"All the World's a Stage We Pass Through" R. Ayana

Friday 1 March 2013

Infinite Cosmos of Light and Life: Dark Energy and Black Holes Don’t Exist

Infinite Cosmos of Light and Life
Dark Energy and Black Holes Don’t Exist

by R. Ayana
photoMuch of 20th Century science has already been discredited, yet too much nonsense is still being taught. It’s time to examine a plethora of false assumptions being foisted on impressionable minds by ignorant authority figures. The precepts and concepts that made the reputations of last century’s physicists and cosmologists are all partially correct at best and utterly wrong and misleading at worst. To believe that their notions were more correct than those of ‘natural philosophers’ who inhabited the relative Dark Ages of preceding centuries is a testament to folly and hubris.

The lies of religions and other tribal superstitions poisoned all sense and reason until the very recent past. In many benighted regions of the globe this mental slavery still holds minds in thrall to fantastic idiocy. The underlying motive for the promulgation of the Big Bang theory – whereby our entire universe supposedly came into being less than fourteen thousand million years ago - has nothing to do with mathematics or physics.

The Big Bang was invented by human beings encased in a cultural matrix that originated in the Bronze Age and was literally beaten into the young brains of untold generations of illiterates. Millennia of blind religious dogma blighted lives with the lie that an invisible ‘god’ created the world, the Sun, the moon and stars in merely six short days, and then took a day off work. Along with everyone else, educated people were preprogrammed to believe in such a creation event from infancy.

No matter how enlightened, the scientists of the day were riven and driven by the childish vision of a creator god inhabiting a heavenly realm somehow removed from ‘mundane’ reality. They invented the idea of some preexisting reality before time space as a result (without exploring the complex hyperspatial and hyperdimensional theories which would make this concept both a possibility, and simultaneously an absurdity.

Two Seminal False Assumptions

The Big Bang is a mathematical absurdity masquerading as physics. It’s based on two largely unexamined assumptions, both of which are false although based on valid observations that truly indicate an entirely different cosmology. One is the phenomenon of red shift (whereby the majority of objects in the observable universe appear slightly red) and the other is referred to as the so-called Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation  - a supposedly ubiquitous hum in a narrow range of background radiation observed wherever we look (or rather listen) throughout the cosmos.

The red shift was ascribed solely to the Doppler Effect – the same phenomenon that causes the sound of a train whistle to seem to rise in pitch (frequency) as it approaches an observer, and lower in frequency as it departs. When related to visible objects, anything approaching an observer appears more bluish (as light wavelengths appear shortened and bunched up towards the blue end of the spectrum) and receding objects appear reddened (because the light from receding objects appears stretched to an observer). Because the majority of celestial bodies appear reddish it was assumed that everything was moving away from us and everything else in the aftermath of a primordial explosive event – a Big Bang.

As demonstrated by pioneering astrophysicist Halton Arp 1 (and subsequently by David Talbott, Wal Thornhill and other proponents of modern ‘electric universe’ theory 2), the Doppler Effect can’t possibly account for many observed phenomena associated with the reddening of celestial bodies. Some share the same apparent red shift while obviously moving in entirely different directions. Their postulated distances from our point of observation and each other – as theorised using red shift for a benchmark - are obviously incorrect in light of a number of observable anomalies.

The reddening of celestial bodies is caused by a number of factors including (but not confined to) the Doppler Effect. Among these are the fact that space is not a vacuum at all (as believed when red shift was first ascribed to the Doppler Effect), but filled with all manner of energies and filtering mechanisms. As a result, light experiences an effective signal loss over great distances and this translates into a shift towards the red and infrared end of the light spectrum, as shorter frequencies – the blue/violet end of the spectrum – are more easily occluded. The same applies, in varying degrees, to all bands of radiation we use to observe the cosmos (including radioastronomy).

According to Halton Arp and many modern cosmologists, many celestial objects that appear to be red shifted due to the Doppler effect are actually younger than the parent bodies which birthed them. This reddening has been observed in many, many objects deemed to be quasars, for instance, which are consequently far closer to us than standard theories allow for. Objects with extremely divergent redshifts are often observed adjacent to one another in the heavens - an impossibilty under the constriants of mainstream theory.

Thus the limits of our ‘observable universe’ are no limits at all, but merely the limit of observation using the electromagnetic spectrum as a yardstick. The universe didn’t begin 13 or 14 (or even 200) billion years ago as indicated by this false assumption, but is in fact infinite. We just can’t see very far through the soup of timespace.

That this is true is revealed by a number of observations, including the fact that no matter how far we look through the sea of time, supposedly primordial ‘infant’ galaxies and other structures appear virtually identical to those we see around us today. This contravenes many precepts of Big Bang theory, as do many observations made since we lifted our sights and sightlines beyond Earth’s occluding atmospheric envelope and began to see the cosmos as it actually appears.

According to ‘electric universe’ theory and contemporary observations that demolish most of the cherished notions of 20th Century astrophysics, the primary ‘force’ acting throughout the cosmos is not gravity at all - gravity is a very tenuous field - but (what we incorrectly term) electromagnetism. And according to the postmodern electrical paradigm, the redness of many celestial bodies indicates not their speed of recession but their age – or rather, their energetic level and even their relative youth!

Thus the first of the only two planks that seemed to necessitate the idea of a Big Bang does not actually exist; most things in the cosmos are probably not racing away from everything else at all, and the increased redness of more distant objects is mainly due to signal loss and varying energy sources.

The remaining plank that seemed to underlie and confirm the Big Bang hypothesis– the so-called Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation. This has also been ascribed to the wrong cause entirely. The all-pervasive background ‘hum’ in the hydrogen band that’s noted wherever our electronic ears listen to the celestial ‘music of the spheres’ isn’t an echo of an ancient explosion, but is due to the constant hum of our galactic circuit.

It turns out that this supposedly all-pervasive hum doesn't emanate from all regions of the sky after all, but is largely confined to the Sun's ecliptic; it's the ion stream emanating from the Sun itself, creating a fog that confused earlier generations of astronomers and theoreticians.

There is also a now well-known and widely recognised quantum effect to consider, whereby virtual particles are continually appearing within and disappearing from the observable (4D) universe.

‘Space’ isn’t space, but is filled with innumerable wavelengths (energies) that generally cancel each other out, resulting in a near-vacuum state. This state isn’t a vacuum or a zero-point field of fluctuations (as often described) but a field that oscillates around scalar zero – conceived as being slightly ‘above’ the zero point, and originally believed to be so negligible as to be immeasurable and irrelevant. When 18th, 19th and 20th Century physicists first calculated all the details of orbital mechanics this reality was entirely unknown; their figures were all predicated on the false assumption that all celestial bodies interact in a complete vacuum.

Newton’s blind clockwork universe and Einstein’s divine plan are equally illusory. God doesn’t play dice (because there is no external god rolling the deadly die) but chance interactions – the freewheeling will of cosmic fields and forces – is everchanging and inherently unpredictable. Everything is possible and we inhabit an infinite interacting series of parallel universes, all interwoven by probability and the wills of conscious beings.

This sea of virtual particles gives rise to a perceivable ‘hum’ produced by little vortices in timespace (effectively electrons and positrons) that occur wherever wavelengths interact in suitable configurations – and as waves are always interacting in innumerable configurations, there are always some that give rise to relatively stable and measurable forms. Some of the most basic of these effectively appear as ‘hydrogen ions’, continually flashing into and out of existence as a result of perpetual wave interactions. These occasionally remain in our plenum when they happen to manifest in a geometrical configuration that remains stable (by virtue of simple mechanical interactions), producing what physics has conceived as ‘atoms’, or ‘ions’. 3

Thus the Cosmic Microwave Background is not an echo of a non-existent Big Bang, but the continuous resonant hum of infinitude tiny vortices, as hyperdimensional energies which transcend the recognised four dimensions of space and time perpetually condense into observable energy in our timespace (See TimeSpace). These manifest in 3D space as plasma - partially differentiated nuclei and electrons -  which forms streams and foci of electrical energy due to the well understood behaviour of plasma streams as conductors of electric currents and propagators of magnetic fields.

It’s worthwhile to note that ‘particles’ are not simply continually emerging in the ‘vacuum of space’, but within pre-existing forms of denser energy fields and material forms as well. In fact, the more dense a field they manifest within the more likely they are to lodge into pre-existing patterns, and to remain in timespace rather than immediately wink back out of existence. When extra particles appear within the energy matrix of matter, more complex and more ‘dense’ forms of matter are formed. Thus ‘matter’ is continuously condensing - growing more dense and complex - and celestial bodies are all slowly growing through time. 4

There are no ‘Higg’s Bosons’, as there is no need for them or most of the other invented confabulations in the ‘particle zoos’ of 20th Century physicists. Simpler geometrical forms simply give rise to progressively more complex geometrical forms and the morphic fields of matter literally attract energy – and more matter – via simplex mechanisms, not through abstruse, ‘spooky’ or exotically impenetrable interactions.


Light Amidst the Darkness

There is no ‘dark energy’ or ‘dark matter’. These confabulations were invented by desperate cosmologists when modern observations made the old Big Bang hypothesis utterly untenable. They are desperate attempts to prop up a rotten old false theory that makes about as much sense as the doctrine of Original Sin and was produced by minds (mal)formed amid the same pernicious fables that gave rise to such nonsense. These ‘dark’ entities were invented to explain the fact that the ‘early universe’ seemed to have expanded and gained its current configuration far more quickly than was possible under the notion that it was merely 13.6 billion years old and a corresponding distance in width.

Because nothing could be seen that could account for the extraordinary expansion that would be necessary to create the observable universe under outdated doctrine, theoreticians simply invented unseen (i.e. ‘dark’) things to explain a non-existent phenomenon. They even made nonsensical claims of an inexplicable hyperinflation of their singleton, simpleton ‘universe’ to keep their fracturing story straight. Now that millions of person hours and innumerable careers have been wasted on this arrant nonsense, it’s very difficult for any astrophysicist to tell the simple truth – that the cosmos of time and space is infinite, and there was no creation and no creator. To do so would be career suicide for anyone with a vested interest in misleading nonsense, or a desire to remain within the sheeplike flock and foolish fold of the duplicitous regional lies known as religions.

Perspective and knowledge are wonderful things, yet the aerie of truth can be an eerily lonely place in a binding, blinding era of one-eyed rulers and indoctrinated rules. True independence and bravery are required for anyone interested in apprehending a truer vision of reality; most simply choose to descend back into the morass of illusion, pluck out the eye that offends and cease seeking ‘unfortunate’ truths.

The reason the cosmos is perpetually expanding is that an infinite sea of manifesting ‘particles’ – which are actually holographic fractal components of the greater multiversal whole – are continuously spreading the ‘fabric of space’ by their very appearance. Energy is continuously accreting into our observable timespace as a result of this mechanism – and ‘matter’ is continuously precipitating into our plenum by the same mechanism. The cosmos is perpetually self-renewing and utterly infinite – a recursive holographic fractal forever giving rise to new versions of itself.

There is nothing ‘dark’ about it. Everything is light.


Balking At Wholes

Similarly, the concept of black holes was invented to explain – to prop up – untenable and incorrect theories. As the stars are neither the big bonfires of the ancients nor the nuclear furnaces created by the crushing forces of gravitational pressures or hydrogen/helium fusion effects proposed by outmoded physic(ist)s - but elements of a vast system of interacting circuits linked via Birkland Currents throughout ‘space’ - stars do not collapse into impossibly small singularities when they exhaust their ‘fuel’. Stars are actually not self-contained at all but are perpetually renewing and/or fluctuating nodes in vast circuits!

Modern observations of supernovae since the occurrence of supernova 1987A have yielded data that utterly fails to conform to standard theory. No supernovae can collapse to produce impossibly small rifts in timespace – singularities or ‘black holes’ – just as the infinite cosmos can never die, as it is infinite in time (and timelines) as well as in spatial extent.

It may come as a surprise to many readers that no black holes have ever been accurately identified or actually observed, and that all the presumed ‘evidence’ of their existence – such as ‘accretion disks’ around their supposed event horizons and stellar jets supposedly streaming from their poles – are actually evidence in favour of electricity as the prime force in nature. The centre of our galaxy isn’t some void on a death trip to nowhere, but a vast, glowing, self-renewing and self-perpetuating locus of emergent light and energy. There are no black holes at the centres of galaxies, but vast regions of light, electricity and other energies continuously forming, spinning and growing as they perpetually replenish galaxies and the cosmos itself - fountainheads of light and life.

In fact, almost all the invented menagerie of stellar objects ranging from black holes to neutron stars, pulsars and quasars are incorrect explanations for widely recognised electromagnetic effects. Just like the particle zoos of subatomic physics, these imaginary entities have no bases in reality. They’re incorrect imaginings based on false and unexamined assumptions.

The Einsteins and Hawkings of the last century were gifted mathematicians – not astrophysicists using true scientific methods arising from observation, but theoreticians developing half-baked ideas based on extraordinarily abstruse imaginings. They were working with flawed and partial evidence as the bases of their ideas, mostly ‘borrowed’ from other luminaries extrapolating from equally flawed data. They lived in relatively primitive times and attempted explanations for the wonders of ‘creation’ using incorrect data and false assumptions. They couldn’t help but be wrong.

‘Space’ itself is a soon-to-be discredited term for the ‘luminiferous aether’ – the plenum of light recognised by ancients and natural philosophers of more recent eras -  an all-pervasive field whose existence was NOT disproven by the 19th Century Michelson-Morley experiments, as widely claimed;5 another simplistic error that has misled science for more than a century.

No external or externalised god or goddess exists. There was no instant of creation, for creation is constant and eternal. We are all holographic parts of a holographic whole in an infinite cosmos of unending possibility.

It’s time to discard the timeworn apparel of binding blinkers and to enter a new dawning world of extraordinary potential with naked, open, honest eyes and innocently open minds. Welcome to the new Millennium and behold the new paradigm, for the future is upon us! Thou art god(dess) - and so is everyone else.

Care to dare, and share the only truth? A billion open minds are awaiting your decision.

If, as is likely, you doubt any of the aforementioned facts and ideas, it would be wise to investigate the extraordinarily well formulated theories of the proponents of modern Electric Universe cosmology – particularly the Thunderbolts website @ http://www.thunderbolts.org



1.     Halton Arp: See Introduction to the Electric Cosmos @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com.au/2009/03/introduction-to-electric-cosmos.html & Infinite Universe @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com.au/2012/11/the-infinite-universe.html & Einstein was Wrong @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com.au/2010/09/einstein-was-wrong.html
2.     Electric Universe: See Thunderbolts @  http://www.thunderbolts.org
4.     See the Expanding Earth: The Case Against Pangaea @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com.au/2010/06/case-against-pangaea-expanding-earth.html
5.     See Stan Deyo’s observations on the flawed Michelson-Morley experiment here: Einstein's Relativity Error @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com.au/2009/09/einstiens-relativity-error.html

P.S. – Schools are for insecure fish and money-blinded wage slaves. Educate yourself! Turn on, tune in and OPT OUT of the deadly pseudo-civilisation of purblind rulers and nonsensical unfair rules. Don’t imagine you can ‘change the system from within’ – that’s just another way for insecure people to sell out to the lowest bidder. Create a new way of life with likeminded friends and loved ones. As the great bard Marley sang, ‘Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds.’

-         R.A.

For more information about new views of reality see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/timespace
and http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/electric%20universe  
and http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/holographic%20universe
and http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/black%20holes
- See ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section

YOU can help this unique independent website’s author survive & stay online in a small cabin in a remote rainforest
Donate any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!
Just clink in the jar -

Click to enlarge

For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

And see

 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/feed

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com

The Prince of Centraxis - http://centraxis.blogspot.com (Be Aware! This link leads to implicate & xplicit concepts & images!)

This site is published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a small but heartfelt donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper!

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


  1. I found this part of the text very inspiring: "The reason the cosmos is perpetually expanding is that an infinite sea of manifesting ‘particles’ – which are actually holographic fractal components of the greater multiversal whole – are continuously spreading the ‘fabric of space’ by their very appearance. Energy is continuously accreting into our observable timespace as a result of this mechanism – and ‘matter’ is continuously precipitating into our plenum by the same mechanism. The cosmos is perpetually self-renewing and utterly infinite – a recursive holographic fractal forever giving rise to new versions of itself."

    The timespace riddle could be only explained from two perspectives: the physics perspective i.e. gravity--therefore, the Einstein's theory of relativity, and so far his equation still works; the other option to use some sort of the new metaphysics; the timespace are natural concepts of the mind itself, therefore they are illumination of consciousness itself--awareness of the universe. Does the space exist in infinity? I would say that only time exists, but time is a form of knowing or consciousness--as one of the natural philosopher's stated "time and being" (Parmenides, Ancient Greek Philosophy) are one and the same; or as Borges in his essay "Pascal's Sphere" interpreted that the periphery of the universe is nowhere, whilst the center is everywhere. Not sure if these thoughts correspond to the fractal structure of the universe? It might. Still, I admire I. Kant's idea that no matter how hard we try to "know" the universe, we are bounded by our acquisitions of the mind. So, what kind of physics we really have, it depends on our representations, and I agree with the author that is about time to change the scientific reductionist method based solely on the limited mathematical probable theory supported by the experimental/instrumental physics and science. The holographic universe could be explained with equal probable strength as the theory of the dark matter or black holes--so the question is what kind of methodology we should apply in order to strengthen the higher level of probability?

    1. You have (gratifyingly) quoted the only section I believe to be a truly original contribution (serendipitous synchronicity in humankind's thought processes notwithwtanding). Your subsequent point does closely correspond with some mathematically based versions of holographic cosmos theories.
      As for Kant's can't cant - the brain is also effectively a hologram, as widely and wisely demonstrated, so the macrocosm doesn't ned to 'fit into' the microcosm - it's already here!
      I (the author) personally believe that all is very clearly revealed when one takes hyperspace - or more specifically higher geometric dimensions - into account. Thus perceived reality (as she is usually known) is a cross section of 'higher' dimensional fields, explaining holography and the implicate order itself. Please see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/2011/02/holographic-multiverse.html and the TimeSpace links there...
      Thanka for your inspiring thoughts.

  2. Correction: Parmenides: "thought and being" are one and the same.

  3. Please note that since this was written it's been demonstrated that the so-called 'universal' background radiation isn't universal, but largely confined to the ecliptic - it's the plasma current flowing outward from the Sun, not cosmic background radiation!

  4. let me ask one or two things,. If this idea doesn't believe big bang theory then why it support geocentrism somehow? So how was the entire world created then?


Add your perspective to the conscious collective