It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

# Timewave Zero - Countdown to Transition

page: 154
575
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 08:49 AM

Originally posted by stereologistThe fact of the matter is that TWZ is a hoax, a fraud, a made up bunch of malarkey and all that has happened in this thread is called shoehorning. Take Z for instance. He begins with the assumption that the TWZ is correct. Then he represents actual events in a manner consistent with this sacred plot. That is shoehorning.

If you actually wanted to prove this rather than just belittle us and disrupt the thread, then you would be observing world events, comparing them to the Timewave, looking up the resonances and then posting about the ones that didn't match. Then we could engage in meaningful discussion about the validity of TWZ instead of slinging mud at each other.

I haven't yet seen a single post by you (in the thousands you've posted in the 2012 forum) where you have done this.

What you have done (once again) is focus on one tiny, largely insignificant thing that we have said and made that the entire basis of your argument.

Whether or not TWZ is fractal has no bearing whatsoever on its validity.

(Disclaimer: I am not a math guy either so I may be wrong on this, but...)

Here is what I think has happened: You are arguing the 100% correct technical definition of "Fractal" and we are using it in a more colloquial sense to mean more along the lines of "has smaller copies of itself within the graph at different scales".

If you look back a few pages you will see some pictures I posted that prove this - the graph appears identical even though the scale is different. This means the whole graph contains ever smaller repeating copies of itself, which is a quality of fractals, but technically doesn't qualify it as a fractal.

From Wikipedia:

Fractals can also be classified according to their self-similarity. There are three types of self-similarity found in fractals:

Exact self-similarity – This is the strongest type of self-similarity; the fractal appears identical at different scales. Fractals defined by iterated function systems often display exact self-similarity. For example, the Sierpinski triangle and Koch snowflake exhibit exact self-similarity.

Quasi-self-similarity – This is a looser form of self-similarity; the fractal appears approximately (but not exactly) identical at different scales. Quasi-self-similar fractals contain small copies of the entire fractal in distorted and degenerate forms. Fractals defined by recurrence relations are usually quasi-self-similar. The Mandelbrot set is quasi-self-similar, as the satellites are approximations of the entire set, but not exact copies.

Statistical self-similarity – This is the weakest type of self-similarity; the fractal has numerical or statistical measures which are preserved across scales. Most reasonable definitions of "fractal" trivially imply some form of statistical self-similarity. (Fractal dimension itself is a numerical measure which is preserved across scales.) Random fractals are examples of fractals which are statistically self-similar. The coastline of Britain is another example; one cannot expect to find microscopic Britains (even distorted ones) by looking at a small section of the coast with a magnifying glass.

Possessing self-similarity is not the sole criterion for an object to be termed a fractal. Examples of self-similar objects that are not fractals include the logarithmic spiral and straight lines, which do contain copies of themselves at increasingly small scales. These do not qualify, since they have the same Hausdorff dimension as topological dimension.

I think TWZ is somewhere between Quasi and Exact but again, not being great at math I'm not 100% on that.

So Stereo, you are technically correct. We don't know the fractal dimension of the wave. TWZ isn't technically a fractal, but it has some qualities of a fractal. I'm sorry. We were wrong and you were right. Congratulations.

Please accept my deepest and most sincere apologies for being human and making a mistake.

Now, if we are finished bickering over semantics can we get back to discussing points that actually matter?

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 09:25 AM
Like this:

www.nzherald.co.nz...

A letter written by Hitler in 1918 that is the first known evidence of his intentions for genocide against the Jews.

I checked the resonance and today resonates with 1914, so it isn't a direct match.

However what is interesting is this quote from Wikipedia:

Year 1914 (MCMXIV) was a common year starting on Thursday (link will display the full calendar) in the Gregorian calendar and a common year starting on Wednesday in the Julian calendar. It was the year that saw the beginning of what became known as World War I.

So today resonates with the start of WW1. The triggering event is supposed to have been the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria and the war started within 30 days. I haven't heard of any recent assassinations or similar but I guess we'll see pretty soon whether a major conflict breaks out or not.

In a broad sense I think this is interesting because of what is brewing in the world at the moment. On one hand most major economies have seen a very bad first half of the year and global economic meltdown seems a possibility (though of course they are saying it will get better again on the news). On the other hand international tensions are running high and we are potentially seeing the start of WW3.

Then today, which resonates with the year that WW1 started, we see a news article about a letter written by Hitler - a historic figure who began his rise to power around the time of WW1 and after.

And with the resonance of the Great Depression coming closer our economy is looking pretty unhealthy.

I've started stocking up on food - its gonna be a long, cold winter.

edit on 9-6-2011 by Cecilofs because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:00 AM

Originally posted by operation mindcrime
reply to post by Acidtastic

I know I should be minding my own business here because my understanding of this whole theory is limited but to just label Stereologist as a government paid debunker is not fair.

Could it be the the good man is just determent to proof a point?

What is the problem with answering the man's question? (the fractal dimension of the plot, whatever that means)

I recognize his determination, I had the same with that whole Webbot debacle. Nobody had to pay me a dime to try and debunk each and every single claim, in every single thread.

Just answer the question..........or is it an impossible question?

Peace

3 things......you've no need to mind your own business, this is a public forum and we're allowed to get stuck in.

I'm not saying that stereologist is a paid debunker, but that is what it looks like to me. The poster spends all day every day debunking 2012 topics. It seems at best, a little obsessive. And at worse, well....I needn't go on.

and I'm not involved enough in TWZ to be able to answer the question. But fractals are in nature throughout, it wouldn't supprise me one bit if there was a fractal pattern to TWZ, or events themselves. I read somewhere (probably on here somewhere) that even the stock markets have a repeating fractal pattern to them. Which would be cool for playing the stock exchange if you could figure it out, could make a fortune!!

edit, here's a link (first link I came to on google with the search "fractal stock markets") www.jstor.org...
edit on 9/6/2011 by Acidtastic because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:23 AM
reply to post by Acidtastic

you've no need to mind your own business, this is a public forum and we're allowed to get stuck in.

I really meant that I shouldn't be adding to a thread that I haven't completely read, comprehend etc etc.

I just fell into the previous page by accident and I thought that it was remarkable that everybody was complaining about Sterologist's presence but nobody was answering his (seemingly) simple question.

So in this light I think it would be pretty normal to tell me to mind my own business or first read the entire thread before adding any comment.

I will be following this thread with more interest from now on, not for TWZ aspect but to see who's going to come out of this discussion victorious.

Peace

PS: thanks for the eloquent reply.

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:55 AM
reply to post by Acidtastic

img528.imageshack.us...

Graph of timewave 1776- 2012 compared with dollar value in stock market from 1776 to 1986.
edit on 9-6-2011 by Zagari because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 11:00 AM
reply to post by Cecilofs

Brilliant resonance...
( If we look to the original graph ( November 2012 end date ) the day this news comes out resonates with around 1918/1919...
A few pages before I explained some other things I noticed...

And if Osama Bin Laden elimination was the resonance for 1914 assassination?
And the Germany epidemic the Spanish Flu resonance?
What if?

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:10 PM
Just curious, I've got the TWZ program now, how can I check to see what today for example links to in the past?

How do I check for the resonances?

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:51 AM

If you have the java one, set dates from June 10 2011 at 1 am to June 10 2011 at 11: 55 pm. That's my way.
( begin date and end date )

You can set dates from September 17 1455 to December 18 1958 if you want.

The third set ( target date ) is for targeting the day/hour/minute you want to see pin-pointed on the graph. A white point will appear on the date you selected as target one.

Press " update graph " on the left.

Press " Resonate back " down to the left or " resonate forward " down in the center.

You will see 5 graph choices.

Kelley, Watkins and above all SHELIAK one are the most precise.

Have fun!

edit on 10-6-2011 by Zagari because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:52 PM
Today I surprised myself waking up in tears because I was dreaming I didn't got the summer job that would make me gain much more money than I got from this 6 months long job I started in December and ended in June.

Today I realized in this 6 months I was doing pretty well, I had a desk, I was getting new friends, I wasn't a no one, people respected me on the job...

But in these whole 6 months I only gained 500 euros.
With the summer job I would gain 1500 euros in 2 months.

I realized I lived 6 months in a bubble. I realize I won't have much chance to get a job here in Italy. We Italians are in a world of trouble.
For 6 months I was the only one with a job of my friends.

The problem is that I know myself and I know I am not ready for university. I failed a year.
I don't know what to do with that.

I know myself. There aren't many universities near my town and I should leave all the people I love here.

There is a particular event that changed my life more than I want to realize. Watching in the eyes a person that died a few hours later.
That changed me much.
Now I am always afraid someone else may die.

I started getting interesting in Timewave Zero in one of the lowest, more sad periods in my life.
It gave so much hope. Hope one day my life, the life of people who suffer, would be okay.

The reality is that Timewave Zero theory makes me HOPE there will be some CHANGE after 2012.
I feel like a stupid telling that but today I realized that is my real feeling.

I HOPE. Otherwise the situation will be grim. For me, for the world, for Africa.
Can I dream that one day those poor kids in Africa will be able to live like us? Can I?

But I'm young. I 'm just off the teenager period of life. I'm just out of that. I am 21. Everybody treats me like I'm 15.
I should dedicate my life to writing books, my real passion, but given that my parents won't read what I write I often give up and so...

I choosed to focus on Timewave theory because I hope it will be worth of it.
I really hope that one day those pages will be worth to remember of.

Instead all those people telling me I'm ignorant, telling me all these pages are a joke, we are all a bunch of retards, doesn't makes me feel well.
It makes me sad.
Because those pages are personally important to me. Call me like you want but its 154 pages guys...Its a lot of experiences in those pages.
Those pages are the ones I read when life sends me bad jokes.
This thread was the spark of my incredible passion for history.
Must be one of my passion-periods.
I 'm constantly reading about history. I don't have much else to do, actually, anyway.

Sometimes, talking with skeptics, I find myself unable to replie properly.
English is not my natural language, they keep asking me things I have difficulty answering to...
In this period I don't feel like I should post on ats.
I don't really think I can contribute to this website.

I'm working on it. I constantly read magazines about global issues...Yesterday alone I read 250 pages on a history book.

Don't think I am not preparing for a non- event. I am.
I want to put a lot of REAL change in my life before to see if this theory is right or wrong.

I won't just wait and doing nothing. I don't want. I want to do something for my life.

I always think about the present. I KNOW this theory may be wrong.
I am not fanatic. I know I could lose my face on ats one day.
I only hope I won't.

I take it like a game. Let's see.

I read often Mckenna lectures. Some day I say " Wow, I learnt so much in a few minutes! ", some day I say " Good God, Mckenna could be insane " .

Mckenna was always telling people " Eat a mushroom! ". Just a few years ago I would have been horrified by his lectures, his ideas. I would have said " This man is insane ".
Today I laugh about that. I don't agree everybody should eat a mushroom at all anyway.
But I wonder if Mckenna should be like Columbus. Maybe he discovered something we cannot even think about.

edit on 10-6-2011 by Zagari because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-6-2011 by Zagari because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-6-2011 by Zagari because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:33 PM
reply to post by Zagari

Just remember that you are awesome, and you will do fine.

Haters gonna hate.

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 08:04 PM
reply to post by Zagari

Let's ignore him. He doesn't want to inform himself a minimal about this theory

I see great fear here that after 152 pages of nothingness you are afraid to to acknowledge that TWZ is a waste of time and that 152 pages have been spent wasted,

he just wants to select a few people and discharging misinfo after misinfo. His only goal is to satisfie his own ego and drive people away from the subject.

I do want to find out what the fractal dimension of the TWZ plot is because that seems to be a linch pin of this claim. So what is the fractal dimension?

Let's ignore him

This is fear speaking. This is fear screaming that this house of cards is about to fall.

From now on I will only update this thread with info that it is concerning the topic, not Stereologist's ego.

The smell of fear, of the recognition that this is all junk is thick upon the air.

What is the fractal dimension of the plot?

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 08:07 PM
reply to post by Acidtastic

I'd call it common sense.

Really? So what is so fearful about asking what is the fractal dimension of the plot?

It seems to ave put Zagari into a tail spin.

Hint, goverment stooges everywhere.

So when someone points out that the fractal claims might be incorrect that person has to be labeled is that it?

You seem rather smart. Maybe you can tell us all what the fractal dimension is for the TWZ plot.

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 08:07 PM
reply to post by Acidtastic

I'd call it common sense.

Really? So what is so fearful about asking what is the fractal dimension of the plot?

It seems to ave put Zagari into a tail spin.

Hint, goverment stooges everywhere.

So when someone points out that the fractal claims might be incorrect that person has to be labeled is that it?

You seem rather smart. Maybe you can tell us all what the fractal dimension is for the TWZ plot.

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 08:10 PM
reply to post by operation mindcrime

Great name operation mindgrame. I love it. Better than mine for sure.

The question of the fractal dimension is not impossible, It should be simple. The claim is that TWZ is a fractal curve. I say it is not. I state that it is 1. Does anyone want to dispute that? I think all of the believers especially Zagari would want to since a value of 1 indicates that this is not a fractal curve.

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 08:17 PM
reply to post by Zagari

He is the only person in the world that claims this graph doesn't show fractal qualities. He seems to misunderstand what fractal really is.

So what is the fractal dimension of the curve? If it is not 1, then prove it is not 1. If you could do that then I'd accept that. But it is 1. The only people saying it is fractal are those like you that do not understand what fractal means. They are like you in simply repeating the same mistake over and over.

He doesn't want to show us WHY he believes the graph is not fractal. He doesn't explain his own claim. Why should we listen to him?

I've made it clear in the other thread where we discussed this issue that the fractal dimension is 1. It is therefore no a fractal curve.

He was challenged and answered in November. He only wants to replicate the battle.

A meaningless claim. You did not answer the question then and now you can't as well. Why can't you answer a trivial question about fractals when you claim it is a fractal curve? The likely answer is that you have no idea what is coming out of your mouth or being typed. Fine. Lots of people do not understand what fractal means. Most people have the sensibility to admit they do not know what fractal means.

This thread deserves better than this.

The basis for TWZ is being called into question. I say that the claims for balderdash. I begin by showing that a curve of fractal dimension 1 is not a fractal.

He cannot show us any real FACT that disproves this theory. Really, he can't.

Oh please! Get off your high horse and give me the fractal dimension and be done with your charade.

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 08:51 PM
reply to post by Cecilofs

If you actually wanted to prove this rather than just belittle us and disrupt the thread, then you would be observing world events, comparing them to the Timewave, looking up the resonances and then posting about the ones that didn't match. Then we could engage in meaningful discussion about the validity of TWZ instead of slinging mud at each other.

This thread is nothing more than silly shoehorning in which people are treating the plot as a gold standard and pretending events match the curve. Ludicrous.

No can tell if an event is novel or not until they check the curve. That is shoehorning.

I haven't yet seen a single post by you (in the thousands you've posted in the 2012 forum) where you have done this.

You are correct. I do not want to make an ass out of myself by stooping to such a wacko methodology.

What you have done (once again) is focus on one tiny, largely insignificant thing that we have said and made that the entire basis of your argument.

I am beginning by examining the basis for the TWZ and seeing a blatant flaw.

Whether or not TWZ is fractal has no bearing whatsoever on its validity.

Very possible. Then again why didn't anyone else spot this error. Are there other errors out there. Anyone else concerned that McKenna shifted his plot to match 2012?

Here is what I think has happened: You are arguing the 100% correct technical definition of "Fractal" and we are using it in a more colloquial sense to mean more along the lines of "has smaller copies of itself within the graph at different scales".

But it doesn't. If you look at the graph up close it is smooth. It is straight. It is not the "lumpy" thing you'd see with a fractal. It is not fractal.

If you look back a few pages you will see some pictures I posted that prove this - the graph appears identical even though the scale is different. This means the whole graph contains ever smaller repeating copies of itself, which is a quality of fractals, but technically doesn't qualify it as a fractal.

You are misunderstanding what fractal means. That's ok. It's not always an obvious idea. Think of it this way. If I zoom in or out as far as I want it should always look lumpy. Zoom in and this is always smooth - actually begins straight line segments.

We were wrong and you were right. Congratulations.

Just because you were misled by the claims of it being fractal does not mean you were wrong. You were simply misled. Zagari has clung to this issue revealing his closes minded nature when it comes to TWZ. You on the other hand have stated a very clear open minded claim - does it matter? I suggest that it may not. On the other hand how much of TMZ is also fake?

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 08:58 PM
reply to post by Acidtastic

I'm not saying that stereologist is a paid debunker, but that is what it looks like to me. The poster spends all day every day debunking 2012 topics. It seems at best, a little obsessive. And at worse, well....I needn't go on.

None of these issues are related to the issue of the fractal claims of TWZ. These are only brought up in the cases where there is at least some recognition by the proponents that there is something wrong with the issue at hand. In t his case the issue is whether or not this is a fractal curve.

I clearly state that it is not. The curve is not a curve at all, but a piecewise continuous differentiable set of line segments of fractal dimension 1.

it wouldn't supprise me one bit if there was a fractal pattern to TWZ

But it is not. The use of the term fractal is simply to imbue some sort of reverence, or modern thinking to the TWZ.

That's a good paper since it shows that the use of fractal in the paper is not the same as the false use of the term with respect to TWZ.

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 09:34 PM
reply to post by Zagari

So the question is this. Does your job searching and the friends you mention reflect on TWZ?

I started getting interesting in Timewave Zero in one of the lowest, more sad periods in my life.
It gave so much hope.

Are you supporting TWZ because it is correct or because you wish it were?

No one can answer that other than you. I believe you are looking for something to use as a support, It supports you rather than you supporting it. It is good if it provides a support for your well being.

The reality is that Timewave Zero theory makes me HOPE there will be some CHANGE after 2012.
I feel like a stupid telling that but today I realized that is my real feeling.

I do not believe that TWZ or 2012 are meaningful. Hope is an incredible emotion. Hope is awesome.

My hope is that present economic doldrums pass and that people get jobs. Good times have many important side effects. They make people less likely to destroy threatened and endangered species. It makes for times when people are able to give more charity. It makes for more peaceful times.

Everybody treats me like I'm 15.

When you are 35 and they think you are 15 you will appreciate the humor in it.

but given that my parents won't read what I write I often give up

Join a book club and get them to comment and assist you. Your English is great. I can only imagine how well you write in your native tongue.

Instead all those people telling me I'm ignorant, telling me all these pages are a joke, we are all a bunch of retards, doesn't makes me feel well.

posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 03:04 AM
McKenna's claim was that TIME is fractal and that the resonances occur on all different scales. TWZ is only an approximation of this relationship and I think only graphed in one scale - that is a limitation of the formula and the program. IF the theory is sound, then there probably could be a completely fractal wave that could be constructed. *Bags not trying to create that!*

Again, you are choosing to not prove the graph is wrong, only that some of the things we are saying about it are wrong. Well no #, we aren't McKenna, we aren't mathematicians, we are mostly just ordinary people trying to make sense of McKenna's work and see if its a valid theory. So yes we will make mistakes sometimes. Feel free to point them out but you don't need to be a dick about it

The irony is we won't know until the end anyway, but its interesting to follow along and try to make sense out of things.

Like you Zagari, for me TWZ and all 2012 theories are about the HOPE that we can change the course of our future. Right now we are sinking rapidly and some profound changes need to happen.

I think your english is really good, but I also think Stereo is playing down your difficulty so that he can use that to his advantage. i.e. If you make a mistake then he can focus on that mistake as though it disproved the theory rather than just you made a mistake. He's cunning that way.

Seriously this BS TM him arbitrarily picking dates is getting annoying. Given how the theory was created - i.e. that it started with a generic pattern of how things change over time - there was no other way but to try to line the graph up with a certain point. If the mushroom told him where to start from then he would have done that. If the King Wen sequence had as a preface "The beginning of time was 12000BC so this pattern starts there" then he could have done that. But no, it is a pattern that repeats itself over time and so he had to figure out the most appropriate alignment.

You do realise that part of what we are doing is seeing how the wave lines up given the end point, right? Numerous times we have debated whether different alignments are more suitable. Other people have different ideas about how it lines up and even the base formula to use.

THAT IS WHY IT IS A THEORY IN DEVELOPMENT! Like ANY theory, its a matter of researching, validating and putting the pieces together into a coherent whole.

You hold scientific proof as such a high value, yet you point at the process of trying to gather this proof and say its proof the theory isn't valid. The hypocrisy is staggering.

Go and troll somewhere else! I know we should just stop responding to you but as I am sure you are aware (as it is your agenda one way or another), people shouting that their questions haven't been answered tend to turn other people off the idea as well. Even though their question has already been answered and they are still saying the same thing...*shakes head*

posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 03:14 AM

Originally posted by stereologist
This thread is nothing more than silly shoehorning in which people are treating the plot as a gold standard and pretending events match the curve. Ludicrous.

No can tell if an event is novel or not until they check the curve. That is shoehorning.

That is BS. We never said that. I think we can look at events in the world and decide if they are novel or not without linking it to TWZ.

Comparing it to the graph is to check the validity of TWZ. Novelty theory is one idea, TWZ is about trying to graph novelty across time.

On a small scale I agree it becomes difficult to link event to each other thematically and bias becomes a much bigger factor. On a broad scale this is less of a problem. You haven't said anything about what we've been talking about in terms of recent history compared to 1890s-1920s. Industrial Revolution, depressions, World Wars, rise of tyrannical powers. Tell me, do you see these themes repeating in recent times?

Oh I know, wars happen all the time right? Well what about Climate Change? This is an issue that has been around for a while, but it is only very recently that it has ramped up as a talking point and governments are actually starting to do something about it. Meanwhile people are being led to believe, wether its true or not, that natural disasters are occurring more often. This means that there is CHANGE (novelty) happening in the world. And it is all linked to the burning of fossil fuels. The resonance of when we started to burn fossil fuels on a mass scale is, coincidentally, right now. Tell me how this is shoehorning.

new topics

top topics

575