The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Dark energy is spin energy

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/26/2017 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 765 times Debate No: 102775
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




The universe gets its energy from aetheric spin. This is the only logical place that energy can come from. All other concepts of energy creation are false.


First of all, energy can neither be created nor destroyed. I am not familiar with the concept of aetheric spin, but if you are talking about angular momentum (such as a gyroscope) there needs to be a force or torque in order for it to happen.

As far as dark energy goes, most of what we understand about it is unknown. All that we know is that the universe is expanding faster than it should based on our calculations of what we know to be there. So whatever is causing it to expand is what we call "dark energy" because we don't know what it is at all. The name itself is misleading because it may not be a form of energy. It is just the term that scientists gave it because they don't know what it is. One hypothesis is that it could be some property of space time.

So it is highly unlikely that dark energy could be some sort of spin. In fact, it could be multiple different things. We don't know what it is but there is more dark energy than anything else we know of in the universe.
Debate Round No. 1


"Energy can't be created nor destroyed." True, but it can be tranferred and transformed into various types of energy. One must understand that matter itself is just energy in a different or alternate state. The equation E=MC2 shows that matter/mass, light and energy are all transferrable. Why is the neutron the heaviest part of an atom? That's because weight is a measurement of aetheric pressure. The neutron is a no spin particle which creates a hole in space that the left and right spin particles rotate around. This basic principle applies to atoms, solar systems and galaxies which are all dimensional fractals of one another. The solar system and galaxies are a fractal models of atoms. Their speed of rotation is relative to their size. Larger systems spin slower than smaller systems is a general dimensional rule.

The only logical power supply for the universe can be aetheric spin energy which spins at the speed of light. This is also implied in the equation E=MC2. The speed of light squared can become matter. But how? That's because when the aether particles approach a large body like a sun they are pushed together and stop/slow down their spin rate. This process gives off a lot of frictional energy in the form of sun light and radiation. Note - The aether particles are not attached when they are in space and have alternate left and right spin properties. This positive/negative - left/right spin arrangement is cancelled and becomes a neutron + energy. Thus, aetheric spin energy is the source of all the universe's energy.

The universe is based on the positive, negative and neutral principle. Atomic research has confirmed that all sub-atomic particles come in groups of three.


What you are saying is nonsense. That is not how quantum mechanics works at all. First of all, I still do not know what you mean by "aetheric spin". Are we talking about particle spin? What is spinning?

"The neutron is the heaviest part of the atom" - The heaviest part of an atom is the nucleus. This is both protons and neutrons together in the center. The neutron has the most mass, but not by much. It weighs almost exactly the same as a proton which doesn't have anything to do with particle spin.

"...weight is a measurement of aetheric pressure" - Weight is a measurement of mass

"The neutron is a no spin particle which creates a hole in space that the left and right spin particles rotate around" - This is complete nonsense. A neutron has no CHARGE but it does have particle spin. It sits in the nucleus along with other protons. There is no hole created. The protons are positive and attract electrons which are negative. There are no such thing as left and right spin particles rotating around a hole.

"The solar system and galaxies are fractal models of atoms" - NO they are not. The model of an atom where there are particles rotating around a large center is outdated and false. It doesn't look like that at all. The name "particle" is misleading for an electron because we don't know what it looks like. It behaves like a large cloud and we cannot pinpoint its exact location or velocity at the same time. Electron "orbitals" don't orbit like planets at all. In fact, you see all kinds of crazy shapes such as a figure 8 or something. Solar systems and galaxies aren't even the same. Yes, there is rotation around a center, but that's about all they have in common.

"The only logical power supply for the universe..." There is no power supply for the universe. It doesn't need one. Energy is constant and is not created. Why would it need power?

Particle spin does not stop or slow down. Its called "spin" but nothing is spinning. I could go into further detail about this, but I think you need to look up what particle spin is if that is what you mean by "aetheric spin". So most of what you say about the spin stopping and creating some sort of energy makes no sense.

There is no such thing as "frictional energy". Friction is a force. Its what makes the brakes on your car work. You can google "types of energy" and will not find friction there.

"positive, negative, and neutral principle" There are positive, negative, and neutral charges for particles and electromagnetism. There don't apply to any of the other thousands of systems in the universe. Maybe if you are a Taoist, you might see every system as a Yin and Yang, but that isn't a group of three either so I don't know what you are referring to.

"Atomic research confirmed that all sub atomic particles come in groups of three" - The correct term is "Quantum Mechanics" or perhaps just "Physics". Yes, there are 3 sub atomic particles. No they do not always come in groups of 3. The Hydrogen atom has no neutrons. Its the first one on the periodic table.

In fact, the physics get even deeper than these subatomic particles. Have you ever heard of quarks? There are actually quite a few of them and these are what make up the subatomic particles. These do not come in groups of 3.

This still doesn't explain anything about dark energy. Even if what you said was true and the particles did give off some sort of energy, we would know about this energy. It could be measured. The fact that we could measure it would make it not "dark energy". Dark energy is something we can't see or understand. We have no clue what it is. That is why it is "dark". If it was "frictional energy" it would be called that. Not dark energy.
Debate Round No. 2


1. Aetherisc spin - Aether particles - left and right - spin at the speed of light. E=MC2 That's what this equation tells us. I didn't just make it up. You have to know how to interpret an equation in terms of a physical reality. Scientists have ben staring at this equation for over a hundred years but nobody really understands it. This equation is about dimensional tranference of energy. Thus, mattter can take the form of either light squared or spin and rotation. The universe is three dimensional - left spin, right spin and no spin dimensions. These three dimensions make up 'empty space' mattter and light. The universe is a very simple place. It is made entirely from one particle which has three states. (Occam's razor principle applies) The simplest solution is alwys the best.

2. Atoms and galaxies exist in different fractal dimensions. They have different time dimensions. A galaxy moves very slowly compared to an atom. ( 10 to the power of 35 Plank's constant differential). Thus, that's why scientist can't join the dots in regards to atoms and galaxies being one and the same.

3. "The only logical power supply for the universe..." There is no power supply for the universe. It doesn't need one. Energy is constant and is not created. Why would it need power?

The aether matrix carries the sun's spin energy to Earth via light. The sun transfers its spin energy which is gathers from the incoming aether particles which are forced together by the sun's gravity. This spin energy is tranferred to the aether matrix which carries this energy as a spin wave through apparently - ' empty space'.

Science is full of false concepts like 'photons' which are supposed to carry light. This is false. Waves need a medium to travel in. Space has positive and negative characteristics. This is the aether matrix.

4. There is no such thing as "frictional energy"

Electricity is created by friciontal energy. When you rub two surfaces together it creates aetheric spin energy that we call 'electricity'. This energy can be stored in a battery. The spin is frictionless unless you apply a point of resistence to it.

5. Hydrogen -
Deuterium - Heavy water? Definitely has a neutron.

When aether particles approach the sun - the particles are forced to slow down or stop their spinning action. The first particle of matter to be created is the hydrogen atom. The hydrogen atom is a transition element which is half way between aether and matter. This is why the sun's atmosphere is made of hydrogen.

6. If it was "frictional energy" it would be called that. Not dark energy.

That's why I am here. To educate the masses on real physics.



First, I took a look at that youtube link which lead me to the theories of Robert Distinti which I now understand to be your source for this theory called "Ethereal Mechanics". I would suggest you quit listening to this guy because he is definitely not a physicist and has completely ditched the classical model of the universe in favor of his own theory which very few people understand, let alone have taken the time to analyze. He basically throws away everything hundreds of scientists have discovered about quantum mechanics and makes his own equations.

Based on what I saw, he provides no real evidence and has no experiments to verify these spin particles or any of the other jargon he claims to have discovered. It is all theory based on equations he does in his head. He is not an experimental physicist, and not even a theoretical physicist. Before we even begin talking about the aether matrix, spin energy, or any of the other theories this guy mentions, you need to confirm it exists. I have no reason to believe it is an actual thing. There is no experiment telling me that there is an aether matrix.

Scientists do understand the significance of E=MC2. If it wasn't significant, Einstein wouldn't be famous. It isn't talking about matter taking the form of light. Its gives us an idea how much energy can be found in matter. Without this equation, we wouldn't have nuclear energy or understand fission. Radiocarbon dating gives us an idea how old things are based on this equation. This equation also made it possible for us to use satellites and send rovers to different planets. So ya it is pretty significant, and someone who uses the classical model of physics understands what it means. This Ethereal model is junk as far as I can see and has no practical application in the world of science.

Atoms and galaxies exist in the same dimension that we do. We can see both of them. They do not have different time dimensions. Something moving faster doesn't put in another time dimension. It just means it moves faster due to a different force. Galaxies use gravity. Atoms use the strong and weak nuclear forces. These are completely different.

As I mentioned before, the atom and galaxies are not even close to looking the same. Electrons don't even move in circles. We don't know what they look like. Things at the subatomic level behave very differently than things at the galactic level. That is simple observation. There is no correlation and it is nowhere near fractal. They don't even look the same.

Photons exist and there are actual experiments to confirm this. They don't carry light, they are light. Light on a very small level behaves like tiny particles in certain instances and we call them photons. The medium that light travels in is not the aether matrix. It is the electromagnetic field. Understanding this is how we have radios, x-rays, and even the redshift that Distinti talks about in his videos.

Friction is still a force. "Frictional Energy" is nonsense.

Why do you have to change the name of electricity to "aetheric spin energy"? Yes, electricity is stored in a battery.

"The spin is fricitonless unless you apply a point of resistance to it". Once again this is nonsense. How can something be frictionless if it has friction when something touches it?

Deuterium is a hydrogen isotope that does have a neutron. Most common hydrogen atoms do not. If you google Deuterium, it says it at the very top. You don't even have to click a link.

You are not educating anyone on real physics. Real physics has experiments to verify that it is true. Don't listen to this Distinti guy anymore. I'm sorry, but he is a crock. He sounds smart when he throws sciency words and complex equations at you, but when you are scientifically literate, you can see the idiocy of his statements. You will not be able to use this Ethereal physics in your life for anything. If you listen to actual physicists like Stephen Hawking, Richard Feynman, or Neil Degrasse Tyson, you will be able to use it to see amazing things in the world. Here are some real books that I recommend that give you a far better understanding of how the world works.

"A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking

"Cosmos" by Carl Sagan

"Astrophysics for People in a Hurry" by Neil Degrasse Tyson
Debate Round No. 3


There is no experiment telling me that there is an aether matrix.

You don't need to do any experiments. Its just a matter of getting in tune with your commonsense. Universities hate common sense and they have put a permenent ban on the word "commonsense'. This is because commonsense is a dangerous thing to people who are preaching nonsensical theories.

Light has no way to travel through space without a medium. This is commonsense. Light is a wave and waves need a medium. This is commonsenses. Universities don't like commonsense because it makes the universe appear too simple and simplicity is the enemy of the intellectual elite. Thus, they need to complicate the universe in order to justify their high status and existence.

You have been brainwashed by the system. You accept ludicious theories without knowing how or why they exist. You most probably believe that the universe came into existence by the Big Bang Theory.The Big Bang theory is just a religious concept based on what the Bible says about the beginning of the universe. God said "Let there be light and there was light" etc.

E=MC2 is just a guessimate on the way the sun works. Tesla used the sun too as his model. That's how he came up with the idea of the generator and induction motor etc.

Atoms and galaxies exist in the same dimension that we do. We can see both of them

Really????? Good. Then you can draw me a picture of what an atom looks like then! lol
Obviously, you are just talking nonsense based on what the university professors keep preaching.

Galaxies use gravity

Really???? According to current thinking - galaxies should fall apart due to centrifical force of rotation but are really held together by some mysterious dark matter stuff that they don't understand. Errrr??????? Aether?

God damn it! Its that "elusive stuff" again. What can it be, that's holding the universe together? lol

Shhhhhhhhh!!!! Don't say that word aether or they'll kick you out of university. Let's call it dark energy or dark matter and just pretend that an aether doesn't really exist. That way we wont lose any friends and we'll remain as part of the dysfunction but safe system. lol

Electrons don't even move in circles.

That implies that you know which direction they are moving......... which is?????????????????

Photons exist and there are actual experiments to confirm this.

Experiments can and are manipulated to get the results that are expected. This sort of thing happens all the time. Note- There is no rewards for getting a result wjhich embarrasses important people like Einstein and co. Its all about politcial correctness and not rocking the boat in the science world. Note - I have studied the experiments and they are all faulty and have faulty premises and expectations.

The problem is that they have faulty expectations in regards to photons. For example - A photon has no mass but it is a particle. This dosen't make sense. Unless you understand that matter is just light squared. Then, the concept of spin energy being transferred through the aether matrix makes sense. Light traveles in two forms - spin and wave. Thus, light is a spinning wave. Its two dimensional. Light has spin torque energy which makes it burn your skin when exposed to it too much. When you get an electric shock the spin energy pushes you away. If you touch a fast spinning ball you get the same jolting sensation as touching a live electric wire.

How can something be frictionless if it has friction when something touches it?

"I don't know either, but that's how the universe works, like it or not" Note - I have heard Richard Feynman say this many times.

The fact that atoms can store energy for billions of years is evidence that spin energy is frictionless unless acted upon by a gravitational force.
The fact that the universe dosen't wind down and run out of energy implies a frictionless mechanism which is not affected by time.



You definitely need experiments. You can't just use your brain. That is how we discovered literally everything. The reason you can even talk about galaxies, particles, velocity, or anything is due to experiments. It is absolutely essential to science. Without an experiment to test something, there is no way to gather evidence of the truth. That is how you find things out.

Yes, waves do travel through a medium. The medium light travels through is the electromagnetic spectrum like I mentioned before.

Are you referring to common sense or is "commonsense" some other thing we are talking about here because I'm not quite sure?

Universities don't need things to be complicated. There is no conspiracy here. Some things are just complicated. Thats just life.

I do not accept ludicrous theories without knowing how or why they exist. I know how and why these things exist. That's what experiments are for. How did we find out about protons and neutrons? Or the orbits of the planets? Or even gravity and velocity and everything in physics? By trying stuff out and observing it in the real world. Not by making it up and guessing in our heads.

This has nothing to do with the bible. The big bang is a theory based on the expansion of the universe. We observed that the universe is growing and we predict that there must be some force that caused it to expand. Our best idea based on what we can tell is the big bang. Its based on the observation that stars and galaxies are getting farther and farther apart.

E=MC2 was not a guess at how the sun works. There was a lot of math and experiments that Einstein did to come up with that equation. Not some "guesstimate".

Michael Faraday invented the generator and not Tesla. Tesla was the guy who did Alternating Current.

I can do better than draw a picture of an atom for you. There are literally photos of them. In fact, someone did an animation using atoms and an electron microscope. Check it out. Its pretty awesome.

Galaxies do use gravity. What do you think makes planets orbit or black holes? What keeps your feet on the ground? Shouldn't you fly off the planet due to its rotation? No you don't because of gravity. Its stronger than the centrifugal forces of galaxies and planet rotation. This is an old one that we figured out a while ago. I don't think you want to bark up that tree. Im pretty sure you are in the minority on that one. If we can't agree on gravity, you are living in a delusional world.

That link to the wired story is talking about Dark Matter. This is different than Dark Energy. Don't get the two confused. Dark Matter is something that is invisible to the instruments that pick up electromagnetic radiation. Remember that medium that light travels through? Ya they mention it in the article you just posted. And the entire concept of Dark Matter is based on GRAVITATIONAL effects on galaxies.

In fact, you should read that article. It even talks a bit about dark energy and explains exactly what I brought up in my opening argument. Its all right there. The word "aether" is never mentioned. The article agrees with my point of view.

You are correct that photons have no mass. Why doesn't that make sense? The experiments are not faulty by any means. They tried something and observed how light behaved. Science is not about political correctness. People care about the truth and how the world actually operates. Most people don't just make up stuff for political reasons. If you grow up loving science, it's because you want to discover and know what the world is really like. And these experiments are very real and do make sense. The ones that are faulty are from crocks who make up their own language and equations like Robert Distinti. He doesn't do any actual science. You have to do experiments to figure things out.

I told you there are many patterns in which electron orbitals move. Take a Physics 1 class. Thats basic stuff.

That burning thing that happens when a lot of light touches your skin? That is not spin torque energy. Thats heat dude. Heat is infrared light. You can see it with heat vision goggles.

Atoms store energy. It's nuclear energy. Not "spin energy". We talked about this already.

FRICTION IS A FORCE. Frictionless energy doesn't make any sense. Its like saying purple sound. "Frictionless" means it is extremely smooth and slippery. Gravity is a seperate force. Gravity does not create friction on an object.

The universe will never run out of energy. Energy isn't depleting. It's not being created either. It's constant. There is no power source for the universe. To even say that is nonsense.

What makes you think anything is spinning? There is no reason to think atoms have a spin like a planet does. Light doesn't spin. Why would you accept that? What proves that anything is spinning? Is there any hard evidence? Has it been observed at all? THERE IS NO SPIN.

Are there any scientific theories that you think are not faulty? Why did you decide to ditch what most people consider to be reality for this aether and spin particle nonsense? Why would hundreds of years of theories and experiments for gravity and photons and energy just be false? Do you honestly believe that this one guy sat down and solved the universal theory in his head? Nobody thinks this guy is a genius. He has less than 1,000 views on his videos. Nobody sides with this guy. You need to seriously take a step back and reconsider your world view. The stuff you are speaking is nonsense.
Debate Round No. 4


Experiments???????? - Gravity Probe B lol

In the case of Gravity Probe B the results of the experiment are so minute that they cannot be separated from background noise. They are processed with a computer until something is found that appears to support the theory. That’s how a scientific industry is created and thousands of jobs for physicists who still, after a hundred years don’t understand what Einstein was talking about. Even Einstein did not know what he was talking about:
“Since the mathematicians have invaded the theory of relativity, I do not understand it myself anymore.” Albert Einstein quoted in P A Schilpp, Philosopher-Scientist (Evanston 1949).

So, it appears that you can understand Einstein's theories when Einstein himself, couldn't understand them. Truely amazing!

The main problem is that physicists don’t understand the limitations of engineering. They live in an unreal world of imaginary numbers based on theory, based on further theory. If they cannot understand basic engineering, how are they able to understand the physical world? The worship of money by the wooden-headed is not so different from the worship of science by the wooden-headed and there are many who cling to every word as if it were the religious gospel. I don’t see what else they can do when they have allowed their ability to think for themselves to be removed by their education. Those of a scientific education are encouraged to quote the words of past scientists rather than think, and this becomes a habit that completely removes any ability for critical appraisal. They don’t think, they remember what they were told to remember and they think they are thinking… If you are different, you had better hide it, and pretend to be solemn and wooden-headed.

As I recall, it was the work of Einstein that introduced the word “counterintuitive” into physics. The idea was born along with this word that our common sense (the same thing as logic) is just not adequate when dealing with relativity. That we plebs are just not smart enough to understand. The trouble with this idea is that I don’t believe that physicists are any more smart than anyone else and that counterintuitive was a ruse to make it appear that they are.

s://; alt="pigs_fly" />

People care about the truth and how the world actually operates.

I have been around and worked for the government and for universities for many years. I would say that people are all very frightened creatures who are scared of the truth and prefer to hide behind a wall of lies because that makes them feel safe and secure in a crazy world. I have also investigated the medical and legal worlds both of which are just as frightened and scared as the other. In fact, humans in general, are very frightened and frightening creatures that are scared of their own shadows. We are still living well within the inquistion. The inquistion is still not over by any means and carries on to this very day.

Spin is the only logical way that the universe can store energy for long periods of time. The universe would be organised in the most efficient and simplest form that it can take. This form must be - the one particle in three states form - that I have mentioned previously. Having hundreds of different sub-atomic particles is very wasteful and unlikely to be true because it is too complicated and suits the hidden agendas of university professors.

Robert Distinti has over 50 videos and each has an average viewing rate of 2,000. Thus, your ability to research your subject is very poor and has thus led you to believe what you hear from the mainstream physics which is mostly a load of nonsense.



I am not sure what instilled such a distrust of the scientific community into your mind. There is no large conspiracy where scientists are trying to sound smart and keep their jobs. The goal of science is to learn the truth about the world around us. There may be some political motivation within the community, but definitely not to the extent that you are claiming.

The currently accepted theories of modern science are based in hundreds of years of verifiable research and experiments. Some of the claims you made in this debate are easily debunked and can be verified by a high school student in a Physics 1 class.

In your last paragraph, you ineffectively attempt to try and take on Einstein's theory of General Relativity in order to demonstrate the fallacies of modern physics as a whole. Your argument consists of quotes pulled straight off of the page on the website in which the author demonstrates a lack of knowledge and understanding of the concepts he is debating. "How can something not matter and not energy have dimensions?" (regarding spacetime)

I am not going to defend Einstein's theory in one paragraph and I find that it is irrelevant to the topic of this debate.

For some reason it seems that you think physicists just sit around in a room and make up equations and complicated words in order to present themselves as smart. This couldn't be farther from the truth. These people dedicate their lives to studying the physical properties of the world around us. How do we know it works? Look at the technology around you that use these principles. Lightbulbs, electric wiring, satellites, batteries, GPS, LCD screens, Cell phones, etc. The list goes on. Do you think people just stumbled upon these inventions and became famous? No they did years of research in their field and applied the theories you are skeptical of in order to make these devices work.

I understand these theories. I can verify my knowledge of the electromagnetic spectrum, gravity, redshift in space, planet rotation, subatomic particles, and galaxies. I have done these experiments and seen it with my own two eyes. That is why I don't distrust the scientific community. Because instead of just thinking there was some major conspiracy, I tried it out for myself.

Your blatant disregard for experimentation and your skepticism for of some of the fundamental laws in physics are what defeat you. That is why you cannot understand what is being shown. It's not that scientists are trying to sound smart and keep their jobs, but rather that people don't take the time to verify the information for themselves. It isn't difficult. Want to know how gravity works? Drop some objects from a certain height and measure their speed. Swing a pendulum. That is what science is about. It isn't just talking in a room and doing math. It's taking a guess, doing an experiment, and seeing if that guess was correct or not.

The beautiful thing about science is that it adapts. If one theory is shown to be faulty, science can change and adapt. That's what it has been doing for hundreds of years. I guarantee there are some theories that we haven't quite gotten correct yet. We are looking for answers. But today's theories are the best we have so far until someone else can verify a new discovery.

The purpose of this debate was for you to demonstrate that Spin energy is Dark Energy. You did not provide a single shred of evidence for spin energy at all. You demonstrated that you do not understand fundamental principles of physics such as friction and heat. You attempt to use principles of physics and then try to dismantle that same physics in order to prove your point. The majority of this debate was not spent talking about Dark Energy. You have proven nothing.

Robert Distinti is not a source of truth. Instead he has led you astray. He attempts to reconfigure hundreds of years of scientific discovery and fails horribly. He is an idiot. If you continue on this path to try and use his theories in order dismantle the whole of modern physics, you will find it to be a very frustrating journey at best. Not a single person who has done actual experiments in the field of physics would ever listen to that bologna.

Instead, you should reconsider your distaste for the scientific community and take a Physics class. I admire your passion for searching for the truth. I encourage you to do your own experiments and not get your information from people with a grudge against modern science.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Akhenaten 3 years ago
Voters note - Con didn't mention anything about the Gravity Probe B experiment which was my key piece of evidence against him. Thus, we can see through his smooth talking deceptions and rational sounding reasoning is all just a cover-up for a criminal organisation called 'scientific research'.
Posted by Akhenaten 3 years ago
If you get a sphere. You can spin it left, then stop it and spin it right. There! You have disproved your hypothesis with one little thought experiment.
Posted by Jonbonbon 3 years ago
But the directions left and right don't have an objective meaning in the universe. They can both be spinning right but one is upside down so it appears to be spinning left. It's not actually a right or left spin. It's all relative. So you can't base physics on atoms that spin left and right. That's a ludicicorus concept.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.