posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 03:49 PM
originally posted by: Djenesis
People need to please stop attacking this thread because you personally don't believe in the theory. This is about a new take on the
Apologies, i'm not trying to attack the thread, i'm critiquing the theory itself.. it is not scientific, and the "new take" is simply a recalculation
using a modified mathematical function of "timewave zero" from a different "point". you can use the timewave zero function with any hypothetical end
date and find historical events to support the "timewave". that is not scientific. the sequence you use to perform the function dictates the shape of
the wave, and these sequences are arbitrarily chosen also, (being a numerical pattern of the I Ching, an oracular tool based on Chinese philosophy and
associated with magic).
Why is not the function applied to fit the actual
major “events” in the universe or on Earth into their numbers? Why is not the Big Bang
included, the formation of the Earth, the Cambrian explosion of life forms, the first terrestrial tetrapods, the first mammals, the extinction of
dinosaurs, early hominids, emergence of Paleolithic art, agriculture, urbanization, industrialization, etc.? Some timewave zeroers may include one of
these “events” but will exclude others since they may not fit their formula, most ignore them altogether like the author of the article linked in
To create a fractal timewave you have to first assume that the universe and spacetime is a fractal,
which it isn't
. then you have to construct a number from the
arbitrarily chosen King Wen sequence, then perform a "fractal transform" of those numbers..
it's numerology, on par with astrology. all the power to you if you would like to believe in it, but without scientific method it's not a theory, it
is simply an unfalsifiable hypothesis.
edit on 29-10-2015 by spygeek because: (no reason given)