Photon Ether: Many Mysteries, One Answer

Reinstating Ether into our understanding of Nature explains two great mysteries in this universe without resorting to the stupid propositions of quantum mechanics and relativity. One is that it provides logical explanation for the results of double slit experiment i.e. how particles produce interference patterns and appear to travel in multiple slits simultaneously. Next is that it explains why there is something called gravity. In fact, it provides so simple and logical explanation for these two phenomena that they both can be argued as proof of existence of Ether.

Ether theory provides a logical explanation for:

  1. Double slit Experiment
  2. The phenomenon of Gravity
  3. Explains EM waves and electromagnetism in crystal clear terms
  4. Mass and Inertia
  5. Explains red shift and cosmic background radiation and dispenses with the absurd theory of big bang
  6. Explains all those observations that are claimed as proof of relativity and QM

The ‘Photonic’ Ether Model

I propose that our entire universe is permeated by a fluid substance or medium called the Ether. Everything else in this universe remains suspended in this ocean of Ether just like how various things exist in an ocean of water. And just like how water is made up of water ‘particles’, I propose that this Ether is made up of photon particles. Electromagnetic waves are nothing but waves travelling in the Ether medium. Just like how a local disturbance in a pond of water gets dissipated throughout the pond as water waves, disturbances in Ether medium travel as electromagnetic waves throughout the Universe. As is the case with water particles, the particles of the Ether medium simply oscillate locally and do not get permanently displaced while transmitting the EM waves.

Mass and Energy: Our great physicists preach that mass and energy are equivalent. They believe that mass can get converted into energy and energy into mass. And they believe that mass and energy just represent different forms of the same thing. I am sure every one of us is familiar with the equation E=MC2 which is hailed as the greatest triumph of modern science. But unfortunately this greatest equation has got its roots in the most absurd theory in science namely the theory of relativity. That itself makes the above mass/energy equivalence formula equally absurd. Having already discussed why relativity is the weirdest theory put forward by mankind, we don’t have to break our heads about the weird mathematics that lead to the above weird equation.

But it is worth mentioning the following: While energy is a vector, mass is a scalar quantity (of course not many physicists would realise that). This obviously prohibits conversion of one quantity into another. Say for example 1gm of mass upon ‘burning’ yields ‘X’ joules of energy. But in what direction and with reference to whom this energy is produced? Is it towards a stationary observer standing by the side of the mass or away from him, or towards the north or towards the south? One may argue that the energy gets released in all directions equally so as to avoid specifying the direction. But that makes the situation even worse – we end up in a situation where our mass gets vanished but the total energy in the system doesn’t increase.

The most fundamental form of energy that we know comes in the form of electromagnetic radiation and we have seen above that photons, the particles of EM radiation, are not mass less. So when our mass gets converted into photons, it doesn’t get destroyed in true sense but simply gets broken down into the tiniest particles of mass. If we manage to add the masses of all these particles produced, that will surely add up to the original mass. The law of conservation of mass and the law of conservation of energy must be seen as two different laws, each holding true independently i.e. mass and energy get conserved separately without one compensating for the other.

Having said that, energy always manifests itself as motion of physical objects i.e. energy has no independent existence without mass as far as we understand Nature. But what actually is mass? We know very well that mass is something that gives inertia to an object i.e. the tendency to remain at rest and oppose motion. So while energy is the one that moves an object, mass is the one that gives inertia to the object and resists any motion. Thus mass and energy are responsible for opposite forces in Nature. But why is it that mass has inertia or how do we explain this property of mass? Why isn’t that objects just move? What stops them from doing so? In other words, why do objects need energy to move? Why do more massive objects need more energy to move? These questions may sound silly but are so fundamental to understand Nature at a deeper level. We can explain many of these questions by drawing attention to the above Ether model.

Cosmic Ocean of Ether: As discussed before, we can propose that all material objects remain ‘held’ in place or remain suspended in a divine fluid medium pervading this whole Universe. One may call this as Ether or Higg’s field or simply universal medium. To move through this ‘cosmic ocean’ of Ether, an object has to overcome the ‘resistance’ offered by the same. This resistance is what we experience as inertia. Obviously objects or particles need energy to overcome this background resistance and to move through the space. The more massive an object is, the more will be the resistance, hence the more will be its inertia. The above model of cosmic ocean of Ether puts the Newton’s law of inertia of motion in jeopardy because an object that is set into motion doesn’t go on moving in the cosmic ocean for ever. Any moving object is ought to come to rest in the absence of further energy supply (unless the Ether itself is streaming under the influence of a more massive object moving in the vicinity- we will come to this soon). That means we have to abandon another great law in physics which we have recited for centuries. EtherJust like an object spinning inside a pond of still water also spins a ‘layer’ of water around it, massive bodies spinning in the cosmic ocean also spin a layer of Ether around them. And this spinning of water or Ether is not an all or none phenomenon: the layer of water that is just adjacent to the spinning body gets spun faster than the layer that is farther away from the body. This differential agitation or spinning of Ether in the cosmic ocean is what probably causes the gravitational attraction between the celestial bodies (Bernoulli principle). And, just like a boat sailing in a lake sends water waves ahead of it, celestial bodies moving in the cosmic ocean also send Ether waves or gravitational waves.

So reinstating Ether into our universe explains many things- inertia/mass, gravitational attraction, gravitational waves and the delusion of wave particle duality. We know that every disturbance in a pond, big or small, gets conducted to everywhere else in the pond in the form of water waves. Of course the waves get attenuated as they move farther and farther from the place of origin.  Similarly every disturbance in the Ether medium from anywhere in the universe gets transmitted to the entire universe in the form of electromagnetic waves or Ether waves. Similar to water waves, the EM waves get attenuated as they travel farther. And they get interfered with waves from other sources. So every bit of space possesses information from everywhere else in the universe i.e. every bit of space represents the entire universe. That explains the Hologram model of our universe put forward by some physicists.

But what constitutes this ‘cosmic ocean’ or Ether? As has been proposed earlier, it is possible that Ether is made up of photons (see chapter- explaining double slit experiment) but knowing or understanding what constitutes Ether doesn’t lead us to the last and final secret of Nature. The concept of Ether immediately rises two questions i.e. what constitutes a photon particle? And what lies in between the photon particles? Like physicists, one may imagine that photons are fundamental particles and the space in between them is empty. But as a logician, I find it difficult to believe so- how can any particle be considered indivisible? And how can there be space that has nothing in it? So by no means, we can consider Ether or photons as the most fundamental stuff in Nature. It may be that there is Ether and there is ultra-Ether in between the Ether particles and there is ultra-ultra-Ether and so on. Understanding each of them simply takes us to a deeper layer of reality but by no means gives us the complete picture about Nature – it is just like peeling another layer of an infinitely covered onion. So it is true to say that we can never understand the ultimate reality or reach the deepest layer by clinging to the material science. This is where the importance of ‘Spiritual science’ comes. Only spiritual and philosophical thinking can help us understand and experience the Nature through to the deepest layer of reality and help us achieve Enlightenment and realise the ultimate truth.

Go to Next Page

Go to Main Index

Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.


  • Ben Dowell  On September 17, 2014 at 10:49 am

    I do agree with most of your conclusions, but I still feel the need to be skeptic of the skeptic. Ideas of physics should continue to be based on ruling out what is wrong, in order to focus on what is right and get closer to the ultimate truth.

    “And, just like a boat sailing in a lake sends water waves ahead of it, celestial bodies moving in the cosmic ocean also send Ether waves or gravitational waves.”

    Wouldn’t light be the waves in this ether?

    I know your example may just be a visual representation of how a “gravitational wave” would appear in an Ether, but I don’t feel that it does gravity a just explanation. If the universal medium acts as any medium affected by movement of mass(generation of photon waves), these waves in an ether would repel mass in spacetime(solar sail). The concept of a “backwards” wave would be a weird way to describe the effects of gravity.

    What I feel like is a more accurate depiction is to have an Ether with density. What else can create a force like gravity in other mediums? Relative density creates a pulling effect of not only matter between heavenly bodies, but also to keep matter together in those bodies. Matter creates a less dense zone in the photon ether. The photon ether would push and collide and interact with matter in an attempt to regulate the relative densities.


    • drgsrinivas  On September 29, 2014 at 6:54 pm

      As I have explained elsewhere, every object and phenomena that we perceive in this universe are nothing but waves in Ether medium (in other words ‘light’). And that includes gravitational waves.
      A celestial body moving towards another body may cause some ‘repulsion’. But that repulsion probably gets overcompensated if the approaching body is spinning i.e. the closer a spinning body is, the more attraction one would feel. The opposite happens in the scenario of a receding body with ‘backwards’ wave.
      I would like to hear more about your relative Ether density model- what could be the thing that is responsible for the relative ether density in the first instance to account for the gravitational force. I believe it is photons that ‘clump’ together and form Matter, so I find it difficult to imagine Matter as less dense ether zone.


  • Galacar  On September 29, 2014 at 7:17 pm

    Did you know everything that ‘modern science’ claims is because of ‘modern science’, was already invented when people and inventors used the concept of the aether? NOTHING is because of ‘Modern Physics” , and I really mean NOTHING.
    Not the mri, not the transistor, not radio, not computers, not wireless. not x-rays,
    not the telescope, not optics,,
    and the list goes on and on.
    Everything was already invented with the use of the aether,
    And not by ‘scientists, but inventors and individual thinkers.
    That means that notjing in ‘modern physics’ works the way they say it works!
    There is something to ponder! 😉


  • hywel  On February 28, 2015 at 9:59 pm

    if you study waves they are all made up of what they are propagating through.
    water, sound etc, except for light /emr which is magically self propagating and fools all observers. if there any others, please tell me.
    i am starting to believe that relativity is deliberate misinformation.


    • drgsrinivas  On March 1, 2015 at 12:25 am

      In fact there is nothing special or magical about light waves- they are just waves in ether medium which is nothing but an ocean of photon particles. Physicists describe them as self propagating because they thing they have disproved ether.


  • Somnath Das  On May 20, 2015 at 6:47 pm

    Your opinions are just opinions, not facts. I know you have given thought on some fundamental questions, which is a good thing. But you are fooling yourself on a ridiculous level. I hope you get out of your illogical, non-mathematical fantasies and face the logical,mathematically consistent reality that is actually out there.


    • drgsrinivas  On May 23, 2015 at 3:32 pm

      “–logical, mathematically consistent reality that is actually out there”

      Out Where? You mean in the sacred books of your stupid religion or in the indoctrinated minds of your religious folk?
      But unfortunately I am not as wise as your stupid religious folk to be able to appreciate the marvellous costume of your nude emperor and the ‘reality’ that you all are able to see.

      BTW, do you have a ‘logical’ mathematical expression for your existence as a human being? or is it that Somnath Das just an illogical nonmathematical fantasy?

      On this blog, I have exposed the stupidity of your ‘logical’ mathematical reality that your folk are obsessive of but don’t bother to go through all that. Just keep uttering that your stupid religious superstitions are proven ‘out there’ and keep demanding your religious stupidity as the actual reality.


  • Galacar  On May 20, 2015 at 10:13 pm

    Somnath wrote,

    “Your opinions are just opinions, not facts. I know you have given thought on some fundamental questions, which is a good thing. But you are fooling yourself on a ridiculous level. I hope you get out of your illogical, non-mathematical fantasies and face the logical,mathematically consistent reality that is actually out there.”

    Errrr..especially who are you adressing here?


  • Galacar  On May 20, 2015 at 10:16 pm

    hywel wrote:

    “i am starting to believe that relativity is deliberate misinformation.”

    YES! You’ve got it! Now you have past that ‘limit’ or ‘border’ it is way easier to
    see that the WHOLE OF SCIENCE is a scam. here to deliberately misled us.


  • drgsrinivas  On July 26, 2015 at 7:59 pm

    Nicola Tesla, the greatest genius of all times!


    • T. Haughery  On May 1, 2016 at 6:22 pm

      I don’t want to get into a discussion about religion, but thought it only fair to respond briefly to this Tesla quote. Although Tesla was truly brilliant at physics, he was not quite as good at philosophy. Since no physics or science can explain consciousness (but only the existence of a God or First Cause can, or at least some spiritual, non-physical, realm), I would suggest that, along with consciousness, the laws of physics are not God himself, but were instead created God or a First Cause, which I believe Aristotle insisted must Himself (or Itself) have a personal consciousness and thus a mind … as opposed to being simply a Force, such as in Star Wars. In other words, even the laws of physics needed to have a beginning.

      Nonetheless, this is one of the best websites I’ve found. Thank you Dr. Srinivasa.

      Now, back to physics …


  • Galacar  On July 27, 2015 at 6:31 pm

    YES!! thank you!!!!


  • Tom Sizemore  On August 19, 2015 at 1:52 am

    I see what you’re saying about there not being inertia of forward motion, in Ether Theory. But then is there inertia of spin? Because, if there wasn’t, the Earth would slow down and stop spinning, right?


  • Tom Sizemore  On August 19, 2015 at 8:59 pm

    I’ve had a thought in regard to my question, that I think answers it.

    Personally, I am convinced by the arguments from the authors of Galileo Was Wrong (whom I’ve become familiar with through youtube videos) that Earth is actually stationary at the center of the universe; our sun revolves around the Earth; and the other planets in our solar system revolve around our sun. Furthermore, the either universe is rotating around Earth, causing the cycle of day and night.

    This explains the Michel-Morley experiment: according to Galileo Was Wrong, the experiment did actually detect enough ether wind to account for the universe revolving around the Earth. (Though, according to your theory of gravity, we can say that they would have detected even more, if it weren’t for ether drag.) However, they did not detect the large amount of either wind that they would expect, if the earth were indeed going all the way around the Sun. The simple explanation is that the earth is stationary. Science rejected this, because of its aversion to religion. And, as a result, Einstein’s quackery was embraced to offer an alternative solution.

    (Thanks to your site, I can now see that this original sin of rejecting the geocentric model –and the ether along with it –has also blinded science to the obvious ether-based explanation of the two-slit experiment, hence saddling us as well with the absurdities of Quantum Theory.)

    In light of all this, I now believe that the reality of a universe that rotates about a central, unmoving earth answers my original question above. If the whole ether-filled universe is rotating around the earth, then might this not impart spin to the planets and starts within the universe? These planets and stars, in turn, would then create their own gravity via ether-drag.

    One may then say: Okay, but what keeps the whole thing spinning? But, since the whole ether is not itself spinning within ether, we could postulate that the universe itself is inert (as opposed to objects moving within the ether.) Or, at such a grand level, I’d be willing to say that the hand of God spins the whole thing: if he were to stop spinning the whole thing, the planets and suns would stop their resultant spins, gravity would cease, and the whole thing would fall apart.


  • thh1859  On March 8, 2016 at 5:16 pm

    Why is the movement of the earth through the ether not detected? If you have already answered this question, please direct me to your answer.


    • drgsrinivas  On March 11, 2016 at 4:42 pm

      I have explained elsewhere how the Michelson-Morley experiment is based upon a wrong premise and hence is incapable of detecting Ether.

      As the earth spins in the cosmic ocean of Ether, it creates two types of Ether currents around it as I have explained here

      How do we prove/ detect the existence of these currents? Well, very easy.

      1) Leave an object in the space ‘above’ the Earth. The object gets dragged towards the Earth.
      2) Place a magnetic compass in the vicinity of The Earth. It gets deflected to one specific direction i.e. in the direction of the ether currents.

      These two phenomena wouldn’t happen if there were no Ether currents. Our scientists have named these phenomena as gravity and magnetism respectively and have given us some absurd mystical explanations for the same.

      We can’t obviously see the existence of air or air winds directly. But we can infer their existence or detect the same by observing the movement of cloths hanged on a washing line or the movement of leaves on a tree. But what if someone insists that as proof of spacetime vibration and argues against the existence of air and air winds?

      Why do objects, dust etc get dragged towards the centre of a whirlpool or whirlwind? That is due to the spiral motion of water/ air particles induced around the eye of the whirlpool. But what if some one argues that as proof of warped space-time?

      So, if we bow to irrational and absurd explanations, we wouldn’t be able to prove or detect the existence of even the most obvious phenomena that we experience in our environment, leave alone detecting Ether and Ether currents!


  • John Davis  On April 2, 2016 at 3:15 am

    Do you find any anomaly with the behavior of our moon? I’ve always felt it strange that we see the same face. I have read it is a common occurrence for large satellites to get locked into synchronous orbit with their planets. Do you believe this to be a simple quirk in the ether whirlpool model or do you think there is something else going on. In my mind I picture two gears.. and in order for the match to work they have to be the same size. I do concede there are other bodies at work.


  • Galacar  On April 2, 2016 at 11:26 am

    @John Davis

    Anomaly with the moon?

    Th moon is riddled with anomalies!

    Why? Because the whole thing is artificial! Nothing natural about it.

    Yeah , I kow how that sounds, but research will show this.




  • John Davis  On April 3, 2016 at 7:56 am

    I appreciate your energy but I don’t think I can follow that idea. Its influence on life on our planet is so great that it seems essential to life. I do believe in a creator and in duality. Positive, negative. Light, Dark, Good, Evil. I believe the moon to be natural.. but I believe we are missing something.


  • John Davis  On April 3, 2016 at 8:57 am

    drgsrinivas – Do you think the divine stuff might explain the gyroscopic effect. Many explanation of inertial resistance of a spinning object resort to vague ideas. I see the gyroscopic effect working for all moving bodies – spinning or not. If you try and push an airplane up or down it will resist. If you try and rotate a gyroscope (or a planet) it will resist. Why? Breaking ranks of an aligned fluid medium.


  • Galacar  On April 3, 2016 at 11:30 am

    (drgsrinivas , sorry it is this long, but I thought it to be important)

    @John Davis

    You wrote:

    “I believe the moon to be natural.”

    I do understand where you are coming from.
    However, if you do the research you will really get there:
    And it is even worse and deeper ten you think. so you have to have a
    sincerely very open mind.The universe isn’t really what you think it is,

    You can start here,,204,203,200.jpg

    (drgsrinivas, would you be so kind to put this picture up?, Thank you!)

    Some quotes:

    “Isaac Asimov,
    American author and professor of biochemistry at Boston University and Science Fiction writer. Asimov was one of the most prolific writers of all time.

    “We cannot help but come to the conclusion that the Moon by rights ought not to be there. The fact that it is, is one of the strokes of luck almost too good to accept… Small planets, such as Earth, with weak gravitational fields, might well lack satellites… … In general then, when a planet does have satellites, those satellites are much smaller than the planet itself. Therefore, even if the Earth has a satellite, there would be every reason to suspect… that at best it would be a tiny world, perhaps 30 miles in diameter. But that is not so. Earth not only has a satellite, but it is a giant satellite, 2160 miles in diameter. How is it then, that tiny Earth has one? Amazing.”

    “The Moon, which has no atmosphere and no magnetic field, is basically a freak of nature”

    Irwin Shapiro,
    Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

    “The best possible explanation for the Moon is observational error – the Moon doesn’t exist.’

    “The Moon is bigger than it should be, apparently older than it should be and much lighter in mass than it should be. It occupies an unlikely orbit and is so extraordinary that all existing explanations for its presence are fraught with difficulties are none of them could be considered remotely watertight.”

    Farouk El Baz,

    “If water vapour is coming from the Moon’s interior is this serious. It means that there is a drastic distinction between the different phases of the lunar interior – that the interior is quite different from what we have seen on the surface.”

    Mikhail Vasin, Alexander Shcherbakov,
    Societ Academy of Sciences, 1970.

    “Is the moon a creation of an alien intelligence?”

    Dr Harold Urey,
    Nobel Prize for Chemistry

    “I’m terribly puzzled by the rocks from the Moon and in particular of their titanium content.”

    Dr S Ross Taylor,
    Geochemist of lunar chemical analysis,

    Said the problem was that maria plains the size of Texas had to be covered with melted rock containing fluid titanium. He said you would not expect titanium ever to be hot enough to do that, even on Earth, and no one has ever suggested that the Moon was hotter than the Earth.

    “What could distribute titanium in this way? Highly advanced technology developed and operated by entities that are immensely more technologically advance than humans.”

    This is a very good example of how deep the rabbithole (of lies) goes.

    Ok, now, why do I mention this here? Well, of course because it was mentioned,
    But also to show how all this ‘mind-control’ works.

    Most people won’t accept the FACT that the moon is an artificial object.
    They even defend the LIE that it is an natural object.
    Hence , this is a good example of seeing the brainwashing in action.
    This is the same throughout the “sciences’.
    It is ALL brainwashing.
    And because it is brainwashing, don’t expect the people at first to understand you or use logic. It won’t work.First the person has to understand he is brainwashed, then he has to deprogram his brainwashing and then he or she is able, mostly for the first time in their life, to think straight and logically.
    Because, whatever way you see it, our brains are tamperd with the moment we have left the womb.




  • John Davis  On April 4, 2016 at 2:56 am

    I am open to the idea that we are being manipulated. “The reason for a great lie could only be to hide a profound truth” I read this somewhere. I do believe the moon to be quite an anomaly and do believe that it has origins other than natural phenomenon. But I ascribe its existence to a creator…

    Genesis 1 – And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day

    As I stated previously – I find it very interesting that on the 3rd day he created the seas, land masses, vegetation, etc. And then light! The comedian and anti-theist Ricky Gervais used this fact to make fun of Christians saying something to the effect of God paints in the dark.

    However ancient people weren’t stupid and knew very well the effects of the moon on the seas and sun on vegetation. The strange sequence of events in Genesis should be taken into consideration.

    I have read many of your posts on here and like your ideas. But I think we have to be careful we aren’t falling down strange rabbit holes like relativity or, in my opinion, the moon being created by futuristic humans or aliens. I remain open to all ideas… cautiously.

    Thank You


  • Galacar  On April 4, 2016 at 11:18 am

    @John Davis

    Cautiously is fine, of course! Be my guest. I think that is aa goood thing.

    But did you know there was a time that there was no moon around the earth?

    Do you know that the moon is connected with saturn?

    And yes, it IS a strange deep rabbit hole. this is just part of the iceberg.

    And actually you are showing me here that you don’t want to go past your ‘firewall”. Put there by our ‘modern education’ and what have you.

    It is fine with me if you don’t want to believe the moon is artificial.
    As explained before, I lay down here , the conclusions of years of research.
    Bty me and others.

    But people are free to do with that information what they want.

    Furthermore, if you want to know more, be aware this is a process.

    I really don’t expect you to see it immediately.

    And as I have written in my posting above, this is a good example of how brainwashing (mind control) works.




  • Galacar  On April 4, 2016 at 11:25 am

    @John Davis

    John, please understand I am not here to offend you.

    And you probably won’t understand me,

    However, talking about the bible.

    Did you know that nearly all tales from the bible where found in the much older books of the pagan religions? sometimes thousand of years before the bible.

    In my eyes the bible is a recycled religion and goes all the way back to babylon.

    There is not one original story in the bible, They are all stolen.

    Now, that doesn’t mean I am not spritual. On the contrary, I believe there is someting I call “Univeral Intellegence” and the Indans call it “The Great Spirit”

    You see, my opinion in this is that all religions are here to keep people from real spirituality. And I see the religions as control tool.

    But I understand if you have trouble with this.

    That is ok




  • John Davis  On April 5, 2016 at 1:15 am

    Thank you for your reply. I will take into consideration all you have said. I have read and watched some of the ideas you propose above with the borrowing of religions / ideas. I know some of this has been put forth by Theosophists whom I have trouble trusting due to some of the dark Magick they practice. Seems like some pretty dark stuff that Blavatsky, Cayce, and especially Crowley were into.


  • Galacar  On April 5, 2016 at 11:09 am

    @John Davis,

    “Thank you for your reply. I will take into consideration all you have said. I have read and watched some of the ideas you propose above with the borrowing of religions / ideas. I know some of this has been put forth by Theosophists whom I have trouble trusting due to some of the dark Magick they practice. Seems like some pretty dark stuff that Blavatsky, Cayce, and especially Crowley were into.”

    First, you are welcome,

    But I have no clue why you put theosophist in.
    I am only looking at facts. You are right about theosophy though. The top is into some realy dark stuff. You are right there and I don’t trust them either.
    So, I haven’t got, as far as I know, anything from them.

    Crowley was a terrible man, and into much more then theosophy. Blavastky has lied a lot together (provable so), but I have no clue what Edgar Cayce is doing here, He was, as far as I can see, a very honest and integer man, able to help sick people with information he got by means of his dreams.




  • Chris Muhlethaler  On April 5, 2016 at 5:29 pm

    Galacar, it seems like there you have so much to say on so many topics (as you always say, you could go on for hours). Have you considered starting your own website of this kind to collect your thoughts on a forum of your own? Just a suggestion :))


  • Galacar  On April 5, 2016 at 5:56 pm

    @Chris Muhlethale

    Yes, I once had one, but it was in dutch.
    I am indeed considering a new one.
    I am also considering giving lectures.
    And yes, they will last some hours, but nobody will be bored. 🙂


  • John Davis  On April 6, 2016 at 1:41 am

    Come to southern california.. if lectures are given by you or Dr. gsrinivas, I’d love to go!


  • Galacar  On April 6, 2016 at 5:56 pm

    Well, Maybe I will one day. I have been in Torrance before and I loved it there!

    If I do, I will let you know.



  • jake  On December 23, 2016 at 9:49 am

    I find it offensive a so-called scientist, dismissing God. You observe all of these amazing things happening simultaneously, complicated, intelligent fingerprints and stand by randomness? I hope at one point, you take off your blinders and realize you are barely scratching the surface.
    You should know one thing, everything is based on absolute complication. A goal of randomness doesn’t routinely achieve such complicated results, with purpose.
    Purpose. Everything you study has a purpose, a goal. A high goal.
    You are a human being with life and intelligent. Why would a scientist dismiss a higher life and intelligence.
    A true observer would dismiss nothing. There is no end. Trying to figure some things out and calling them different names, doesn’t solve them or the invention of them. The origins. The path and why it took those paths and why it wanted to achieve a complicated piece of life.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.