Welcome to my Universe.

June 22, 2011 § 16 Comments

Welcome to The Crestroyer Theory.

Crestroy is a coined word from creation and destroying, which is what we see in the quantum fields.

It is about antimatter, the mind, Einstein, quantum mechanics, the speed of light and a mix of philosophy with popular science.

It could explain dark matter, dark energy, antimatter and various other phenomenas, but it will definitely not explain everything.

otto krog krogh otto krog krogh otto krog krogh otto krog krogh otto krog krogh otto krog k

§ 16 Responses to Welcome to my Universe.

  • David Raven says:

    Interesting stuff, I’m no scientist and don’t claim to be, I just have an interest in all of this. My view is that the scientists in the LHC will never find the Higgs, it doesn’t exist. I think they’re ignoring the one massive power that exists but can never be scientifically ‘proven’ and that is consciousness, or god or spirituality or love, whatever you want to call it. The power of thought governs our reality, we come from consciousness, we are it having a human experience. Quantum mechanics is mind boggling, but everything becomes very clear and straight forward if we apply a positive mental attitude to life and live as were meant to, we can create our own reality, a conscious thought gives particles mass and if its a positive one it will manifest in a positive reality. Please leave your comments, I’m not very good at explaining what I mean but I hope its clear-ish!!!

  • magogland says:

    I guess your prediction was wrong on the higgs!

  • Ted Erikson says:

    Interesting connection to Fuller’s tetrahedron, as I have been pursuing.. Check:

    Click to access SEEKINGUNKNOWNSHORES.pdf

    The fact that an inscribed sphere in a regular tetrahedron have identical surface to volume ratios and the sphere’s points of tangency generate another tetrahedron, ad infitutum..both ways..

    • Dear Ted,

      Would you please summarise Fullers explanation. I just don’t have the time to go into it. Nassim Haramein has similar ideas as mine about the tetrahedron, but his main theory is quite different.

  • G Srinivasan says:

    You are an the right track.The problem of the functioning of the universe has been solved in Vedic times in Sankhya and is perfect. “Sea of Something ” exists always but its state of dynamism changes constantly. We and everything is a holographic state of that and interpreting and decoding those changes is conscience, intelligence, existence, life, matter etc. It is isimple because one single algorithm does it all axiomatically . No choices. See “” . Lets dialogue. The theory is extreemely powerful and you have an intellectual lead to it.

    • Thankyou so much. We are both on the right track. My main problem is that my theory cannot be proven physically, as I put antimatter into parallel universes. All the theories about parallel universes is very hard to prove, as they are parallel. How can you measure something in a parallel universe from another universe? It’s kind of difficult. Nevertheless, all the theories about parallel universes has the same problem, and quantum mechanics allows parallel universes, elsewise the theories had been killed years and years ago.

      My next problem is that the idea of antimatter being consciousness seems pretty wacky for the most scientists. They disagree by the mere thought of it being correct.

      It will not stop me from proceding though, I know that I am on to something.

      Let’s dialogue indeed. Do you by any chance have a scientific background, I don’t and that is my third problem. I studied physics for half a year 3 years ago, but had to give it up, due to financial problems. It is a hard study indeed. What I need is a scientist who knows the extreme complexities of high energy physics, and a scientist daring to put his head on the block. If the speed of light is infinite in vacuum, then all the natural constants have to be adjustable too. Energy should be defined as minus infinite energy (antimatter) ower zero energy (zero point field) to plus infinite energy (matter).

      So you are so right about the Vedic, they had it very right the old folks.

      But how the hell do we prove it, that is my mission. Thanks again for yur interest.

      • G Srinivasan says:

        Rather late reply -saw yours only today. I have the proof through three derivations. Mathematical proof based on axioms.. Experimental proof from an experiment conducted during a solar annular eclipse. Practical running proof through a gravity converter motor generator that runs continuously by charging a battery increementally from another battery using NDFEB magnets that provide the eternal potential. visit kapillavastu dot com website and read the contents.

      • I have tried understanding your theory, without any luck. Could you explain it in a few words. I would appreciate that very much.

  • Sm. says:

    Dear Mr. Otto Krog, you have hit the proverbial “nail” on the head. They (physicists/scientists) will never be able to prove “it” because it is from our very conscious, or more, precisely, from our “collective” conscious that we have come into being, including all that we see and all that we are. “Spooky” business, if one is not consciously accustomed to the idea.

    • Well, I am optimistic in nature, and I believe that I can convince physicists that consciousness is the basis of creation and destroying. Maybe I am too optimistic, but they are pretty open for new ideas. The old ones does not make any sense to many in present time. Spooky it is, but as good old Niels Bohr could have said, if you claim to have understood quantum physics you haven’t grasped it at all. The Universe will hold, that’s for sure, so that is one stable datum we must adhere to.

  • Ewan S Fallon says:

    Dear Ted, you may not wish to publish this but as a follow up to “The universe is a disturbed field of pure energy seeking equilibrium” let me add :-
    I have outlined my disturbed energy concept in “The Dynamic Ether” available thru Kunaki publishing. The proposition is that gravity is a flow of a super fluid formed by the tenets of fluid dynamics. This relates black holes, dark matter. and even dark energy to the fluid dynamic processes. Dynamic energy gives a more believable explanation for the observed deflection of light by a large body, and doesn’t have to bend space to do it.

  • I don’t think that space has to be bent at all, so in that we can agree. How do you bend space? It’s a crazy idea from the beginning, isn’t it?

  • eco-geek says:

    Wow! Alternative paradigms – and we are getting to the point (or maybe well past the point) that these are needed. Any ideas may be possible realities but we need a consensus on the interpretation of the ideas for it to make sense i.e. to establish a new paradigm as the culturally perceived reality.

    I am a nutcase too. I believe that the speed of light is infinite. All the measurements I am aware of (and I might be missing something) measure the time taken for a photon emitted from point A to appear at point B. However the interaction is not necessarily the speed of light just the time taken for a photon emitted to be received. The wave could quite easily traverse the entire universe but be forbidden from interacting by a “phase uncertainty of detection” derivable from the uncertainty relations. Of course if the wave does not traverse the entire universe and is of finite length then by the WK theorem it has an energy spread not a single quantised energy. Perhaps the light wave “negotiates” the energy transfer over time and maintains the second law by sending a reverse low energy photon to the emitter?

    Another thought: Do atoms fill space or are there “air-gaps” between spherical protons and neutrons in atoms?

    Its getting back to school day models but perhaps worth pursuing. The only likely fully (3-D) space filing geometry is that of the rhombic do-decahedron (RDH -perhaps the projection of a 12 dimensional super reality onto a 3-D space). If we model the proton and neutron as RDH we can construct the Omega – group by “stellateing” the RDH with successive pairs of stellation units, themselves subcomponents of the RDH – 12 off. The Omega minus itself is a fully stellated RDH. We get a nice binding energy curve. Use this then to predict the binding energies of different particles taking reasoned guesses at the number of sub-units of the RDH used in the construction of these other particles. Wow: we start to predict.

    Obviously binding energies are the result of e-m waves interacting which define by Fourier the shape of the subunits and larger constructs with lower frequencies hence energies.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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

What’s this?

You are currently reading Welcome to my Universe. at The Crestroyer Theory,.


%d bloggers like this: