Friday, July 12, 2024

Okay so

 technically wrong on one point,

(Space expanding faster than the speed of light)

Overall premise that "The Alien Hypothesis"

has too many laws of nature to overcome

and is therefore a "overcoming the laws of physic" problem

and nor simply "a technological problem" still stands.


Let me explain.

Why doesn’t the expanding Universe break the speed of light?

"Just 13.8 billion years after the hot Big Bang, 

we can see objects up to 

46.1 billion light-years away. 

No, this doesn’t violate relativity."





"If there’s one rule that most people know about the Universe, it’s that there’s an ultimate speed limit that nothing can exceed: the speed of light in a vacuum. If you’re a massive particle, not only can’t you exceed that speed, but you’ll never reach it; you can only approach the speed of light. If you’re massless, you have no choice; you can only move at one speed through spacetime: the speed of light if you’re in a vacuum, or some slower speed if you’re in a medium. (Which spacetime is.) The faster your motion through space, the slower your motion through time, and vice versa as well. There’s no way around these facts, as they’re the fundamental principle on which relativity is based."


"galaxies beyond about 18 billion light-years away can never be reached by us, even if we sent a signal at the speed of light today."

(So that right there eliminates a whole bunch of the observable universe 
"we can see objects up to 46.1 billion light-years away.")


What “nothing can travel faster than the speed of light” actually means


"It is true: nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. But what does that actually mean? Most people, when they hear it, think the following thoughts.

"When I observe an object, I can track its motion, observing how its position changes over time.

When I see it, I can record its observed position and the time at which I observe it.

Then, by using the definition of velocity — that it’s a change in distance divided by a change in time — I can get its velocity.

And therefore, whether looking at a massive or massless object, I had better observe that the velocity I get never exceeds the speed of light, or that would violate the laws of relativity.

This is true in most of our common experience, but it isn’t true universally. In particular, all of this includes an assumption that we pretty much never think about, much less state. The assumption in question?"

"That space is flat, uncurved, and unchanging. This occurs in Euclidean space: the type of space we normally conceive of when we think about our three-dimensional Universe. Most of us envision doing something like putting down a three-dimensional “grid” on top of everything we see, and then try and describe positions and times with a set of four coordinates, one for each of the x, y, z, and time dimensions."


"In other words, most of us understand the basic concept of special relativity — the “nothing can move faster than light” part — but fail to appreciate that the real Universe cannot accurately be described by special relativity alone. Instead, we need to take into account that the Universe has a dynamical fabric of spacetime underpinning it, and that it’s only the motion of objects through that spacetime that obey those laws of special relativity."

(So that part I nailed 100%.)


"Instead, we have to recognize that our Universe obeys the rules of Einstein’s general relativity, and that those rules dictate how spacetime evolves. In particular:

space itself can either expand or contract,

space itself can be either positively or negatively curved, not only flat,

and that the laws of relativity apply to objects 

as they move through space, not to space itself.

In other words, when we say “nothing can move faster than light” we mean “nothing can move faster than light through space,” but that the motion of objects through space tells us nothing about how space itself will evolve. Alternatively, we can only assert that nothing moves faster than light relative to another object at the same location, or event, in spacetime."


"Space doesn’t expand at a speed

So, nothing can move faster than light through space, but what about the ways that space itself changes? You’ve likely heard that we live in an expanding Universe, and that we’ve measured the rate at which the fabric of space itself expands: the Hubble constant. We’ve even measured that rate precisely well, and can be certain, from all the measurements and observations we’ve taken, 

that the present-day rate of expansion is precisely between 66 and 74 km/s/Mpc: kilometers-per-second-per-megaparsec.)

(Those two different measurements have both been repeatedly independently verified by different means and poses a problem, WHY TWO DIFFERENT MEASUREMENTS IF THEY ARE BOTH CONFIRMED AS ACCURATE? 

My position is its evidence of the spiritual realm.

Back to the point Im trying to make:

74 (kilometers a second) =

165,533.286 miles per hour.


ITS PHYSICALY IMPOSSIBE TO ACHIEVE.


The amount of energy required would be infinite.

Any kind of "space dust/debris deflectors"?

The amount of energy required would be infinite.

Add on some special cryogenic chambers for the crew of a ship and?

The amount of energy required would be infinite.)


"For every megaparsec (about 3.26 million light-years) away that a distant, unbound object is from us, we’ll see it recede from us as though it were moving away at the equivalent of 66–74 km/s. If something is 20 Mpc away from us, we’d expect to see it moving away at the equivalent of 1320–1480 km/s from us; 

(1320 km/s = 2952756 mph)

if it’s 5000 Mpc away, we’d expect to see it moving away at ~330,000–370,000 km/s." 

(330,000 km/s =738188976 mph

See the problem Alien freaks?)


"Space further away from us is expanding faster than that which is closer to us, to such an extent that it further complicating anybody's

"Alien Hypothesis"

Period.)


"But this is confusing for two reasons. One, it’s not actually moving at that speed through space, but rather this is the effect of the space between objects expanding. And two, the speed of light is 299,792 km/s, so isn’t that hypothetical object that’s ~5000 Mpc away actually moving away from us at speeds exceeding the speed of light?"


"The way I like to think about the expanding Universe is with the “raisin bread” model. Imagine that you have a ball of dough with raisins all throughout it. Imagine that the dough now leavens: expanding in all directions. (If you like, you can further imagine this is happening in a zero-gravity environment, like on the International Space Station.) Now, if you put your finger down on one raisin, what do you see the other raisins doing?

The closest raisins to you will appear to move slowly away from you, as the dough between them expands.

Raisins that are farther away will appear to be moving away more quickly, as there’s more dough between them and you than the closer raisins.

And raisins that are even farther away will appear to be moving away ever more-and-more quickly.

Now, in our analogy here, the raisins are like galaxies or bound groups/clusters of galaxies, and the dough is like the expanding Universe. Only, in this case, the dough that represents the fabric of space cannot be seen or directly detected, doesn’t actually get less dense as the Universe expands, and simply provides a “stage” for the raisins, or galaxies, to inhabit."


"Every time we look at a distant galaxy, we’re seeing the light from it as it is right now: upon its arrival. That means the light that was emitted experiences a slew of combined effects:


the difference between the gravitational potential from where it was emitted to where it arrives,

the difference in the motion of the emitting object through its space and the motion of the absorbing object through its local space,

and the cumulative effects of the expansion of the Universe, which stretch the light’s wavelength.

"The first part, thankfully, is normally very small: on the order of only a few parts-per-million even for the most severe overdense and underdense regions in the Universe. The second part is known as peculiar velocity, and depends on the local gravitational field that an object has experienced over its cosmic history. In practice, those peculiar velocities can range from hundreds up to a few thousands of kilometers-per-second, with the greatest known peculiar velocities approaching about ~2% the speed of light, or around 6000 km/s."


(Here is the whole problem I am alluding to:



Theres is no way to overcome 
the expansion rate of the universe 
and get here "in a spacecraft"
unless you somehow violate 
a lot of the laws of physics 
as we now know them.

Its not a technological problem.
(However advanced one want to presuppose things)
Its a laws of physics problem.
(They are the same throughout the universe)
Period.)

"What’s important to recognize is that the expansion doesn’t have an intrinsic speed to it at all; space expands at a frequency: a speed-per-unit-distance". 

(And? as established, 
different parts appear to expand at different rates.)

"Expressing it as some amount of kilometers-per-second-per-megaparsec obscures that “kilometers” and “megaparsecs” are both distances, and they’ll cancel if you convert one into the other."

(I went ahead and did it anyway to to give people some kind of idea.)

"The light from distant objects does indeed get redshifted, but not because anything is receding faster than light, nor because anything is expanding faster than light. Space simply expands, and expands proportionally to the amount of time that’s passed with the overall energy density that the Universe possesses. In fact, no objects need to move through space at all in order for this to occur, as it’s the space between objects that expands; the objects themselves remain relatively stationary with respect to the space that they occupy. (Up to the effects of peculiar velocity, of course.) It’s our own intuition that brings us back to the notion of a recession “speed” for these objects, simply because that’s what we’re familiar with given our own experiences."



POINT IS?

A SPACECRAFT 
CAN NOT OVER COME THIS:



Almost like an entity wanted you to know that BTW.

And even if it did?
There is the question of infante energy source(s)

The effect of time slowing down 
as you approach the speed of light.

The immense amount of Radiation in space.

The effects of weightlessness etc
just on and on and on...

None of this solves the problems 
we see with UAP today, 
which is. they appear and disappear 
without a trace. 

(Multiple advanced radars confirmed simultaneously and repeatedly. The operators or the equipment was at fault?
Are you fucking nuts?
Get a clue bud.) 

Theres not a "technology" that can make you appear and disappear (violate the laws of physics)
and Satan lost 
his access to dimensions

Thereby rendering but one conclusion:

 The Locust of the deep 
are Gods Destroyer angels, 
and 
what they are destroying is 
your notion(s) of a strictly:



 
 


and 

universe
devoid of the spiritual
are hereby declearded to be
 no longer tenable 
in the face of the reality 
we experience around us.

You are being put on notice by the almighty.

The eight characteristics 
of the locust of the deep in Rev 9:7-10 
tell you,
like David being the eight son, 
like there were eight people on the Ark etc...

Its the end of one age 
and the start of another

(Look at your world and disagree)
 

"THE TWO MOST POERFUL PEOPLE ON THE FACE OF THE EATH SINCE OLD TESTAMENT TIMES ARE HERE ON THIS EARTH RIGHT NOW AND ABOUT TO BE COMBINING FORCES BEFORE MUCH LONGER."

Makes a lil more sense now?
Maybe?
Perhaps?

Few extra points:



(If you look close you will see.
The universe started off expanding.
Slowed.
But recently it was discovered that it was 
reaccelerating.

Thats not supposed to be
(because of gravity)
and none can explain it.
So I'll do it for em:

Theism:
the·ism
/ˈTHēˌizəm/
noun
belief in the existence of a god or gods
especially belief 
in one god as creator 
of the universe, 
intervening in it 
and sustaining 
a personal relation 
to his creatures.

Better to have your illusions destroyed and live eternally with your creator than the alternative believe me.

And to all the "prominent" pastors, preachers ect or anybody who so obviously feel threatened
on social media etc?Come tell it to the face of the personification of the Holy Spirit in the end times.

Somebody take the Sethian view of Genesis 6
or that the locust of the deep are demonic please, so I can destroy your nonsense to your face and show the world what I am ascertaining is 100% the truth.

It is solely by the power of the holy spirit invested in me 
that I can make
 such BOLD arguments/claims.

Your positions are untenable as well.

THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT NEED TO BE WORRIED ARE THE PEOPLE THAT SHOULE BE 
AND BELIEVE ME
THEY KNOW IT.

SO BE IT.

UNYOUCHABLE FOR THREE AND A HALF YEARS ONCE WE ARE OFFICIALY TOGETHER.

I just told honey on the porch that I think its kinda hard to convince me were not the two witness, she smiled and agree.

Few minutes later there was a thunderstorm.

Think a rainbow was there?

You already know the answer.

I'm over here just flat out destroying 
the Definitive Writing 
of 20th Century Biblical Demonology

Anybody, anywhere, 
minimal prep time 
on your home turf 
and you'll wish you never laid on me 
about five minutes in
 promise.

The fact that you know that's true ought to tell you something.

Were Here.

SO BE IT
Praise God Glory Hallelujah. 



















No comments: