Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Secret of the Universe - The Ultimate Solution (A Must see!)

page: 3
37
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 9 2008 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Look, I see your point...I even found your thread about time travel interresting. I am not opposed to theoretical views in any manner. But that was not my intent with my original question, which through all non-pertaining responses, has yet to be answered.

I know the answers are there for the meaning of the universe, through the universe...I follow. But this problem is not theoretical in any manner...it did not turn into a theoretical problem until I asked my question. My question pertained to the "tangable" equations that are being worked with...not the theoretical ones that were not even discussed or referenced in the video. Metaphysics has absolutely nothing to do with the solution, or the question I presented. I can just as easily take the information, add varying views to it, some more complex math to confuse others, and outcome a more complex answer that I have pulled from my @$$ and explain it as just being there. That is my point.




posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 01:05 AM
link   
What makes you so sure metaphyics is not the answer or at least part of the answer?



posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 01:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Epsillion70
 

I agree ..

In the beginning was thought, and thought was with god , and thought was god ...?

Oh wait that is 'word' ... But, what is a 'word' if it is not 'verbal thought' ... ?



posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Epsillion70
 

I agree ..

In the beginning was thought, and thought was with god , and thought was god ...?

Oh wait that is 'word' ... But, what is a 'word' if it is not 'verbal thought' ... ?



posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 01:56 AM
link   
Because, the equations have no theoretical application to them...they deal with tangable problems...this is NOT metaphysics in any manner. The falicy in your assumption is due to your misunderstanding the premise of your initial response that pertained no where near a definative solution..or a plausable one for that matter. Metaphysical application might be useful if any portion of the original video dealt with it, but the underlying theory was not metaphysical by any means. Likewise, NOT even mentioned until a challenge of who's @$$ the equations were retreived from. Since you seem to run on a quandary of solutions to something otherwise explainable by cognitive thinking, I will assume the reasoning behind this being moved to this forum was not because there is insufficient evidience to support such a "remarkable find", but how many bullet holes it has in it...as well as the shoddy solutions.



posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 12:03 PM
link   
I've watched this 3 times now and written everything out. I have to say that the first bit with the ADM - is the only part that doesn't "ring" true with me - but the rest - Very Clever. (it's a little unfortunate that the ADM is in the very beginning, could you mention it later with the 144 stuff perhaps and get right to the hidden prime sum sequences?)

Anyway, in my humble opinion there is no "hiding" as much as there is "coding". Hard to say that the pyramids or painted halls or government buildings or cathedrals are hiding info really. But the fun is in the journey - the decoding. And it's not for everybody - some people just don't want to do it or know it - it's not their life path this time - they live to shop
But the seekers will find it and use it (again and again over time if necessary).

So, for me things seem to follow - right up to the bell - twice - ? and the "below" going through zero - could you explain that a bit more? Is it the wire? And is the bell about sound? 2 tones? moving weight with magnets and resonance?



posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Also, I believe I read once that the only squares in all the Fibonacci numbers are 0 1 and 144

Also - do the 2 sections make a golden angle?

Here's an interesting article you might enjoy re tone, music and your numbers.

www.schillerinstitute.org...



posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 01:15 PM
link   
and the concave pyramid idea - how does that fit in do you think? 8 sided twice is 16?

image source: www.catchpenny.org...

the 8 x180 or 4 x 360 = 1440 and that might explain the .10 cents (10/100) to get you back to 144 (but I'm still not sure I buy the ADM 144 connection, but if I did, I wouldn't stop before the .10 cents re finding meaning.)



posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Interesting video, though long. What exactly does Jeremy want to build? The flywheel? A pyramid? Then what? I'm a little confused as to the point of this, whether the numbers are coincidence or not.



posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   
This is for everybody that thinks decoding something like that needs an 80 year old man or green aliens from Mars:

If you are studying math or engineering you should know this:
Doing math every day of your life changes the way you think and perceive things!

If somebody gave a mathematician (even while studying) all those pictures, explain to him what the number phi is and then ask him to make sense of all the info in front of him, I would bet all my money that that person, who has a decent IQ and knowledge of mathematics would figure it out in a week. Not that difficult.

So in my opinion, that code was written to be discovered by anyone who had an interest in those sort of stuff, someone who would appreciate the newly found knowledge and someone who would try and develop it.

But I must add, reverse engineering is always MUCH easier than engineering. That Ed guy who composed those beautiful logic into patterns and numbers much have been extremely intelligent.

And Jeremy... Bloody nice find! But please don't stop there go on, and if you need any help just ask everyone here at ATS I'm sure here are people who will help, I know for sure I will...



posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Jeremy Stride
 


Did you by any chance happen to read:

"How To Read His Writings" The Unauthorized Guide to Decoding Edward Leedskalnin's Works by Ed Marlinski. An Amazing and Revealing Book, which shows you how to decode Edward Leedskalnin's writings, the one who raised and moved over 1,100 tons of rock all by himself, starting with his Magnetic Current Booklet published in 1945.
( copied this off www.labyrinthina.com... )



posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Yes Jeremy...just let us know how many more people you need so as to have more @$$3$ to pull the answers from.

Mathematics is not hard...I follow down to the second of everything he was trying to explain...but there are missing parts which no one cares to point out...except me. But I follow now, it is not the fact that over half of the information is missing, others innability to ask questions, or the profound lack of logic I am provided, it is completely my fault for not understanding the conforming theory of "decoding" a nonsensical approach to an unlogical assumption.

But alas! Jeremy has yet to respond...only a few who claim to understand the solution, but do not provide evidience of such a claim, not even in miniscule form, of thier profound understanding, and supposed I.Q. that is higher than mine.


Just to point out: If a mathematician was provided this absured information, and someone had to EXPLAIN phi to them, then he/she was not a mathematician in the first place, and would take waaaaayyyy longer than a week to arrive at the precise obscurred knowledge being presented here.

But let's say that the entire point has been overlooked, and the answer does have metaphisical reasoning pertaining to these assumptions...what is it? Anyone have a clue of how many diverse metaphysical theories there are?...a freaking lot! Nobody has yet to pinpoint the exact metaphysical evidience to support they claim has just happened upon them to resolve applicable theory. I believe that people are just wanting to sound REALLY SMART when presented with a question they are just TOO stupid to answer.

It is not Jeremy that is at fault here though...it is the people who all of a sudden can't explain why they follow the theory with half of the evidience. Has anyone filled in the rest? Probably not! The fact is, he provided half of the problem in the video, and about 1/4 of the solution...the rest is meerly unexplained information that NOBODY has the ability to explain.

And betting money on this proves that you would be very broke without proving me wrong.

To all that say they understand it...you ARE lying unless you can prove otherwise!

I call shenanigans!



posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 08:29 PM
link   
Enjoyed watching this too, even thought it is quite long ...
Always love it when people are about to decode (or interpret) the ancient codes
but once decoded it's not really a secret anymore ... so why everyone talking about secrets?
"The freemansons have kept these secrets forever."
Have you ever thought about how you would bring the essential information of the universe or some work you what to keep for the future generations into a 'form' that can outlive thousands of years?!



posted on Aug, 11 2008 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by Epsillion70
 

I agree ..

In the beginning was thought, and thought was with god , and thought was god ...?

Oh wait that is 'word' ... But, what is a 'word' if it is not 'verbal thought' ... ?




Thought was actually first source. And not the "word." despite the missinterpreted translation quote in John 1:1-4 of the New Testament.
Obviously reason and logic would tell you that "words"are only symbols used in the syntax of one type of communication to each other.
Understand that "words"only make up 7% of intercommunication.

[edit on 11-8-2008 by Epsillion70]



posted on Aug, 11 2008 @ 05:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Taledus
Yes Jeremy...just let us know how many more people you need so as to have more @$$3$ to pull the answers from.

Mathematics is not hard...I follow down to the second of everything he was trying to explain...but there are missing parts which no one cares to point out...except me. But I follow now, it is not the fact that over half of the information is missing, others innability to ask questions, or the profound lack of logic I am provided, it is completely my fault for not understanding the conforming theory of "decoding" a nonsensical approach to an unlogical assumption.

But alas! Jeremy has yet to respond...only a few who claim to understand the solution, but do not provide evidience of such a claim, not even in miniscule form, of thier profound understanding, and supposed I.Q. that is higher than mine.


Just to point out: If a mathematician was provided this absured information, and someone had to EXPLAIN phi to them, then he/she was not a mathematician in the first place, and would take waaaaayyyy longer than a week to arrive at the precise obscurred knowledge being presented here.

But let's say that the entire point has been overlooked, and the answer does have metaphisical reasoning pertaining to these assumptions...what is it? Anyone have a clue of how many diverse metaphysical theories there are?...a freaking lot! Nobody has yet to pinpoint the exact metaphysical evidience to support they claim has just happened upon them to resolve applicable theory. I believe that people are just wanting to sound REALLY SMART when presented with a question they are just TOO stupid to answer.

It is not Jeremy that is at fault here though...it is the people who all of a sudden can't explain why they follow the theory with half of the evidience. Has anyone filled in the rest? Probably not! The fact is, he provided half of the problem in the video, and about 1/4 of the solution...the rest is meerly unexplained information that NOBODY has the ability to explain.

And betting money on this proves that you would be very broke without proving me wrong.

To all that say they understand it...you ARE lying unless you can prove otherwise!

I call shenanigans!


Dude, by explaining PHI I meant explaining to someone that doesn't know what it is that you can find it via relations.

You point out that this theory doesn't really mean anything. It means a lot to me, since I am still and was always amazed by people capable of designing hidden knowledge in numbers. Yet as you said it is not yet fully understood. That is obvious since the flywheel hasn't been recreated.
And if you watched the video you should know that the flywheel is the answer.


So PLEEEEEEASE use your unchallenged thoughts and intelligence to help Jeremy complete his theory, for it seems that you understand perfectly that 75% of the solution is missing.

Thanks



posted on Aug, 11 2008 @ 12:36 PM
link   
Taledus

You are an angry man are'nt you! I think jeremy has done some great work here, yet you are hell bent on flaming him with random hissy fits about its done in a way to confuse ( why are you confused? ) etc etc. How about this, explain in detail, where figures and data etc are pulled out of an A** to fit, explain to me in detail, where, in reference to the video, he is mistaken.

As far as i recall maths is about logical thinking applied to certain rules for certain situations. Am i Right? I cant see in the OPs theory anything other than logical thinking, after figuring out the link to the prime numbers he worked the information he had available back through out the whole decoding process. Kinda like when you have a math egn where your given the answer and have to work back from it to find out the unknowns in the egn. And depending on what type of math it is, you can determine what egn's etc to use to get the correct unknowns. As far as i can see this is exactly whats he's done!
How do people who decode information work by your logic??
Your logic does not allow for even the basic's of problem solving!



posted on Aug, 11 2008 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Just got done watching the video...yeah the one that could have been about 10 minutes long, but was almost an hour...yeah, that one.

Definitely some interesting connections between numbers in there, especially the primes. Also, some leaps taken to try and make some of the numbers fit. That is the fine line between "decoding" and "pulling something from one's arse".

For example, the solution seemed based around legitimate mathematics like prime numbers, circles, stars, pyramids, etc. but the very first thing brought up is that ADM=144. That is numerology and can IMO be thrown into the "from one's arse" side of the solution.

There is also no reasonable explanation given for why 7 and 6 need to be multiplied by 24. Seems like a clear cut example of making the numbers fit. If he was truly hiding things in numbers it seems he would have just used their multiplied values in the first place. For example, why say 6 when you mean 144? One could argue that is part of the code, but then why code the first digit in a seven-digit number and not the rest of the digits the same way?

Which finally brings us to the actual split in the numbers. This is a fine example of making the numbers fit and reminded me ultimately of the same faulty reasoning used by the Bible Coders.

Ultimately, I was intrigued enough to actually finish the video, but was rather let down with the lack of any real answers after all those real numbers.

On a side note, there are many pyramids that have been built and they probably all don't have the same angle of incline. Is the ratio the same for every pyramid when the right angle is place inside them?

Second side note, are there actually any magnets in the flywheel?



posted on Aug, 11 2008 @ 05:37 PM
link   
I watched the video and thought it was good but im more interested in the technology and science of these ideas than the numbers and math, while i commend the effort involved in trying to unravel any secrets they may have in this area, just how is the knowledge applied to the real world, its not like his magnet wheel hasn't been around for ages, how does that nullify or invert the effects of gravity?

If all it took was spinning this configuration against some stones then im sure it would have been tried already, if theres more to it then i don't see how knowing the math will help in making the machine?

I've got some thoughts in this area though and would prefer to discuss the magnetic theories instead of the math if anyone's interested.



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Hey,

I thought some may be interested in this. Symbols and language are often left in communication and here is a good example relating to the video.

It is a Stella Artois Legere beer coaster. The six sided star and 144 are on this as well as "legere" translation "light" sits above the bottom line.

You can see the picture here.
img134.imageshack.us...

And the second one here with the lines added to make the symbol more apparent.
img396.imageshack.us...
**edited for links**

[edit on 12-8-2008 by Jiffy]



posted on Aug, 12 2008 @ 05:24 PM
link   
How are you getting the 6 point star and 144?





new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join