It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
He's now been answered TWICE/quote]
Not true. You stated you could not answer the question and another person has posted that I was correct to label the graph as fractal dimension 1. Therefore, the graph is NOT fractal.
One of the latter 2 responses are appropriate, not the first.
That sounds to me like there is no interest here in actually seeing if this TWZ is correct. That has been the essence of this thread for 150+ pages.
The way i understand it is this: McKenna put the I-ching( a chinese divination process) into a computer, and it turned out as a fractal. He then converted it to a linear graph (TWZ), took a section of it, and mapped it over a section of history.
The pattern it produced over the last several hundred thousand years, repeats itself on a smaller and smaller scale, i.e a century, decade, year, month etc etc.
It is fractal.
Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Cecilofs
THAT IS WHY IT IS A THEORY IN DEVELOPMENT!
This is not a theory. It is not based on facts. Theories explain facts.
Theories explain facts??? Since when???????????
Facts explain facts. Once a theory has arrived at a hypothesis, and it can be proven or disproved based on experimentation, does it become a fact, and even then, it can often be changed and facts can be re-written.
It seems to me that you don't understand the difference between Timewave Theory and Timewave Facts. You should get YOUR facts straight before you come on the thread knocking others.
I've watched you come on here with your armchair math and strawman arguments, and it is now painfully obvious that you have no clue about the scientific method and how it works, even though you project to others that you do.
While this is off-topic, I feel it is relevant for you to understand that you are wrong about this subject....
Your level of arrogance is undeniable to anyone who has read this thread since we can all see that you believe you have outsmarted every other person who has ever explored McKenna's THEORY and attempted to conduct their own experiments that might prove or disprove the theory.
What experiments have you conducted?
[You ask if others have developed a way to measure novelty... that is the experiment that is needed to prove or disprove the theory and is what several people are working on.
People are looking for ways to prove or disprove the theory with experimentation, and there is no ONE way that is the right way to test the theory. I think this is where you have a complete misunderstanding of the process and where the conversation diverges between you and others.
Whether Zagari or others are right or wrong is not your place to say without having conducted your own experiments that prove or disprove the hypothesis, and at least they are attempting to test the theory through experimenting with different ideas whereas you expect us to just take your word for it that we are all wrong and you are right.
I will trust the math of a chaos theory mathematician over yours any day of the week, so until you have something much more concrete that can put the hypothesis to rest, you should move along to another topic that you have a stronger foundation of to debate.
Believe what you want Stereo, but it's people like you who give science a bad name and you should leave the people here alone because you add little value to the topic and I don't believe anyone on this thread cares what you have to say or wants to hear from you, but that is just a THEORY of mine.
Perhaps you'll experiment with my theory
I don't see that happening unless you do some serious soul searching and come to grips with your massive ego.
I explained with facts that TWZ IS a fractal but it has no meaningful fractal dimension- a fractal DOES NOT have to be fully carried out to be a fractal function- if you did carry out the 64x compression of the damped oscillation wave indefinitely you WOULD get the full fractal plot of the TW function- and it would have a low but meaningful Fractal dimension around 1.1- but THERE IS NO NEED to do this since you would be computing the fracal function beyond the grain of the Planck scale-
also- the timewave is NOT fractal dimension of 1- anyone who has studied even basic Mandelbrot/Julia sets knows that ONLY A STRAIGHT LINE has a fractal dimension of 1- any kinks or curves adds infinitesimal fractal dimensionality-
but I actually know what I am talking about and can appreciate it's beauty and creativity-
if it is wrong it is probably only off in some small way- or we cannot properly measure the novelty [or activity] it tracks [I think it tracks the raw number of quantum observable events that are connected into the whole planetary network of conscious observers]
I don't post errors as a rule- I have provided clear and correct explanations of the Timewave Fractal and it's dimension- anyone can check my definitions and figures and verify them against the pathetic attack /quote]
Tsk, tsk. You attempt a rather pathetic lie by claiming any line not straight is more space filling than a straight line. Can you provide a link to support this pathetic claim?
Can you explain why you went from a value of 1 to a value of 1.1?
you are just frothing at the mouth at this point- I have udergraduate degrees in computer science and mathematics and tutored math professionally as a student
Frankly, you get an F for your understanding of fractals.
yet it is well documented that it is based on the differences in the King Wen sequence of the I Ching- you are saying the I Ching is an arbitrary sequece!
The decision to use a particular sequence is arbitrary. That has no bearing on the source of the sequence. You do claim to have an understanding of math, correct? You claim to understand English, correct? So what is your problem in not understanding that the selection was arbitrary?
you are so blinded by your irrational stance against TWZ that you do a disservice to your own motives
Another straw man argument of no value.
no one is going to listen to you when you make such obvious errors/quote]
More pointless off the mark commentary.
address the ACTUAL weaknesses-
I have and you seem to be trying to do your best to avoid your horrible mathematical mistakes:
1. Claiming that the plot has both a 1 and a 1.1 fractal dimension.
2. Claiming that a curved line is more space filling than a straight line.
Here are the weaknesses:
1. The plot is not fractal. It has a fractal dimension of 1.
2. There is no way to measure novelty.
3. There is no statement of how events affect novelty.
4. There is no means of independently calibrating the plot.
So now we are left with your ability to show how you calculated the fractal dimension of 1.1. I believe you made that number up because you have no idea how to calculate a fractal dimension.
Clearly stereologist hates timewave, sees it as rubbish
Why does one spend so much time here when it is rubbish? There is no clear logical reason.
Stereologist has turned the thread into an argument about things that simply have nothing to do with what Terrence was after/quote]
So you take everything hook, line, and sinker? You don't bother to ask simple questions about whether an idea works or not? You just pretend that things work?
Sadly though, he has won.
The only win would be for people to realize that shoehorning is not research. To win is to get people to understand that ideas such as this need to be examined for correctness. Has that happened? No.
We appreciate your knowledge here!
All apart for stereologist...
I don't think you will ever find the answer capable of satisfying Stereo.
His goal is destroying this thread.
He will probably win for exhaustion of the members...
I find it hard that he seems to repeat the same things like some sort of machine-poster.
EVERYBODY is reprimanding you and criticizing YOUR behavior lately and you ask me if I'm curious about the timewave? If I want to get real research work for it?
Dude, you are deeply unexplicable to me.