Well, I disagree that I provide no evidence. I am simply reinterpreting the evidence that everybody has in front of them. Yes, I think it is stupid not to accept causality and the discreteness of nature. Denying causality and discreteness is on a par with the flat earth hypothesis. My claim is not that we are immersed in energy. That is a trivial inference to make. To the infinite embarassment of the physics community, it follows logically from the application of causality to motion. I don't need to show experimental proof for causality or discreteness. It should be a given. My claim is that we will soon be able to tap into the lattice for energy production and propulsion. The experimental proof of that is coming. A little patience, por favor.

By the way, don't go thinking that physics is not filled to the rim with hypotheses and theories for which there is no proof. It's called theoretical physics.

I think you need to take another look.

We need a new transportation technology that does away will all that stuff. Fuel, rockets, etc., it's all primitive. They're primitive, dangerous, expensive and cumbersome. As a species, we need to confront that simple truth. Our current space propulsion technologies are chicken shit, no matter how often we fool ourselves into believing otherwise. You are in denial if you think this stuff is any good.

...from the baby-boomer generation. Catapulting cargo into orbit, eh? This is so absurd as to be laughable. But this is what you get from thinking inside the box. You can only think in terms of what's in the box. Does anybody really think that humanity is going to colonize the solar system with such painfully primitive technologies as rockets, space slingshots, and solar sails? Isn't it time that we start thinking outside the box? Isn't it time that we start questioning our most ingrained assumptions in physics so that we can find real solution to the space propulsion and energy production crises? I think so.

Take motion, for example. Physicists think that they understand motion but they really don't. All they got are equations that describe observations. Ask any physicist why two particles in relative inertial motion stay in motion and all you get is a bunch of nonsense mixed with ignorance and self-deception. Some will say nothing is needed and that Newton proved it centuries ago. Others will say that momentum keeps them moving. Still others will tell you that physics is not about the why of things but the how. It's annoying, really.

Yeah. With carp like this, is it any wonder that we are still in the dark ages when it comes to space propulsion? If physicists could truly grok motion, they would understand that it is a causal phenomenon and that, as a result, we are immersed in energy, lots and lots of it. A reevaluation of our understanding of the causality of motion leads to the inescapable conclusion that we are immersed in an immense lattice of energetic particles. Soon, we will use the lattice for both propulsion and clean energy production. We will have levitating vehicles that can go almost anywhere at tremendous speeds and negotiate right angle turns without slowing down and without incurring any damage due to inertial effects. Floating cities, earth to Mars in hours, New York to Beijing in minutes... That is the future of energy and travel.

My advice to all policy shapers and decision makers in the energy production and global transportation arena is this: take a careful look at the writing on the wall and prepare yourselves for the coming changes. The future is here.

The Problem with Motion.

Here's the correct link:

The Problem with Motion

It's good to see that a few fortunate (i.e., very rich) people will get the chance to go out into space. But when will space travel become as cheap as driving to the corner store? The problem with space travel is that the aerospace industry is still using the same chemistry-based propulsion technologies that first gave us the ability to fly. Using rocket propulsion for space flight is dangerous, primitive and extremely expensive. There is no way we are going to colonize the moon or the solar system beyond with chemical rockets.

Be of good cheer, however. The aerospace and energy industries will soon undergo a seismic paradigm shift. A recent reevaluation of our understanding of the causality of motion leads to the inevitable conclusion that we are immersed in a huge lattice of energetic particles. Soon we'll have vehicles that will move almost anywhere at tremendous speeds, negotiate right angle turns without slowing down and without incurring any damage due to inertial effects. Floating cities, unlimited clean energy, earth to Mars in hours, New York to Beijing in minutes. That's the future of energy and travel.

The Problem with Motion

You need to be less of a pompous and condescending asshole. From my perspective, of course. LOL.

Thank you. I wonder if Newton or Calileo would have objected to their work being valued at a mere 5 dollars worth. After all, they were up against centuries if not millenia of scientific research.

Wow. Gonads are rare in these parts. Who would've thunk it?