The Prime Mover - Quote: "The universe is not expanding but rather static, as once believed by Einstein"

[Oystein]

Hi

I have earlier concluded by own calculations and my private theory, that if Bessler's machine was real, the classic/accepted solution to the universe's fabric/function/history must have at least one flaw. I found that Bessler's wheel would only fit into theories like the latest theory presented by John Nash at his "death bed". https://www.nrk.no/dokumentar/xl/alle-l ... 1.13602152 Norwegian article. (Translate by google if you like).

He said that the biggest problem with today's understanding of the history and fabric of the universe, is the proposed expansion due to observed red-shift, dark matter/energy and the big Bang. His solution to the proposed problem was a complete theory where gravity and the planets supports themselves in orbit etc. and the universe stay static without imploding (or expanding.) It lead to an alternative to Big Bang, namely a hidden function of "creation", as a ongoing fundamental process.. thus he described it as a solution to creation, thus ultimately, "God". This is interestingly the same "problem" Aristotle and the priests Bessler discussed Perpetual Motion with, had. They were all looking for God, the initial source of energy, or the First Mover or the Prime Mover. Something must move first. The first mover as proposed by Aristotle was called "Primum Movens"! If you find Primum Movens, you find God. Aristotle actually concluded that Primum Movens MUST be God! This was the philosophers and the natural scientists/theologians idea. Bessler and the priests traded knowledge with, was actually looking for the same thing, as modern scientists and Nash! Namely Primum Movens

My private alternative theory, concluded that red-shit had to be a natural function of light in some static "quantum-fluctation /zpe/vacuum". I was ridiculed for mentioning it here. Who am I to challenge an expanding universe? (I don't challenge it.. let's just call it coffee table philosophy) The reason I think such thoughts are important, is at least two things. 1. If what science believe to be "final law" is really true.. then Bessler was fake.. 2. If Bessler was fake.. Many people are looking in the wrong places.. If Nash or others are correct, in some areas.. Bessler may have been a true genius after all.

Today, I came across this new article of Professor Lucas Lombriser in a Norwegian science magazine. Here is an English language article of similar content: https://universemagazine.com/en/the-ill ... f-physics/

I have no intention defending anything of this, but I think that it is fruitful the zoom out and look at Bessler's case from from any angle..

Maybe someone can use this as motivation, or simply mental refill to a cup of coffee!

Have a nice day
Best
Øystein

[johannesbender]

Hi

I have earlier concluded by own calculations and my private theory, that if Bessler's machine was real, the classic/accepted solution to the universe's fabric/function/history must have at least one flaw. I found that Bessler's wheel would only fit into theories like the latest theory presented by John Nash at his "death bed". https://www.nrk.no/dokumentar/xl/alle-l ... 1.13602152 Norwegian article. (Translate by google if you like).

He said that the biggest problem with today's understanding of the history and fabric of the universe, is the proposed expansion due to observed red-shift, dark matter/energy and the big Bang. His solution to the proposed problem was a complete theory where gravity and the planets supports themselves in orbit etc. and the universe stay static without imploding (or expanding.) It lead to an alternative to Big Bang, namely a hidden function of "creation", as a ongoing fundamental process.. thus he described it as a solution to creation, thus ultimately, "God". This is interestingly the same "problem" Aristotle and the priests Bessler discussed Perpetual Motion with, had. They were all looking for God, the initial source of energy, or the First Mover or the Prime Mover. Something must move first. The first mover as proposed by Aristotle was called "Primum Movens"! If you find Primum Movens, you find God. Aristotle actually concluded that Primum Movens MUST be God! This was the philosophers and the natural scientists/theologians idea. Bessler and the priests traded knowledge with, was actually looking for the same thing, as modern scientists and Nash! Namely Primum Movens

My private alternative theory, concluded that red-shit had to be a natural function of light in some static "quantum-fluctation /zpe/vacuum". I was ridiculed for mentioning it here. Who am I to challenge an expanding universe? (I don't challenge it.. let's just call it coffee table philosophy) The reason I think such thoughts are important, is at least two things. 1. If what science believe to be "final law" is really true.. then Bessler was fake.. 2. If Bessler was fake.. Many people are looking in the wrong places.. If Nash or others are correct, in some areas.. Bessler may have been a true genius after all.

Today, I came across this new article of Professor Lucas Lombriser in a Norwegian science magazine. Here is an English language article of similar content: https://universemagazine.com/en/the-ill ... f-physics/

I have no intention defending anything of this, but I think that it is fruitful the zoom out and look at Bessler's case from from any angle..

Maybe someone can use this as motivation, or simply mental refill to a cup of coffee!

Have a nice day
Best
Øystein

Slight mistake , but funny non the less .

[Fletcher]

Thanks Oystein .. always appreciate your inputs .. I'll read it over the weekend .. my coffee cup can always use topping up and all that shift lol ..

[agor95]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHKa8F- ... nstitution

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qu3WET ... umberphile

[agor95]

https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.06833