Mathematical Consequences and The Atrophy of Communication

Mathematical Consequences – Hypothesis vs Theory

All of our actions in life have consequences. When someone violates a legal statute, there are consequences. A consequence of an electric current through a conductor is a magnetic field.

There are many examples of such consequences in different scenarios.
But here, I want to talk about the consequences of a mathematical approach, equation or solution.

The mathematical consequence of equations for Relativity are different than the mathematical consequences of equations provided by Classic Physics.

It is the duty of the scientific community to form hypotheses around each mathematical consequence. And then to develop theories in attempts to explain those hypothetical scenarios. Based from the mathematical consequence.

“A denial of the teaching of the alternative is a shortchanging of the new pupil of science.” – Dr. Edward Dowdye

You are free to make thought experiments and think critically within a given set of rules from a foundation of those mathematical consequences. Until the critical thought becomes clear thought. And you discard the contradictions of the explanations (theory) until it makes more sense.
There are many nonsensical thoughts within a given theory in attempts to explain a hypothetical scenario. Not every idea within a given theory is valid. And you are not free to violate the consequences of your own theory to justify a confirmation bias.

Before 1911, there was no curved-space or 4th dimensional continuums or manifolds.
A hypothetical scenario for Relativity is to say “Let’s image a beam of light traveling in space… and the beam bends in space.”
That is a hypothesis.

A Theory/ attempted explanation for that particular hypothetical scenario is to say:
“The Light bends in space from gravity. And space is linked with time. And gravity is the curvature of space-time; therefore, light slows down and bends around the curvature of space-time.”
That is a theory. And this theory only works within a certain set of mathematical consequences.

Another consequence of the Math dictated by Relativity is that Time/Reality itself dilates. That observers experience reality subjectively with no universal rate or sequence for Time. No universal frame of reference. That Time shifts between observers dependent upon gravity, velocity and the distance light travels.

Everyone is aware of the THEORY/ ATTEMPTED EXPLANATION for a HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO described by Einstein and other Relativists.
But what if there is another mathematical approach which yields a different conclusion than Relativity?
The same data and observations can be interpreted differently… which means there can be an approach which yields the same numbers in a solution… but with a different hypothesis and theory.

And that is what Dr. Edward Dowyde has provided. Over the course of decades of work with recognized brilliant contributions.

Credible Challenges to General and Special Relativity, Doppler Shift Theory and more from Dr. Edward Dowdye. Retired NASA Engineer, University Professor of Mathematics and Internationally recognized expert in Optics/ LASERs /Satellites.
The following bio is from Dr. Dowdye’s website:
https://web.archive.org/web/20220102025727/http://extinctionshift.com/author.htm

Dr. Dowdye’s approach to explain the propagation of All emissions is derived from reformulated Galilean Transformation. The mathematical consequences of the solutions are in direct opposition to Relativity’s solutions.
But it is the duty of the scientific community to develop hypotheses to play around with the given set of rules within the parameters of those mathematical consequences. Not to ignore them.

The mathematical consequences for Relativity state:
The velocity of light is the same from ALL frames of reference while Time shifts.

The mathematical consequences for Effectivity (Dowdye’s work) states:
Time is the same from ALL frames of reference while the velocity of light shifts.

But what does that REALLY mean as a consequence if Time is the same from ALL frames of reference?
That means there are other explanations (theories) to describe why clocks tick at different rates and the ILLUSION of Time-Dilation.
It means you must completely drop the THEORY of Relativity in order to comprehend its opposite.

Hypothetical scenario:
Time never changes between observers.
Every source of light provides Real-Time illumination of Reality regardless of wavelength, frequency, distance, velocity or gravity.

We are not looking into the past when we see galaxies and stars.
That is a hypothesis.

The justification for that hypothesis is based from an alternative approach to the Invariance of the Wave Equation provided by Dr. Edward Dowdye.

Invariance of the Wave Equation based from Classic Physics and Galilean Transformations.
Yielding the same results without needing relativity, corrections… And without illusions!
∂²φ/∂x² + ∂²φ/∂y² + ∂²φ/∂z² - 1/c² (∂²φ/∂t²) = 0

The HYPOTHETICAL OBSERVER would find

Φ = ΦₒSin2π (νt + 1/λ x) to be a solution of the wave equation of the PRIMARY wave at velocity c relative to S, where νλ = c, but at velocity c'≠ c relative to the rest frame.

The ORDINARY OBSERVER would find

Φ’ = Φ’ₒSin2π (ν’t’ + 1/λ’ x’) to be a solution of the wave equation of the secondary wave at velocity c relative to S’.

IMPORTANT NOTE!!! THERE IS NO TIME DILATION IN EUCLIDEAN SPACE UNDER ELECTRODYNAMICS OF GALILEAN TRANSFORMATIONS!

Thus t’ = t (meaning, Time is the same from All frames of reference)

Both the HYPOTHETICAL and ORDINARY OBSERVER would find that the velocity of the wave being observed is always:

ν'λ'= [ν(1± cv)][λ(1± cv)−1]= νλ = c relative to its MOST primary source.

Differentiating the equation for Φ twice after t and x, the HYPOTHETICAL OBSERVER gets

∂²Φ/∂t² =−Φ(2π)² ν² = ν² λ² ∂²Φ/∂x²

and

∂²φ/∂x² + ∂²φ/∂y² + ∂²φ/∂z² - 1/ν² λ² ∂²Φ/∂t² = 0

The ORDINARY OBSERVER derives

∂²φ’/∂x’² + ∂²φ’/∂y’² + ∂²φ’/∂z’² - 1/ν’² λ’² ∂²Φ’/∂t’² = 0

t = t' (Time is the same from all frames of reference)

c ≠ c' (The velocity of light is NOT the same from all frames of reference)

c' = c ± v (The velocity of light is dependent upon the velocity of the light source relative to an observer or media. Whether that light source is approaching or receding away from that observer or media)

So...
The following Theory is an explanation based from that Classic Physics interpretation of Time and Light... in direct opposition to Relativity.

And again… it is the scientific community’s DUTY to acknowledge the existence of the alternative approach, the hypotheses and theories (explanations) that were developed. (and are currently being developed.)

To say, “There is no way other than Relativity” is disingenuous and unscientific.
To say, “There are no challenges to Relativity” is disingenuous and unscientific.
When people say, “Relativity is Proven”... it means they have lost their way in Science.
Evidence and proof are 2 different things.

If you say there are no contradictions in Relativity. You are either clueless or a liar.

As Dr. Dowdye says… when it comes to the propagation of light, refraction of light in space at the solar limb of a star or the alternative interpretations for GPS (dealing with the deformation of the electron configuration of cesium atoms from tidal influence)…
“The scientists who support relativity are either unaware of these phenomena or they don’t want you to know about this. This is bad news for them.”

Here are some abstracts to peer reviewed papers by Dr. Dowdye.
Hosted by NASA and Harvard:
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/search/q=dowdye&sort=date%20desc%2C%20bibcode%20desc&p_=0

Evidence vs Proof

Hypothesis: Hypothetical Scenario
Theory: Explanation of Hypothetical Scenario
Evidence: Data Collected
Proof: Mathematical solutions to equations that work out conceptually.

People wrongfully interchange the words evidence and proof.
Proof is subjective. How you interpret evidence is subjective.
What one person CONSIDERS proof of a claim… others can say that same information DISPROVES the same claim.
So, where is the objective proof of any given scenario or claim?

The truth is that “proof” is purely subjective. (if you are using the word as meaning “an end all be all definitive solution with no other explanations.)

'The proof is in the pudding', yet no one will spoon feed it to you. Take the time to eat it and you will enjoy every bite. Unless, of course, you've had a sour taste in your mouth your entire life that now makes the sweet taste of truth seem bitter. Cleanse your pallet, or the truth might be too hard for you to swallow.

In reality, “proof” is simply a mathematical derivation showing the process of obtaining a solution to an equation. But if the equation doesn’t accurately represent reality… then the mathematical proof is erroneous.
An example would be the claim of light bending of gravity by General Relativity as presented by Dr. Edward Dowdye. https://rumble.com/vbtccv-refraction-of-stars-relativity-vs-observations-and-data-with-dr-edward-dowd.html

Knowledge vs Wisdom vs Intelligence vs Smart

Knowledge is gained/earned through experience.
Wisdom is a collection of valid and useful information.
Intelligence is how WELL you are able to perceive, understand and apply the wisdom attained. And how WELL you are ABLE to convey it.

Intelligence is also represented by the quality of thoughts and approach to process and convey information.
Being smart means you are clever in HOW you apply your intelligence. Using the experience from knowledge gained, you gauge a scenario and know how to apply your intelligence.
And making choices that are beneficial to the advancement of your being.

Ignorant does not mean unintelligent.
The root word for Ignorant is “to ignore”.
Meaning to purposefully not pay attention.

Someone is aware of information, but they choose not to give it the time to understand it. If people ignore information despite their awareness of its existence, they are being ignorant of that particular information.

Being dumb is a refusal to acknowledge the existence of information. Dumb is not ignorant. Dumb is a lack of intelligence and smarts resulting from a conscious dismissal of even acknowledging information’s existence. Dumb people are not capable of processing certain information from a direct and blatant refusal.
Pseudo-skepticism is dumb.

An intelligent person who has not been exposed to information is not ignorant or dumb. They are just uneducated. But If they are unwilling to become educated.. that would qualify as dumb.

Uneducated can be confused with dumb. There are many highly intelligent people who have not yet been educated to a particular topic. But many educated people merely learn to parrot the reasoning of others and have no mind of their own. If that don’t have the ability to grasp certain information, it means they just need more education.

I’m not sure if animals have a collection of wisdom. Wisdom might be a purely Human trait.
Animals like dolphins have knowledge and experience. And they are Extremely intelligent and smart. But I’m not sure if wise applies, because I’m not sure if they have an archive of valid information.
Just experiences and memories which can be conveyed through glyphs.

Anyone can change their ways at any time though. People chose to remain stagnant.
But miseducation is also confused with education. Textbooks are severely outdated.

There is a difference between a school system and education system. People are schooled now. Not properly educated.
Here is a link on the difference between Propaganda vs Education:
http://www.trufax.org/general/indoc.html

Knowledge is the only thing we take with us when we die.
The knowledge of past incarnations will lay dormant in the DNA until a proper trigger justifies a reason for a “realization”/epiphany/ Eureka moment or “intuition” seemingly from nowhere.

Do not give credit to your own realizations or thoughts to some entity outside of yourself. All of your thoughts are your own. They may have formed from the combination of what you have previously encountered… while filling in the gaps to attempt and predict an outcome or solution. You can thank Creation at large for your ability itself to think.
What outside entity is there to thank for you realizing your own ability to appreciate?

To take a step back and appreciate the ability to appreciate unto itself.
That is your own self-awareness and spiritual growth of applying higher levels of thought.
If you have no context or information to know “what” “gave” you that ability… I guess you can just give credit to the unknown/ magical, quantum, aetheric God… until you realize the Truth.

Truth vs Facts

It is a fact that Relativity states A, B and C.
But A, B and C are not necessarily the Truth.

It was a fact that life could not exist in a drop of water.
But the invention of the microscope revealed the Truth.

It might have been a fact that the Earth is Flat to some people.
But satellites (and many other simple methods) reveal the Truth.

It might be a fact that you are caught with a knife in your hand while standing over a dead body. The Truth might be that you heard a ruckus, then found a body and picked up the knife. But Truths don’t necessarily matter in a court of law… the facts matter.
And you will be judged on the facts many times.

Were you in the area at the time of the murder? Yes.
Were you holding a knife over a body? Yes.
Did others see you holding the knife while standing over the body? Yes.
Therefore…. ________.

A theory (explanation) will be judged on the available facts many times…. Even though it could be completely misleading from the Truth in reality. Or that there are more facts being overlooked. Or facts that are not able to be gathered after an event already happened.

Even though the Evidence (facts) SUGGESTS something MIGHT be true… the totality of evidence could still be misleading or be an illusion of observation.

The truth is that you did not murder the person. But everyone plainly knows the facts and sees the available evidence. You can never change the Truth because the Truth IS. But facts can be misleading and bring you to the wrong conclusion… which you BELIEVE to be the truth.

Truth never changes. Truth is universal. Truth is absolute.
Some people say absolutes don’t exist. But I disagree. Those people might not be familiar with Geometry.
Perfection and absolutes exist in geometry. There is 360 degrees to a circle. That is an absolute Truth no matter of location, speed, gravity, etc. A circle is perfection. Anything different would not be a circle.

There are indeed absolute truths despite what people may FEEL or BELIEVE. But reality is not dictated by feelings, opinions or subjective observation. Truth is not subjective. Truth is not relative.

Your CONCLUSIONS might be different than other people’s conclusions… but your Truth is no different than ANYone else’s truth… Universally.
Facts change over time. Truth never changes.

If something is accurate, there will be more and more evidence to suggest so. While having less and less material to disprove that claim.
But “proof” is subjective.
What people mean to say by “proof” is that they are fully convinced there is no more evidence to possibly collect and no other explanations.
And some might “believe” that stance to be foolish.

Funny exchange at a Deepak Chopra event. Catching Deepak in failed logic. Man from the audience asks a question. “My question is for Deepak and the Bishop… Now you stated before that ‘all belief is a cover-up for insecurity.’ …. Do you believe that?”
Deepak answers, “Yes.”
The man nods with approval and says, “Thank you…” before walking away from the microphone. (while the audience roars with laughter.)

Belief vs Knowledge
Belief and Knowledge are 2 different things.
Belief is either put to rest or turned to knowledge.

If you remain stagnant in a belief… that becomes the basis for a cult.
If there is no available means to collect further information to attain evidence… to judge the facts and come to a definitive understanding… then you have no choice but to continue speculating (within the rules and mathematical consequences of the particular model you are using to filter a given hypothesis.)

As Nikola Tesla said, “The scientists from Franklin to Morse were clear thinkers and did not produce erroneous theories. Scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane. Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments and they wander through equation after equation until they build a structure which has no relation to reality.”

Science means “to know’, not “to believe.”

Remaining stagnant in belief and having faith without actively trying to determine a Truth is how cults ultimately form. Actively try and disprove a claim, hypothetical scenario or explanation. Science and experiments can never “prove” a (theory). Only disprove.

Knowledge is gained by learning how not to do something just as much as it is learning how to do things properly. Trial and error.
Being convinced a theory is proven is an error unto itself.
People who believe the THEORY of Relativity is “proven” have lost their way in science.
That is mind-trickery. Psyence… not Science.

Belief is ambiguous. Knowledge is absolute. Believe what you want, but know the Truth.

Credibility

Credibility and credentials refer to somebody paying for college classes. Each unit is called a credit.

You receive the certification for those credits once you have demonstrated you understand the material. When you have completed and paid for the credits… You earn credentials and become "credible."

But someone who doesn't pay for the classes/units/credits… And they work with their family or work in the real world demonstrating the same understanding… They are not credible. Yet they can be more experienced and have more knowledge than someone who has credentials and a PhD.

Usually… In order to deem somebody as having an understanding, collection of wisdom or knowledge in a given area… They go through that process of school and paying for it to earn credits… But intelligence and knowledge is not representative of a diploma or credentials.

Takes on-going conversations or a history of documented experience to determine if you have an understanding of a topic of field.

If someone has knowledge without credentials, It can take some time before properly assessing that person knows what they’re talking about. They will either have an archive of personal work to show or they can demonstrate an understanding through conversations.
After a certain time, it will be self-evident if someone is trustworthy.

Not everyone with credentials is intelligent or knowledgeable now adays. Many times, people earn credentials and still don’t know what they are talking about. While other people who never had credentials can display their prowess on demand.
The word credibility is now wholly associated with a consensus of trustworthiness in general… based on a given level of experience. (and at least the illusion of intelligence.)

But, as Richard Feynman said, “Never confuse education with intelligence. You can have a PhD and still be an idiot.”

Telepathy vs Audible Language - The Atrophy of Communication

Audible language with linear progression of speech atrophies the parts of the brain which develops what we call telepathy. Telepathy can be described as a broadcasting/transmission of a carrier wave other than an audible frequency that is interpreted by another brain which has developed to receive the same type of incoming signal.

That interpretation of those carriers might be nonlinear.
Or just a linear progression of visuals rather than a list of vocabulary played out as syllables to form a chain of sentences which is interpreted from the deciphering of language as a code.

Like rapidly flashing Memes and interpreting all of the data from the blocks of thoughts images and clips of scenes in motion. Conveying the very things you have seen and heard. But retransmitting those memories as a block of thought through a higher frequency carrier wave.

Which might be why monks around the world practice silence. To train the brain to receive as well as output. Thoughts are a transmission. Speaking to yourself in your head with an inner dialogue might not be the best thing in the long run. Speaking to yourself in your head does not transmit. Thinking harder or “screaming in your head” does not increase the chance of transmission.

Why use words in linear progression in your own mind when you can use entire memory to convey the meaning in one image or scene?
Either replaying in real time what you experienced to someone else… or a sped up summary.

Meditation might prove to be a tool in order to work that portion of the brain. Trying to get rid of all language and all inner dialogue. Practice on conveying those same thoughts through image only with no language. And practicing to block-out all vocabulary. All linear progression of human language.

If a society of people never establishes an audible form of communication… It will probably come down to body language, visual cues and having such a similar experience on a daily basis that a given action is understood because they were only a given set of logical outcomes for a given logical action.

So there is no bother with any language if you are performing a logical action for a given scenario that is known on a daily basis. But the absence of an audible form of language might mean the concept of humor also atrophies over time. It’s probably very boring and silent on an alien’s ship. Everyday work is understood and there is no need for verbal communication.
There is probably no joking or humor or context we would be able to have in common.

When we learn something new, we tend to laugh or chuckle from amazement. Mainly from an overflow of emotion in comparison to the lack of knowledge in relation to the new realization and amount of information just gleaned. The more information in a shorter period of time… Can result in a larger overflow of emotion. Which can be conveyed as laughter. But that might be a purely primitive linear minded process. Like a reflex.

So… If just one of any alleged alien abductions are true… And people are screaming while there is no emotion or audible response from the aliens… It might be because they don't speak at all. Questions and screaming and audible sounds might be viewed as an annoyance like a bird squawking or dog barking. They might not have vocal cords or they atrophied from lack of use.

It might be common and normal for humanoids to develop what we would consider as a “telepathic communication.” So it would be strange for some telepathic alien race to encounter a babbling and screaming human. What a loud and barbaric Earth people...

But your particular society has to shut up for a few generations in order to have those portions of the brain develop. Otherwise, the areas of the brain muscle which broadcast and receive might atrophy.
You either develop a different form of communicating with the brain while the vocal cords atrophy…. Or you develop the vocal cords through speech and the brain atrophies.

The compromise would be to practice sound and silence throughout the day. And to isolate yourself in an environment to practice such a lifestyle.
(Which will seem very boring to most people. Like a monk or monastic life)

To speak only when needed and listen to only what is needed. And observing without opinions. No music, no science fiction, no extraneous or nonsensical thoughts. Nothing unneeded. All while you also take the time throughout the day to meditate and get rid of your language and all inner dialogue for a bit. To evolve the human brain. With enough practice generation after generation… our off-spring will be able to advance that portion of their brains even further.

Through practice and experience with an equal amount of sound and silence. The brain might develop a third portion or enlarge when compared to previous generations.

The irony of having no language at all might be that everyone would "speak" the same language. Just using a more advanced carrier wave within a potential gradient of thought to convey information. Although vocal cords might atrophy over the generations, an advantage might be echolocation or a definitive “6th sense”, 7th sense, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th and more.

1 Sight 2 Sound 3 Smell 4 Taste 5 Touch
6 Echolocation 7 Ultrasonic receptors 8 Sensing Magnetic Fields 9 Sensing particular metals and chemicals in the surrounding media 9 Sensing diseases other than through smell etc.

You cannot expect to use your regular inner dialogue and linear language… And expect to send that sentence or paragraph to somebody else's mind in real-time. And then scream in your head trying to send the message to someone with their back turned hoping they’ll look from receiving the message. (Doesn’t work... I’ve tried. lol)
Neither does staring at a penny on a table and flexing your stomach or thinking hard trying to levitate the penny.
(Works in my dreams though)

I don't think that is a reasonable hypothetical scenario to assume your inner dialogue of linear language word for word can be sent to another person’s mind. (That can be done through advanced technology like hypersonic sound panels which serve the illusion of “a voice in your head”.)

Or even through bone conduction to bypass the cochlea of the ear altogether.)
But the human brain does not have those capabilities yet. We need technology and tools to aid with that.

Universal Communication and Bypassing Deafness
(This chapter is from my Facebook note posted 12/25/10)

Will have to briefly explain the concept of Dr. Patrick Flanagan's Neurophone.
The premise is like connecting an ipod or microphone to a muscle stimulator. Like the ones that do sit ups for you.

But instead of a regular signal that zaps the muscle, it would be a modulated frequency. Pretty much it would be the electric version of sound. You just bump up the octaves from our audible range to the frequency of electricity.
THEN zap the muscles at a low amperage through the same pads as the muscle stimulator or EKG tests.
Check out this "Solid State Tesla Coil" which modulates the sound into electricity.

The plasma arcing off the coil IS the speaker. Instead of hearing zzzzzaaappp zzzjjjjjj zzzzjjjj, you hear the music you modulate through the circuit before it gets to the coil, therefore the electricity coming off the coil will make the sound of the music.

(the fun starts at 1:45)

So modulate the frequency like that... then connect it to a muscle stimulator instead of a Tesla Coil or spark gap. Put the 2 EKG pads behind the ears (at the intersection of the Occipital, Prietal and Temporal bones in the skull)

The modulated vibration would send a small electric charge which the bones would conduct and the person would "hear" it loud and clear regardless if they were completely deaf or not.
It's pretty much accounting for the electric signal that the ears can't interpret, so it bypasses the ears and just vibrates everything. (You could technically put your hand on a plate and hear the message through your hand in your head from the bone conduction)

When you brush your teeth with an electric toothbrush you hear the pitch of the buzz in your head when it presses against your teeth. Same concept.

When you're at the barber and they buzz your head, you hear the vibration of the razor regardless if you have plugged ears or not because it vibrates your skull to that frequency.
So by sending a modulated electric signal through the device, you would be able to hear without any headphones or bypass deafness completely.

You could connect the device to a TV, radio, computer, or have a live mic and the person will be able to "hear" everything just like everyone else.
They could go to concerts, movie theaters, and hear everything as "normal", if the mic is good enough quality.

This is where the communication part comes in.
In addition, you can incorporate a real time language translator.
So imagine connecting that to your head and then when someone speaks to you in Chinese, you just hear it in English in your head. Or whatever your language of choice.

You could do it wirelessly too and eventually without needing the pads.
Dr. Flanagan's Neurophone was also known as a "telepathy machine".

(Apparently Dr. Patrick Flanagan came up with this idea back in 1958 as a 14 year old)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mz7-Nv8eypclpENjiyQcW4Z6jFdXTWpq/view?usp=sharing

Imagine taking this to the next level with the human brain directly. Real-Time matrix downloads... as “telepathic” communications. That’s where humanity is headed if we consciously focus and practice over the course of generations. Laying the foundation for society to teach those things, so when you re-incarnate, it’s common knowledge and easier to attain.

Dolphin Speak

It might be more reasonable to say that the advanced carrier could be unraveled in a given persons mind… Where the persons mind itself will translate the incoming block of thought and assign the meaning as linear vocabulary. Which will translate to a voice in their head. But no one is speaking to you word by word in a linear fashion in real time.
You receive a block of thought… And your brain unraveles it in the form of a voice in your head. Because that is what you are used to with your own inner dialogue. A voice in your head.
(like your conscience or replaying speech word for word)

But a picture speaks 1000 words as they say. And if you train your mind to receive visuals and speak in your own inner dialogue using pictures rather than words....

The brain can glean much more information from a picture and image and scene, more so than the time it takes for a measly sentence to unfold with an extremely limited meaning per sentence.

So if you train your mind to think in images rather than inner language dialogue… When you receive a block of thought from an advanced carrier… It will unfold as images in your mind rather than inner language dialogue.

But then your mind will have to further interpret the meaning of the images through the collection of your own experiences and context.
The telepathy is a byproduct of evolution over the course of multiple generations, resulting from a necessity to communicate without an audible carrier wave.

This is why I believe dolphins have such large brains. Because they developed an entirely different portion which grew a third hemisphere. Allowing them to communicate through a higher carrier like ultrasound with cymatic images embedded within the emission.

The symbols interpreted by dolphins which are emitted by dolphins can only represent the daily life of a dolphin in the sea. The average experiences and scenarios. The type of information interpreted from any given dolphin glyph will only be in the context of a dolphins everyday experience.

But if humans were able to develop the same cognitive transmission of dolphins… The type of information we would be able to send in such a short time through the representation of a symbol or glyph would extract a lot more information in a shorter time. Like a matrix download.

And maybe why alleged aliens might have larger heads.
"Speaking” in silence.

Linear progression of language and inner dialogue might produce linear firing of synapses with neuron branching in a particular manner.
But a non-linear form of carrier wave as a communication might result in a loop of synapses within the brain on a particular plane. Where the neurons form in bundles and an overall wreath/ halo shape rather than randomized dendritic branching.

As the synapses fire in a loop on 1 plane through the 2 alternating hemispheres… An alternating current between right and left hemisphere of the brain could possibly generate a third signal which transmits as a nonlinear carrier.
Or that an entirely different portion of the brain becomes activated out of necessity over generations of practice.

And the alternation of left and right hemispheres at a given rate might contribute to strengthening the muscles and portions of the brain to transmit and receive those advanced carriers. For a society of people who have developed that ability… The sacrifice might be an atrophy of the vocal cords from lack of communicating through an audible carrier.

The Language of Math
Math is a language. An equation is a grouping and derivation of symbols.

There are not many words needed to convey the meaning of an equation and proof of derivation to a given outcome. The symbols are representative of entire scenarios or variables. And through observation and experiments and experience in that field... a given equation with a consensus of meaning for symbols will provide the context.
It is known what a given equation means and describes.

There is even no need for vocabulary to convey an observation when you convey the observation itself through images... rather than your opinion or interpretation OF your observation. (a theory)

It is the language and explanations which distract from the progression of science in some cases. We all strive to understand what is going on. So we try to communicate through vocabulary and written language and oral speech. (The only means we’ve had before the internet of memes and ability to send clips).

If you were to convince someone of a given theory or model using only images of what is actually observed… How would you describe Relativity to an alien?
(Without using computer simulations)

What series of images would you show to give evidence for your stance?

If you were able to post images from your own memory of what you personally observed… What would you post as a convincing argument through your own eyes?

Try and put together a collage with related images to provide a convincing argument for your model. No vocabulary and language allowed. Speak only in math and images.

If you only used a series of images to convey a given argument… Someone babbling about fourth dimensions and curvatures of space would have a difficult time. Their diatribes would be viewed as an annoyance, not an explanation.

Explain using a series of images only. No language allowed.
Math is ok.
Satellite images are ok, but no captions. Just the images.
Observations are ok. like a screenshot or video of a camera linked to an optical telescope.

No moving computer CGI or computer animated graphics though.
Scientific Diagrams are ok but no words or captions.

Be aware that the same images can be interpreted many different ways.
But with no captions to influence you… How would you interpret the pure observations for yourself?

Relativity would not make much sense to anyone if you took away language.
The Truth is pure for all to see.
A circle has 360 degrees.
Light refracts ONLY at the boundary of a media, not in “the vacuum of space from gravity”

If you cannot display an understanding through a series of pure images... then it would be considered babbling gibberish and nonsensical noise. Just as the scientific community rightfully viewed Relativity for the first 20 years after Einstein introduced it in 1911.

The scientists at the time called Relativity the greatest hoax in the scientific community.
(and justifiably so...)

“The Theory of Relativity is a mass of errors and deceptive ideas violently opposed to the teachings of great men of science of the past and even to common sense. The theory wraps all these errors and fallacies and clothes them in magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king. Its exponents are very brilliant men, but they are meta-physicists rather than scientists. Not a single one of the relativity propositions has been proved.” – Nikola Tesla

The politics of the scientific community has led the world at large to adopt doublethink.
A process of indoctrination whereby the subject is expected to accept as true that which is clearly false, or to simultaneously accept two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in contravention to one's own memories or sense of reality.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink

Showing images that don’t represent reality and scenarios that have never been directly observed will not serve well as satisfactory explanations.

What evidence is there that we are looking back in time 1.25 light seconds when we observe the Moon?
What evidence is there that we are looking back in time 8.33 light minutes when we observe the Sun?
And what evidence is there that we are looking back in time 1 million years when we observe a star 1 million light years away?
What images would you show to support that stance when every observation is happening in Real-Time?