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.

 

I AM ready for ascension. Are you?

page: 17
17
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by 12.21.12
Oh really? en.wikipedia.org...


Really.


When a reference is used to four-dimensional coordinates, it is likely that what is referred to is the three spatial dimensions plus a time-line. In this case the space is sometimes called Poincaré space or Minkowski space or (3 + 1)-space.[1]If 4 (or more) spatial dimensions are referred to, this should be stated at the outset, to avoid confusion with the more common notion that time is the Einsteinian fourth dimension.


Do you even read what you quote? You don't. You don't really know anything about physics, math, basic algebra or graphing, I'd bet not a thing about computer sciences or graphic arts either? You rely on quotes that you don't even take the time to read and understand. Allow me to explicate: 3 spatial dimensions plus a "time line". We can call this time line the "W" axis for means of simplicity. The 3 dimensions rotate on this axis to show movement and thus "time". This "w" axis in itself is 3 dimensionsl space as well and if you were standing on the x,y, and z axi while they rotated with nothing to reference location, it would appear to you as if the W axis was rotating on the x,y,z! It's all realtive.


Really Now? en.wikipedia.org...






In physics and mathematics, a sequence of N numbers can be understood to represent a location in an N-dimensional space. When N=5, one of these numbers is sometimes colloquially called the fifth dimension. This usage may occur in casual discussions about the fourth dimension. Abstract five-dimensional space occurs frequently in mathematics, and is a perfectly legitimate construct. Whether or not the real universe in which we live is somehow five-dimensional is a topic that is debated and explored in several branches of physics, including astrophysics and particle physics.


Comprehending this word might help.

col·lo·qui·al:
1.) Characteristic of or appropriate to the spoken language or to writing that seeks the effect of speech; informal.
2.) Relating to conversation; conversational.

These are mathematical concepts that have no baring on reality. The same goes for 2 dimensional and one dimensional objects. They don't exist, they are delusional mathematical concepts. It takes 3 dimensions to create these 1 and 2 dimensional ideas, along with 3 a dimensional piece of paper, and 3 dimensional ink or pencil (graphite), etc.


So you are smarter than Einstein are you? What are your credentials?


Need I say more? Will you actually repond to the next post yourself or are you gonna go running off to wikipedia quoting texts of definitions and subjects that you don't understand that supports the side of your opponent and use them as your argument?

I hope you don't consider yourself "ready for ascension". Your ego is much too big. You're just here to argue, so much so that you don't even take the time to learn.

[edit on 9-6-2008 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]




posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 12:55 AM
link   
[edit on 9-6-2008 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 01:49 AM
link   
reply to post by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
 


Then you should know that without a timeline, what happens? Nothing. Sereiously don't think to hard there, I would hate to see you pop a blood vessel.

So since you are an expert in physics and computer animation, why don't you explain to us what a gravity field is? What is light?

Wht don't you explain time to us while you are at it? What is the function of a timeline? A Keyframe? Vector Images? Whats a nurb?

Oh and since standard copy+paste definitions are no good for you, please describe in your own words please, no cheating!



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 02:01 AM
link   
reply to post by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
 





3 spatial dimensions plus a "time line". We can call this time line the "W" axis for means of simplicity. The 3 dimensions rotate on this axis to show movement and thus "time". This "w" axis in itself is 3 dimensionsl space as well and if you were standing on the x,y, and z axi while they rotated with nothing to reference location, it would appear to you as if the W axis was rotating on the x,y,z! It's all realtive.


Width+Depth+Height+Time=4 Pretty basic math there, I don't understand what is so hard to grasp here. They only rotate on an axis if it needs to rotate on a tilt, it could move linearly also, but without time this is not possible. Furthermore it doesn't (whatever it is you are speaking of) need to rotate on an axis unless there is a tilt, when an object rotates, the point of which it rotates is called an anchor point.

Again x+y+z + time =4

[edit on 9-6-2008 by 12.21.12]



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
 


Furthermore, this little quote you copied and pasted contradicts everything you just said.




When a reference is used to four-dimensional coordinates, it is likely that what is referred to is the three spatial dimensions plus a time-line. In this case the space is sometimes called Poincaré space or Minkowski space or (3 + 1)-space.[1]If 4 (or more) spatial dimensions are referred to, this should be stated at the outset, to avoid confusion with the more common notion that time is the Einsteinian fourth dimension.


Need I say more?



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by 12.21.12
Then you should know that without a timeline, what happens? Nothing. Sereiously don't think to hard there, I would hate to see you pop a blood vessel.


Here you go again, you are having trouble reading and understanding what I'm posting.

"Allow me to explicate: 3 spatial dimensions plus a "time line". We can call this time line the "W" axis for means of simplicity. The 3 dimensions rotate on this axis to show movement and thus "time". This "w" axis in itself is 3 dimensionsl space as well and if you were standing on the x,y, and z axi while they rotated with nothing to reference location, it would appear to you as if the W axis was rotating on the x,y,z! It's all relative. "

(Btw, that was one of the weakest insults I've seen in a while, if you knew anything about anatomy you'd know that thinking too hard wouldn't pop a blood vessel. At least get it right if you're going to make an attempt, though I'll let you know that they [insults] will NEVER effect me emotionally in anyway if that is your goal.)


So since you are an expert in physics and computer animation, why don't you explain to us what a gravity field is? What is light?


I am currently working on explaining and figuring out gravity and what causes it. There are a multitude of "lights". There is visible light to us which is seen at around 400-700 nm of wavelength, then there is electromagnetic light, ultraviolet, etc.


Why don't you explain time to us while you are at it?


I already have, more than once. You must not be reading it or not caring to because you're afradi that you might be "wrong"? Someone ready for ascension surely would be able to consider another idea compared to their own to see how it stands up to the reality of the physical universe.


What is the function of a timeline? A Keyframe? Vector Images? Whats a nurb?



time line
–noun 1. a linear representation of important events in the order in which they occurred.
2. a schedule; timetable.

key frame graphics
A frame in an animated sequence of frames which was drawn or otherwise constructed directly by the user rather than generated automatically

Vector graphics/images: is the use of geometrical primitives such as points, lines, curves, and shapes or polygon(s), which are all based upon mathematical equations, to represent images in computer graphics.

Non-uniform rational B-spline -(NURBS)- is a mathematical model commonly used in computer graphics for generating and representing curves and surfaces.


Courtesy of dictionary.com and wikipedia.com.


Oh and since standard copy+paste definitions are no good for you, please describe in your own words please, no cheating!


What is cheating?
See the difference here is that I never said that copy+paste is no good, obviously you're angry that you have less knowledge in this field and now you're just twisting the text to project your own feelings. I clearly said that BEFORE you copy and paste something as your argument, at least UNDERSTAND it. (Because you didn't)

If you don't have the self restraint to allow for the capacity and acuity to learn and cordially converse then how can you be ready to ascend to anything, anywhere?



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 02:10 AM
link   
reply to post by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
 


I refuse to argue with somebody that is not capable of critical thinking. All you did was a google search and copied and pasted your answer after I asked you to explain in your own words. Consider yourself ignored.



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by 12.21.12
Width+Depth+Height+Time=4 Pretty basic math there, I don't understand what is so hard to grasp here.


You are creating 4 components, yes. THAT is not difficult to divulge. However, you continuously miss the point that time is a 3 dimensional construct.


They only rotate on an axis if it needs to rotate on a tilt, it could move linearly also, but without time this is not possible.


Everything in the universe rotates either on or about an axis or central point(s) and positions, there is no such thing as linear movement without rotation about an axis or orbit about and caused by an originator or point(s). For example, the moon orbits the Earth using the earth as its orbitational axis while the Earth orbits the sun and rotates on its own axis. The sun orbits the center of the galaxy, the center of the galaxy rotates on its own axis.


Furthermore it doesn't (whatever it is you are speaking of) need to rotate on an axis unless there is a tilt, when an object rotates, the point of which it rotates is called an anchor point.

Again x+y+z


Again, time is a 3 dimensional unit of measurement and a 3 dimenional entity of itself, constructed from 3 dimensional space. Energy is converted, transmutated and omnimorphous. If you were to mesaure time you'd find out that it is 3 dimensional. Try it. Time+Space=3 dimensions. Fundamental physics as stated by Einstein, you like him, right? Time+Space= one and the same. Time is the measurement of the movement of space, and space is the measuremeent of the movement of time.

There is an eternal now, it is in persistent change. The past and the future are linearly immeasurable. There was no beginning and will be no ending to energy. You were born and you will die, but the energy that makes you up is eternal; neither created or destroyed.



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 02:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by 12.21.12

Furthermore, this little quote you copied and pasted contradicts everything you just said.


That is actually your quote that YOU copied and pasted and I replied to. DUHHHH.


Need I say more?


Please don't. Save me the agony of your ignorance. I've throughly described this more than 5 times throughout this thread.



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 02:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by 12.21.12
I refuse to argue with somebody that is not capable of critical thinking. All you did was a google search and copied and pasted your answer after I asked you to explain in your own words. Consider yourself ignored.


I can do whatever that I want to do. The point being made is that what YOU copied and pasted you DIDN'T and still DON'T understand.

I purposely copied and pasted to prove the point. You asked for definitions. I fetched direct definitions and didn't use them for an argument.

You on the other hand assimilated your definitions from wiki, copied and pasted them and used them as an argument against the point that I was making when in fact all they did was support what I was saying.

You sir, lack critical thought. You're also a hypocrite. Don't throw stones if you live in a glass house.

Everywhere I go there is someone trying to manipulate someone else into having faith in the invisible.



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 02:47 AM
link   
reply to post by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
 


The terminology used in this thread may be faulty due to new terms being needed here. Right now all that is available to us is "dimensions", "frequencies", "levels", "vibrations". If you are so totally obsessed with proper terminology when the additional descriptions draw an understandable picture, well...... have you seen the movie "As Good As It Gets?" Think about that.

STM



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 02:57 AM
link   
reply to post by seentoomuch
 


All I'm saying is to research and understand what you are spreading, because you may just be spreading lies, nothing at all, ignorance, and/or cult similar teachings.

We exist in and of a UNIVERSE. Acclimate yourself with it and see how you and your beliefs relate.

And regardless of terminology here. There's never been a such thing as the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd dimension of ascension proven! How can you go throwing around terms now like "4th dimension and 5th dimension" of ascension. You can't! It's bull. It's made up.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN? NOTHING... all it is is a nice teddy bear to go to sleep with. It is not true whatsoever. If you need a teddy bear to sleep with then you're weak and you don't deserve the truth, lies will fill you up because you're going to sacrifice the truth for emotional comfort on an impulse buy.



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 03:03 AM
link   
reply to post by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
 


I thought that ALL physics courses taught you to extend your thoughts, though with equations which utilizes one side of the brain. What we are describing here is from the other side. Did you lock all the locks tonight?

STM

[edit on 6/9/2008 by seentoomuch]



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 03:04 AM
link   
reply to post by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
 


I don't know who appointed you the ALL KNOWING JUDGE of ATS but seems that you already have a thread about it here www.abovetopsecret.com... Why don't you leave it there and stop taking away from the topic at that you obviously don't believe in anyways.



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 03:20 AM
link   
May I suggest this?

Would you consider starting a thread concerning the terminology used in subjects such as this one? Perhaps you'll coin a new term or two that would help us define the "finer" points of our descriptions,

Just a suggestion 'cause I'd really like to see this thread back on track and I am seeing this same terminology argument all over the board, it would be a big help to all of us.


And a note: I saw some really nice thoughts posted in your thread.


STM

[edit on 6/9/2008 by seentoomuch]



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 03:29 AM
link   
reply to post by seentoomuch
 


Well believe it or not this was actually discussed earlier today, this thread has really had a positive impact on most people, I really like this thread also.

What I would suggest is that since we have already discussed the terminology of dimensions whether people agree how they should be termed or not, derogitory comments (about terminology) should be ignored or considered off topic.

Also I can only imagine that people are going to have more than a few words after they log back in and see the all the bickering that has been going on, I would ask them to please just ignore it and not respond to the negativity so that this thread can get back on topic.



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by seentoomuch
 


Anyways thats a good idea, I would consider that, but probably not tonight and thank you! Also sorry for adding flames to the fire everyone!

Perhaps if we do start a new thread we should state in the OP that this is not a thread about conspiracy, so there is nothing to debunk!

[edit on 9-6-2008 by 12.21.12]



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 04:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by seentoomuch
I thought that ALL physics courses taught you to extend your thoughts, though with equations which utilizes one side of the brain. What we are describing here is from the other side. Did you lock all the locks tonight?


Well, anything really causes you to extend your thoughts in some way or another. I suppose you mean to have an open mind. Yes, but not to be devoid of sound logic.

I have no idea what you're talking about with the rest of your reply, forgive me. Perhaps you could explain it to more extense.



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 04:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by 12.21.12
I don't know who appointed you the ALL KNOWING JUDGE of ATS but seems that you already have a thread about it here www.abovetopsecret.com...


What exactly does this mean? The all knowing judge of ATS? Is that how you feel about me? Is that how I make you feel? Okay...

Asking questions and applying knowledge, science and logic.

As far as I know no one has appointed me the all knowing judge of ATS, I'm just a member like the rest of you, attempting to sift through the lies and get to the truth.


Why don't you leave it there and stop taking away from the topic at that you obviously don't believe in anyways.


If I am taking away then hit the alert button and call a mod. They're really the closest thing to all knowing judgers of ATS when it comes down to it.

I thought that since the O.P. and various other members have been talking about ascending to a 4th and 5th dimension that I'd fill them in on exactly what dimensions are concerning science. Now I understand that dimension of thought could simply mean a different field of thought, such as one from hate to evil. That could be considered as changing your dimension of thought, though used very loosely.

Now, before you try and convince without any evidence except your own anger and ignorance of subjects, name calling etc. Could you please explain to me when and where we ascended trough dimensions one through three to be getting to the fourth and fifth? What are the first 3 dimensions? Who made them up? Where do they come from?

I have a feeling that you won't be able to explain any of this, or if you do that it will be scant and riddled with illogicalities. Please make me look stupid and prove me wrong. Show me the dimensions that you speak of through something other than "you have to believe it", "just have faith", and "don't attempt to debunk it because it's not a conspiracy".


Well sir, a case with no evidence is certainly a conspiracy.


Conspiracy:
an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.


This is a conspiracy against science and a conspiracy against love and truth, that is if you say you are pushing forth love.

If love is the truth then let's be honest with ourselves and stop lying. This definitely is modeled to fit the bubble of conspiracy.

There are multiple people now telling us that they are ready for an ascension that no one can prove exists. The last thing that I personally want to see is another mindless religion creating another 2,000+ years of robitcal faith drones fighting each other over their own ignorance of who and what they are and where they are.

[edit on 9-6-2008 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 04:34 AM
link   
The lock reference was from the movie I referenced above. And more importantly, I hope you do consider working out a new terminology that fits what many people are experiencing; it's real and it's happening but we don't have labels for it and are having to borrow them from here and from there. It would be greatly appreciated, am getting sleepy, will read your response tomorrow,

Best regards,

STM



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join