Mega Genius® Intelligence Briefing 
The entire physical universe is far more electronic in nature than modern science realizes. So is your own body, which operates not only by electronic flows within it, but by means of an exact and complex electronic structure, both inside and at a considerable distance outside it, which the medical profession has not yet discovered.
I’ve researched electronics for more than 40 years. As a child in grade school, I created my first mobile robot. Soon after, I built a short-wave “ham” amateur radio transmitter, from scratch. Then I constructed a Van de Graff electrostatic generator, more than six feet tall, that furiously unleashed lightning bolts in excess of one million volts. Although in high school I practically electrocuted a physics instructor, just to prove to him that he didn’t know as much as he thought he did, I did that intentionally. Later I was formally and extensively trained in classified electronics by the United States Government.
The world’s first workable incandescent lamp, which we know today as the light bulb, led to the extensive illumination of homes and cities around the world. Thomas Alva Edison invented it on what he called “Eureka Day,” in 1879. Although Edison intentionally broke his first workable light bulb to examine its filament, he later created a duplicate that he passed on to his daughter, Madelyn Edison Sloane. I purchased it in the early 1970s and keep it beside me in my study.
Edison believed that college did not teach people to think; and, conversely, the world originally considered that Edison was a “blue ribbon crackpot.” But the world was wrong. It subsequently came to know this visionary, who held well over 1,000 patents, as “The Wizard of Menlo Park” and “The Man of the Twentieth Century.”
It may surprise you to know that when Edison invented his light bulb, he neither understood Ohm’s Law — one of the basic laws of electricity — nor even wanted to. He believed that such knowledge would interfere with his research.
Edison understood another law of electricity, however, quite well. In layman’s terms, it was that two terminals of different electrical potential, or let’s say “charge,” and in close enough proximity will discharge from one to the other.
As I look at Edison’s earliest incandescent lamp, I see that it has two terminals. If enough electricity flows between them, as it passes through the filament it will light the bulb.
Every light bulb that you own today has two terminals, too. So do your radios, televisions, computers, food processors, ranges, refrigerators, automobiles and everything else electrical. Some electrical devices have a third terminal, called a ground, which eliminates stray electricity, but all have at least two. Just look at the terminals on any battery or count the prongs on any common electrical plug.
Electricity, also known as current, or charge, or “juice,” flows from one terminal of a battery to the other, in one direction only, and we know it as “direct current,” or “DC.” The juice will flow as long as the charge between the two terminals of a battery is unequal. As soon as the juice between the two sides is equal, or balanced, the flow stops and the battery is dead.
The company that feeds electricity into your home changes the direction of the juice’s flow 60 times per second (50 in Europe), keeping the flow continually unbalanced between all the various sets of terminals of your light bulbs and appliances. We know this form of electricity as “alternating current,” or “AC.”
If something goes wrong at the electric company, the flow to your home can stop. Then the juice to every terminal in your home falls equally to zero. There is no longer an imbalance between any of the sets of terminals and everything stops. All your lights cease to function and your appliances fail, just as if a battery went dead.
Anytime two oppositely charged terminals are in close enough proximity, or the electrical charge is great enough, a discharge will occur. If, for example, you ran a wire from the positive terminal to the negative terminal on a charged automobile battery, thereby eliminating the separateness of terminals, you would immediately see and hear the discharge in the form of a dangerous electrical explosion. The terminals “shorted out.” We have all seen the discharge of a sufficiently charged cloud and an oppositely charged Earth, in close proximity, in the form of lightning.
It is imperative that we hold terminals apart to prevent a sudden discharge from occurring. As long as we maintain sufficient space between the terminals, they will not short out and we can manipulate the unequal charge for various beneficial purposes.
We can use such energy for many purposes other than the illumination of a light bulb. For instance, we can use it to run a motor. You probably have never thought about it, but gravity and centrifugal force maintain the space between the terminals of the Sun and the Earth, thereby preventing them from shorting out. The space then allows electromagnetic energy, sunlight, and other forms of energy to flow in an acceptable manner from the Sun to the Earth.
Gravity and centrifugal force also maintain the spaces between the more than 100 billion stars of our Milky Way Galaxy. And those same forces maintain the spaces between the more than 200 billion other galaxies in the universe. When you perceive the big picture, our almost infinitely large physical universe is basically a multi-terminal DC motor.
Now let’s look at this further, for the law upon which Edison relied is more basic than even he realized. Any two terminals of different potential and in sufficiently close proximity will discharge. The terminals do not have to be considered electrical.
For instance, let’s consider two identical automobiles on level ground to be a set of terminals. If we siphon gasoline from one car to the other, it will flow through the connecting tube only as long as there is an imbalance in the amount of fuel between the two cars. As soon as each gas tank holds an equal amount, they will be balanced and the flow will stop.
One could think of thousands of similar examples, from the locks of a canal, to the inflation of a rubber raft, to the milking of a cow. In each instance there is an imbalance, or unequalization, or “disagreement” that results in the flow only until an agreement between the two terminals is reached.
One could quite accurately say that any flow, electrical or otherwise, is essentially a disagreement. Whenever a flow continues long enough in one direction only, sooner or later a balance will be reached and the disagreement will be replaced with agreement.
The basic law of electricity that Edison knew applies even to you, in many ways, and to your relationships with others. Any argument is a disagreement. The opponents are terminals, between which juice, or charge, flows back and forth, rapidly changing direction, like alternating current.
It could be a relatively small disagreement, as in the case of death row inmate Thomas J. Grasso, who was distressed with his final meal. His last flow of words prior to his execution, on March 20, 1995, in Oklahoma, were, “I did not get my Spaghetti-Os. I got spaghetti. I want the press to know this.” Or it could be a major disagreement, as it was a few seconds later when the state of Oklahoma responded to Mr. Grasso with a gut-wrenching flow of its own. Or it could even be a much more encompassing disagreement, as in a war between countries or planets.
The basic law, however, applies to all disagreements: Any two terminals of different potential and in sufficiently close proximity will discharge .
When you argue with another, between you and the other terminal there is a lack of balance. There is an unequalization. Rather than agreement, there is disagreement, resulting in the flow of a glare, followed by the flow of words, and more forceful words, and, if the argument is not alleviated, perhaps even the flow of solid objects. Just position two terminals in close enough proximity and with significantly different opinions. Then watch the sparks fly!
There are various techniques you can use to attempt to win any argument. Unfortunately, all but one are unworkable, because they violate the law.
The least workable technique, and unfortunately the one most commonly used, is for each terminal to continue discharging against the other, like alternating current. The flow of disagreement continues and feelings get hurt, similar to an electrical burn.
Another uncivil technique is to attempt to weaken the other terminal by belittling or invalidating the person with comments, such as, “You’re stupid!” or “You don’t know what you’re talking about,” or “Who cares what you think?” or “So what?”
That’s similar to trying to rub dirt onto a terminal of a battery. You may be able to stifle the flow if the terminal is small and weak, but the electrical disagreement in the battery remains. In the case of people, you may be able to suppress the other person’s verbalization, if the opposing terminal is weak and unable to hold a position, but the disagreement—just like the electrical charge in the battery—remains. Every bit of the disagreement is still there; it just isn’t being discharged, or displayed, at the moment.
Another disadvantage of this technique is that the reason your opposing terminal may stop arguing with you is not because you have succeeded in winning the argument. Believe me, you haven’t. Perhaps the most difficult thing to find in this universe is someone who really thinks he lost an argument. Rather, if he stops communicating it is only because he feels that your ability to understand is non-existent. One will not keep talking to another person who appears to not understand.
Furthermore, people who don’t understand are considered to be not very bright, which is the impression your opposing terminal will be left with. And convincing an opponent that you are a dim bulb is not the way to win any argument.
Besides, if you are not going to be a terminal that appears willing to receive your opponent’s charge, why not save time and verbal energy by just walking away?
Now let’s look at that technique, which is for one person to simply walk away, or for someone to separate the two terminals, a favorite method of parents and school teachers. Any two terminals separated by enough space will stop discharging, but the disagreement remains. The trouble with walking away is that, again, it tends to be perceived by the other person as an attempt to ridicule them, as if one said, “Who cares what you think?” or “You aren’t worth my time.” Neither is this method courteous nor civil.
Your opponent won’t think less of himself. Rather, he will conclude that by walking away you have given up, don’t understand, and, again, are a dim bulb. And that’s not winning.
The technique that actually works, thoroughly and in the long run, is the one that adheres to the electrical law that Edison knew.
To win any argument you merely have to equalize the juice between the two terminals, which you do by receiving and understanding the other person’s viewpoint completely.
One doesn’t accomplish that by shouting, belittling, or walking away, but by listening and understanding the words your opposing terminal is flowing to you. Subsequently, you may need to ask a few questions, in a civil manner, to receive answers that will help you understand his opinion even better. The technique, however, is to listen carefully, honestly, and thoroughly, until you have completely understood his viewpoint, without arguing or otherwise discharging toward him at all in the interim. Remember, two terminals cannot effectively flow in opposite directions at the same instant.
When and only when you have understood his viewpoint thoroughly and completely, you will probably also understand why he has that exact viewpoint and you can then address it effectively. Let him know you actually understand. Now that he has at last discharged completely, and you have acknowledged that you have received and understood his flow, he is finally willing and able to receive a civil flow of reasoning from you.
Look at it this way. Two terminals are unsuccessfully attempting to discharge flows against each other. One terminal stops discharging and willingly receives the other terminal’s flow. Soon the flow changes from an unequalization to an equalization, from an imbalance to a balance, from a disagreement to an agreement. Now you have agreement. Got it? It’s basic electronics and a fundamental law of the universe.
The next time you find yourself entering an argument, use the technique that works, by following what I have said, exactly. It works for any disagreement, from a battery, to an argument … even to countries and planets at war. The only time it doesn’t work is when it’s not applied. Rather than knocking heads against the physical universe, it’s so much easier to use one of its basic laws to your advantage.
Thomas Edison used this same law of the universe to illuminate the entire world. Why not intelligently use it to enlighten your own life?
5 December 2001
Copyright © 2001 – 2011, Mega Genius®. All rights reserved.