Over more than twenty years I have performed hundreds of experiments, which were mostly motivated by trying to uncover the reasons for and causes of not always convincingly-explained working activities of ancient civilizations. In these experiments, I came to the conclusion that many activities of ancient prehistoric cultures were clearly motivated by the desire to exploit knowledge about the attributes of static electricity. Even in academic publications, I found no information on the range of the properties of static electricity. Therefore, it can be concluded that they have probably never been published. For this reason, I admit it might be an entirely new science.
Four properties of static electricity, probably yet unpublished, seem key to the implementation of many megalithic and religious structures. Many often seemingly useless construction activities of our ancestors could not be convincingly and logically explained without the connection to these new findings of the properties of static electricity. Historians and archaeologists have often helped themselves out by saying that the motivation for constructing many buildings in our history was based solely on a “ritual” or “calendar reason”. All researchers and scientists who “dared” to link knowledge of ancient cultures with modern knowledge of the physical energies were often ridiculed and considered as being textbook ignorant. The four properties of static electricity introduced are, however, far from a total explanation of all yet difficult-to-explain mysteries of our history. In some cases, the new knowledge about the properties of matter in connection with a charge of static electricity provides only partial explanation to the historical mysteries, which suggests that there can be many more unidentified properties of static electricity.
There is no doubt that there is an incorrect interpretation of certain parts of history in connection with the explanation of the motives for constructing many complex, but even the simplest, of old buildings. It is therefore necessary to examine the question of logical reasons for constructing the buildings in context with new physical knowledge which demonstrates that “knowledge” of ancient and extinct cultures surpassed the knowledge of modern history. The “ritual dogmas” will need to be replaced by new energy knowledge. This will create a real picture of the evolution of world cultures, as well as a “springboard” for further research in some historical periods.
However, there are the above mentioned scientific “obstacles” that discourage many who are interested in modern research. These obstacles, which psychologically bind the thinking of many researchers eager for truth, are the skeptics. The skeptics, in an effort to stand out, which they cannot achieve in a different field of science, serve as scientific inquisitors. Being a skeptic is very easy, as skeptics always respond to new ideas by saying, “Everything that cannot be put in context with known facts cannot be assessed.” They refuse to respect the fact that all new findings were found beyond the edges of the known facts, in most cases.
I was saddened, for example, when skeptics in the Czech Republic attached an ‘erratic boulder’ to Erich von Däniken. Even if Däniken did not bring any revolutionary ideas in his work, he would have done more for the promotion of history than all the Czech inquisitional skeptics combined. Däniken inspired hundreds of thousands of researchers around the world by his extensive work; thousands of them chose their field of work due to his exploratory study. And last but not least, after centuries of neglect, many historical monuments that were described by Däniken are now cracking under the pressure of curious tourists. Däniken fully described the megalithic culture in his writings.
Literary works by Erich von Däniken are well above the writings of other authors, who constantly repeat pieces of information that have already been published many times. I have studied all the writings of Däniken and I can say that I gained more knowledge about the megaliths from his literature than I would have received by personal visits to the places described. There are more such cases, which I will not address here. I regard the ‘erratic boulder’ given to Erich von Däniken as the worst injustice.
Skeptics could not have objected to the way Däniken describes the megalithic culture, but they likely just disagreed with his opinion that it could not have been created by a ‘textbook-type’ civilization and that ancient cultures received the information from some advanced cultures from outer space. And here is the discord: Skeptics recognize the current interpretation of history; Däniken, as well as many logically thinking people, does not. It does not matter where the ancient cultures received the information. The fact is that they must have obtained it somewhere. Däniken’s view that ancient cultures may have obtained the information from space cannot be assessed in any other way than as a creative idea. Any doubts about the astronauts from other planets can encourage others to think about other explanations. The essence of the literary work of Däniken is not just about getting the source of information, but it is about the whole megalithic culture. Reacting to the opinions of Däniken by granting him an ‘erratic boulder’ seems amateurish and inappropriate. People expect scientists to scientifically and properly reason their decisions.
If skeptics think that people used to build thousands of megaliths all over the world for ritual and calendar purposes (as is currently mentioned in history), they only compromise themselves in the same way archaeologists do. Unless it is explained what tools were used to machine the hardest diorite rock, unless it is experimentally demonstrated that it is possible to transport a block of rock weighing one thousand tons a distance of two kilometers solely by the use of pulling and ropes, unless it is explained how people communicated with each other when they built the same types of megalithic structures around the world, the account of Däniken cannot be clearly and categorically questioned. In this case, the purposely formulated assumption proposed by the skeptics in granting Erich von Däniken an ‘erratic boulder’ stated exactly the opposite. They reached a phase where the public began to question statements given by the skeptics.
The new knowledge about static electricity resulting from the research on megaliths seems like a great hint, not only for the research of ancient cultures, but also for several other fields. In addition, we can expect further findings of the unknown properties of static electricity. Below are listed the four attributes of static electricity, which I describe in dozens of articles at http://www.miroslavprovod.com
Below are listed the four attributes of static electricity, which
I describe in dozens of articles at http://www.miroslavprovod.com. I remind the importance of the four attributes of static electricity, which
I describe in dozens of articles at http://www.miroslavprovod.com.
1 – Each material has a charge with three energy components (aura, zones,
and interzones).
2 – When auras of two or more charges come into contact they merge into one
common charge with common energy components.
3 – By merging charges into a joint charge, there is a gradual equalizing of
their energetic potentials.
4 – During the equalizing of energetic potentials there is also a transfer
of chemical properties.