It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So, what is your particular 'Theory of Everything'?

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 05:53 AM
link   
4 Power Theory

1, 2, 3, 4

The numbers, 1, 2, 3 and 4 are not the ordinary numbers that you know of--- in the human stupidity sense, but in fact, they are symbolic of something much more important. You may think of the number 1 as 1 apple, and the number 2 as 2 apples, and so forth. In this thread I will provide guidance as to what these numbers mean...

To begin I will explain using wisdom of the tongue, and second I will use science and philosophy; and to end I will use imagination and knowledge:


The Wit

If you are a good human:

•What is your number 1?

•What is your number 2?

•What is your number 3?

•What is your number 4?

I would answer to 1, my unborn baby.

I would answer to 2, the self.

I would answer to 3, nature.

I would answer to 4, the central nerve.


The Science and Philosophy

1 is the first point of existence, to any modern academic pseudo-scientist, it's a point, however, the truth of the matter is that it's not a point, it's a baby, to be born.

2 is the second point of existence, to any modern academic pseudo-scientist, it's points, however, the truth of the matter is that it's not points, it's the self of which 1 becomes after birth [ i.e.. the universe ].

3 is the third point of existence, to any modern academic pseudo-scientist, it's points, however, the truth of the matter is that it's not points; it's the nature of which is a heaven and hell to 2, a reflection as such, but also an abstraction; [ i.e.. male + female, male - female and vice versa ].

4 is the forth point of existence, to any modern academic pseudo-scientist, it's points, however, the truth of the matter is that it's not points; it's the central nerve of which sustains 3, and 2; but not 1, for 1 is sustained by 2. [ i.e.. consciousness, the ineffable, the unreal, and more ].


The Imagination and Knowledge

1 can be imagined as a dimension wherein all past, present and future man-made creations are already created. 1 knows every possibility and probability. In our dreams and nightmares, raw probability is on our side or against us; this is our connection to this dimension through the central nerve.

2 can be imagined as the chosen 1; that which is to repent unoriginally and help or hinder the creation of originality. It can be imagined as the collective universe as 1, but as in a point, as the academic pseudo-scientists say.

3 can be imagined as reflection of everything on the planets and stars, but in an abstracted dimension---inter alia, trees, animals, stars, water, seas, fire, lava, blood.

4 can be imagined as a central nerve of which controls a body; consciousness.

1, 2, 3 and 4 can be imagined how you like, but these are from an expert.


satans-sphinx.tumblr.com...

​Can you spot 1, 2, 3 and 4 in this picture?

If you had to apply 1, 2, 3 and 4, following the logic that I proposed prior, to each of the questions below ( and I mean literally the numbers 1, 2, 3 and 4, and not yes or no answers ), ​which would you put to each of the questions and why?

If you can't, not only will you go to hell upon death, for, you help to, inter alia, murder future generations, destroy the planet, promote animal cruelty; you are worse than a, inter alia, paedophile, baby murderer, child abuser, skin colour hater!

•Does the picture come without the frame?

•Does the picture come without the backdrop?

•Does the picture come without the selves?

•Does the picture come without the logical meaning?​​​

Riddle me this:




posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 06:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: skunkape23

Who are you going to complain to when he welshes on the deal?


Shouldn't be too hard to find a decent lawyer in hell.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: pfishy

i am pretty sure, that it is not the floor, that i am sitting on, and this "thing" that i use to type these words, is not a computer,
it is all Yog Sothoth, the key and the gate, and we humans, are some sort of parasitic extensions of the one and the only,
YOG SOTHOTH.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Energy. Everything is born of it, everything returns to it. Everything is powered by it. It is every where. All the time.



a reply to: pfishy



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: pfishy

Had to think of T.C. instantly as I saw your thread.
You might like his ToE as well:



My personal ToE is something similar to the M-Theory. There are things, that can travel between the "sheets" of dimensions (souls f. ex.) and we're even capable of creating reality according to our will, at least to some extent. That's the point where believe-systems come into the equasion, which dictate the framework of possibilities.
I can't overcome the concept of gravity to fly for a while as my mind is not convinced, thus I don't believe in actually lifting off... yet.


edit on 7-10-2015 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-10-2015 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-10-2015 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: DarkGameGod
The theory of everything wouldn't be something so easy that you could sit on your ass all day saying "I know everything now"; it would be something difficult and eternal, like a puzzle. Academia has brainwashed you though, you're a fiend for the edu-view on things---rather than using your own consciousness, you believe in every man-made rule against it.

The truth of the matter is, your theory is correct, it's just not a theory designed for a 'human', or any other self-sustainable creature.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: pfishy

I believe in a governing force. That's all I know.

In one hand you have the comfortable constant that is relativity, and in the other you have the chaos that is quantum mechanics.

There has to be something that unites the forces, hopefully in our lifetime we will have the answer.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: pfishy
I don't have a "Theory of everything", but I think Richard Feynman outlined a good approach to learning more about nature, from 1:45 to 2:51 in this video:



If you expected science to give answers to all the wonderful questions about what we are, where we are going, what the meaning of the universe is and so on, then I think you could easily become disillusioned and look for some mystic answers to these problems. How a scientist can take a mystic answer I don't know, because the whole spirit of ... well never mind that... I don't understand it, but anyhow ... if you think of it though ... the way I think of what we are doing is we are exploring, we are trying to find out as much as we can about the world. People say "are you looking for the ultimate laws of physics?" ... No, I'm not. I'm just looking to find out more about the world. And if it turns out that there is a simple ultimate law that explains everything, so be it. That would be very nice and ... but if it turns out it's like an onion with millions of layers and we are just sick and tired of looking at the layers, then that's the way it is.

But whatever way it comes out, it's nature it's there and she is going to come out the way she is. And therefore when we go to investigate it, we should not pre-decide what it is we are trying to do except find out more about it.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

That's what the quote implies, that plants created animals to spread their seeds around...



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:44 PM
link   
a reply to: pfishy

There's a universe enclosed within us and we are enclosed within a universe, and on and on....



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

As above, so below?



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:51 PM
link   
This is merely wit [i.e. wisdom of the tongue] and sleight of hand. We are insignificant when it comes to discovering a theory of everything if this is our method. We need raw wisdom, raw stimulus to our minds. The theory of 4 is the only truth, through it we understand consciousness - through division of four we can understand almost anything.

This won't make sense to you, yet, but soon it will. Believe that.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Reflections and opposites. The power of opposites or opposing forces creates movement. Reflection(s) transfer information. Life starts with movement. It happens within us and around us. As above, so below.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

Look into some of the Hermetic stuff if you want an interesting read sometime.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: lostbook

Look into some of the Hermetic stuff if you want an interesting read sometime.


Hermetic?



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Except that plants didn't invent animals. Plants adapted to make use of animals that were already around.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Does anyone know the answer to this question?
If I were standing on a proton relative to the size of me a on earth, if I looked up what would I see?
If I had answer for that I could have a better theory.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 03:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: gflyg
Does anyone know the answer to this question?
If I were standing on a proton relative to the size of me a on earth, if I looked up what would I see?
If I had answer for that I could have a better theory.
You couldn't really "see" anything because the wavelengths of visible light are too large to bring any detail to something that small, which is why we have to use electron microscopes to see really small stuff. But if you could see, you'd see lots of space. The nucleus of an atom is surrounded by lots of space.

If the nucleus was the size of a marble the next nucleus would be about two football fields away so I'm not sure you could see it without binoculars. You probably couldn't see the electrons, as they have very little matter or size, relative to the proton, and there are quantum mechanical issues with being able to see them.

What Would a Supersized Atom Look Like?

if the nucleus was expanded to the size of a marble, the outer edge of the atom would be nearly a football field away.


edit on 2015107 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 05:01 PM
link   
I would say that every opinion in this thread is true in a sense (even Skunkape's homage to JR "Bob" Dobbs and the Church of the Subgenius... a "joke" religion that's so meta it surpasses jokes and becomes pious)... and that's quite weird.

I am struck, every day, with the sheer weirdness that anything exists... at all. Really... wow.

That a point of consciousness can contemplate itself and it's environment is weirdness on another level altogether... so nothing would surprise me at this point of my own information assimilation.

Weeeeeeeee!



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: pfishy

From The ONE Came 2.3.4,,,,,Infinity .



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join