100 years away from being fast enough for the task, Cloët estimated. And even if supercomputers were fast enough today, the equations haven't advanced to the point where you could plug them into a computer, he said.

Still, he said, it's possible to work with QCD to answer some questions. And right now, he said, those answers offer a different explanation for the EMC effect: Nuclear Mean-Field Theory.

He disagrees that 20% of nucleons in a nucleus are bound up in short-range correlations. The experiments just don't prove that, he said. And there are theoretical problems with the idea.

That suggests we need a different model, he said.

"The picture that I have is, we know that inside a nucleus are these very strong nuclear forces," Cloët said. These are "a bit like electromagnetic fields(opens in new tab), except they're strong force fields."

The fields operate at such tiny distances that they're of negligible magnitude outside the nucleus, but they're powerful inside of it.

In Cloët's model, these force fields, which he calls "mean fields" (for the combined strength they carry) actually deform the internal structure of protons, neutrons and pions (a type of strong force-carrying particle).

"Just like if you take an atom and you put it inside a strong magnetic field, you will change the internal structure of that atom," Cloët said.

In other words, mean-field theorists think the sealed-up room Hen described has holes in its walls, and wind is blowing through to knock the quarks around, stretching them out.

Advertisement

Cloët acknowledged that it's possible short-range correlations likely explain some portion of the EMC effect, and Hen said mean fields likely do play a role as well.

"The question is, which dominates," Cloët said.

Miller, who has also worked extensively with Cloët, said that the mean field has the advantage of being more well-grounded in theory. But Cloët hasn't yet done all the necessary calculations, he said.

And right now the weight of experimental evidence suggests that Hen has the better of the argument.

Hen and Cloët both said the results of experiments in the next few years could resolve the question. Hen cited an experiment underway at Jefferson National Accelerator Facility in Virginia that will move nucleons closer together, bit by bit, and allow researchers to watch them change. Cloët said he wants to see a "polarized EMC experiment" that would break up the effect based on the spin (a quantum trait) of the protons involved. It might reveal unseen details of the effect that could aid calculations, he said.

All three researchers emphasized that the debate is friendly.

"It's great, because it means we're still making progress," Miller said. "Eventually, something's going to be in the textbook and the ball game is over. ... The fact that there's two competing ideas means that it's exciting and vibrant. And now finally we have the experimental tools to resolve these issues."

Regards

1 Like

Folks , the "danger" of intelligent approximation and oversimplification can be demonstrated by raising each of 0.99 and 0.9999 respectively , to the power of 365 (representing the 365 days of a year) . Notice the very sharp divergence in the results when you increase the % accuracy by just 1% i.e. from 99% to 99.99% :-

Regards

I don't believe neither in an atom nor in subatomic particles. I have proven that electricity flows in an open circuit:

Many people have accused me that these experiments are fake. I tell them that I am anytime ready to perform them in front of live audience so that everyone can inspect the setup closely. But no, they don't want that because their cherished beliefs will end up at the trash heap of the history.

So, my experiments which cost a few dollars against their experiments which cost 10 billions dollars! Let's make a competition!

But no, such a competition will never take place because the shame on them will be enormous.

THE KING IS NAKED. I am the child who shouted it out. But unlike the folktale, no one will admit it because the folk is afraid of the western academic inquisition. The fake western science will rule for many years to come, but since someone has once exposed it, the day will come when it will end up in the garbage.

So, what do those experiments prove? They prove that NO PARTICLES are moving through the wires, but the electric current is just a vibration of the inner forces of the matter.

As I said several times before, the matter at the end dissolves in invisible, intangible, immaterial forces: electromagnetic forces, light forces etc.

Those forces of the light weave incredible nets of miilions various geometries which are actually the various substances. Every substance has its own and unique inner geometry of the light forces, EM-forces etc.

1 Like

@Mitko_Gorgiev , fantastic - your experiments validate some of Tesla's most controversial claims about electricity !

Regards

@Mitko_Gorgiev thanks for sharing this...it is extremely interesting topic...

I would like to ask what is the benefit of the large metal objects within this experiment?.. Are they creating your open field IE...will the experiment work if they were moved or altered? Or are they somehow magnetised/live (capacitor)?

Regards

M

Dunno if you know but most of mainstream 'scientists' are faux atheist Babylonians. Worshiping the old religion with just new words ascribed. All really evil. Designed to keep humans under foot. Don't think you'll have any luck convincing any of them since their NEED to either not believe the truth defines their success or failure with their ilk.

1 Like

@Western0bserver , yes - they have "blind faith" in erroneous science :))

Regards

The phenomenon has nothing to do with an electric field around the objects or with capacitance.
The two objects can be hundreds of meters away from each other.

It has actually to do with the volume of the conductive objects (they may be also some electrolytes).
But let me give you an analogy. Imagine you have two metal rods, one shorter and one longer like in the figure below.

image

Now, you hit the first metal rod in the middle with a hammer (marked with an arrow). You get some vibrations in the rod. Those vibrations will be much stronger if you hit a longer metal rod in the middle with the hammer.

What is actually the analogy?
The action of the battery corresponds to the hitting of the hammer. The larger the conductive objects on both sides of the battery are, the stronger the vibrations in themselves are, which actually means stronger electric current.

Please see also this article:

2 Likes

@Mitko_Gorgiev , thanks for your deep insight into electric current !! If we go into the details of the "electron cloud" concept , the idea is that it probably extends across the entire Universe (probabilistically speaking) !

So , do atoms really ever "touch" each other , in the physical sense that we understand ?? Maybe not...! So , if the FUZZY atoms do NOT actually touch , then what is the point of colliding them together like billiard balls , or trying to smash them like pieces of glass ??

Do atoms ever actually touch each other?

Category: Physics Published: April 16, 2013

two hydrogen atoms

Artistic rendering of two hydrogen atoms moving close to each other. At what point do they "touch"? It depends on what you mean by touch. Public Domain Image, source: Christopher S. Baird.

The answer depends on what you mean by "touch". There are three possible meanings of touch at the atomic level: 1) two objects influence each other, 2) two objects influence each other significantly, or 3) two objects reside in the exact same location. Note that the everday concept of touch (i.e the hard boundaries of two objects exist at the same location) makes no sense at the atomic level because atoms don't have hard boundaries. Atoms are not really solid spheres. They are fuzzy quantum probability clouds filled with electrons spread out into waving cloud-like shapes called "orbitals". Like a cloud in the sky, an atom can have a shape and a location without having a hard boundary. This is possible because the atom has regions of high density and regions of low density. When we say that an atom is sitting at point A, what we really mean is that the high-density portion of the atom's probability cloud is located at point A. If you put an electron in a box (as is done in quantum dot lasers), that electron is only mostly in the box. Part of the electron's wavefunction leaks through the walls of the box and out to infinity. This makes possible the effect of quantum tunneling, which is used in scanning tunneling microscopes. With the non-solid nature of atoms in mind, let us look at each of the possible meanings of touching.

  1. If "touching" is taken to mean that two atoms influence each other, then atoms are always touching. Two atoms that are held a mile apart still have their wavefunctions overlapping. The amplitude of one atom's wavefunction at the point where it overlaps with the other atom's center will be ridiculously small if they are a mile apart, but it will not be zero. In principle, two atoms influence each other no matter where they are in the universe because they extend out in all directions. In practice, if two atoms are more than a few nanometers apart, their influence on each other typically becomes so small that it is overshadowed by the influence of closer atoms. Therefore, although two atoms a mile apart may technically be touching (if we define touching as the overlap of atomic wavefunctions), this touching is typically so insignificant that it can be ignored.

What is this "touching"? In the physical world, there are only four fundamental ways for objects to influence each other: through the electromagnetic force, through the strong nuclear force, through the weak nuclear force, and through the force of gravity. Neutrons and protons that make up the nucleus of an atom are bound to each other and undergo reactions via the two nuclear forces. The electrons that make up the rest of the atom are bound to the nucleus by the electromagnetic force. Atoms are bound into molecules, and molecules are bound into everyday objects by the electromagnetic force. Finally, planets (as well as other large astronomical objects) and macroscopic objects on the planet's surface are bound together by gravity. If two atoms are held a meter apart, they are touching each other through all four fundamental forces. However, for typical atoms, the electromagnetic force tends to dominate over the other forces. What does this touching lead to? If two atoms are too far apart, their interaction is too weak compared to other surrounding bodies to amount to anything. When the two atoms get close enough, this interaction can lead to many things. The entire field of chemistry can be summed up as the study of all the interesting things that happen when atoms get close enough to influence each other electromagnetically. If two atoms are non-reactive and don't form covalent, ionic, or hydrogen bonds, then their electromagnetic interaction typically takes the form of the Van der Walls force. In the Van der Walls effect, two atoms brought close to each other induce electric dipole moments in each other, and these dipoles then attract each other weakly through electrostatic attraction. While the statement that "all atoms on the planet are always touching all other atoms on the planet" is strictly true according to this definition of touching, it is not very helpful. Instead, we can arbitrarily define an effective perimeter that contains most of the atom, and then say that any part of the atom that takes extends beyond that perimeter is not worth noticing. This takes us to our next definition of touching.

  1. If "touching" is taken to mean that two atoms influence each other significantly, then atoms do indeed touch, but only when they get close enough. The problem is that what constitutes "significant" is open to interpretation. For instance, we can define the outer perimeter of an atom as the mathematical surface that contains 95% of the atom's electron mass. As should be obvious at this point, a perimeter that contains 100% of the atom would be larger than the earth. With 95% of the atom's electron probability density contained in this mathematical surface, we could say that atoms do not touch until their 95% regions begin to overlap. Another way to assign an effective edge to an atom is to say it exists halfway between two atoms that are covalently bonded. For instance, two hydrogen atoms that are covalently bonded to each other to form an H2 molecule have their centers separated by 50 picometers. They can be thought of as "touching" at this separation. In this approach, atoms touch whenever they are close enough to potentially form a chemical bond.

  2. If "touching" is taken to mean that two atoms reside in the exact same location, then two atoms never touch at room temperature because of the Pauli exclusion principle. The Pauli exclusion principle is what keeps all the atoms in our body from collapsing into one point. Interestingly, at very low temperatures, certain atoms can be coaxed into the exact same location. The result is known as a Bose-Einstein condensate.

Again, atoms never touch in the everyday sense of the word for the simple reason that they don't have hard boundaries. But in every other sense of the word "touch" that has meaning at the atomic level, atoms certainly touch.

***Folks , also here is an excellent take on the case against building a large particle collider than CERN's existing Large Hadron Collider (LHC) :-

Please, don’t build another Large Hadron Collider

A next-generation LHC++ could cost $100 billion. Here's why such a machine could end up being a massive waste of money.

Credit: francescodemarco / Adobe Stock

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • A next-generation LHC++ could cost $100 billion.
  • The hypothetical machine could not truly test string theory. What it could discover is entirely speculative.
  • Pursuing scientific curiosity is rewarding, but there are smarter and more productive ways to spend all that money.

Tom Hartsfield
Here’s some inside baseball about physics research. High energy theory was a field with vast accomplishments across the 20th century and its success was propelled by a series of physics geniuses who won support and funding for a seven-decade succession of particle colliders. These colliders smashed matter together and discovered particle after particle streaming out of the explosions. The geniuses built the Standard Model to explain the particles. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC), located in Switzerland, was the capstone of their era, finding the last required particle — the Higgs boson — to complete the model.

Today, those geniuses are nearly all gone and their successors are bogged down in various forms of mathematical supersymmetry. You’ve heard of some of its ideas: string theory, M-theory, D-branes, and so forth. It’s all fun to read about. But the problem is that it doesn’t explain anything. High energy theory has become highly academic and mathematical. Einstein postulated four-dimensional spacetime because he needed four dimensions to make sense of the world as we see it. String theory requires 11 dimensions — or maybe 10, or 12, or 26. Maybe some are curled up. Why? Because neat things happen in abstract math, apparently.

Supersymmetry is not a tight and efficient theory, welded together to explain observations. It’s a convoluted mess of mathematical models that could potentially explain anything, or nothing at all. Sabine Hossenfelder, a theoretical physicist who has worked in the field, gives an excellent review of the situation. She doesn’t pull punches. A giant particle collider cannot truly test supersymmetry, which can evolve to fit nearly anything.

This brings us to the LHC, and its hypothetical successor, call it LHC++. The LHC found the Higgs. However, it has had nothing to say about supersymmetry or string theory. Sabine points out that no LHC result could ever rule out supersymmetry. What’s worse, the LHC++ could not rule it out either. The only hope for an enormous new collider would be to happen upon a new and unexpected particle.

It’s not a terrible idea, in a vacuum. Science occasionally progresses when scientists stumble across some entirely new and unexpected phenomena. Ethan Siegel makes the case for building LHC++ for this reason. He believes that arguments against it are disingenuous, or made in bad faith. However, he’s wrong on this one. Economic and scientific sense argue for a different approach.

A significantly more powerful LHC++ will cost tens of billions of dollars. It’s entirely possible that the price could swell to $100 billion. Spending that much money on a machine to take shots in the dark is a mistake. When you don’t have much to go on, and limited resources, it’s better to aim at problems that you know are out there. Those things will lead you to new discoveries. The revolutionary success of 20th-century physics was kicked off in just this way.
Many leading scientists of the late 1800s speculated that physics was nearly finished. There remained only a few mysteries. Two of these known mysteries were the nature of blackbody radiation and the constant speed of light. Both phenomena were studied and measured, but could not be explained. Einstein and others focused on finding solutions to these outstanding problems. The answers lead directly to the development of quantum mechanics and relativity: two of the cornerstone theories of modern physics.

There are many known problems in physics right now. $100 billion could fund (quite literally) 100,000 smaller physics experiments. There may not be enough physics labs on Earth to carry out that many experiments! Ethan points out that we push frontiers such as trillionths-of-a-degree temperatures in new experiments. That’s a great pursuit: It can be done by a handful of researchers, using just a tiny fraction of the funding freed up by not building LHC++. Some of the 100,000 experiments could look for possible physics beyond the Standard Model in clever ways that don’t require the annual GDP of a small nation.

Conversely, that $100 billion could be lumped together and spent on one giant project to solve a known real-world problem. Perhaps we should send the money and associated technical talent to solve fusion energy. ITER, the world’s most promising fusion machine, is a colossal (and over-budget) experiment. And still, $100 billion could fund somewhere between one and five more ITERs. Or, it could power hundreds of alternative efforts to create practical fusion energy.

The money and brainpower that would go into a bigger LHC could be much better used to chase one, a few, or many known scientific and practical problems in the world. Along the way, new and unknown physics would certainly turn up, as it always does when you attack previously unsolvable problems. The only good argument for the LHC++ might be employment for smart people. And for string theorists. It just doesn’t add up.

Regards