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.

 

Timewave Zero - Countdown to Transition

page: 158
575
<< 155  156  157    159  160  161 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Pilot
 


Please remain on topic. Do you or do you not have anything to add to the issue of why a piecewise linear function is not a fractal?




posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by setAI
 


The name is stereologist. Altering the name of another user is against the rules.


1- the Timewave IS a fractal function- it's output is recursively fed back into the simple additive wavefunction to build a wave with self-similar waveshapes at every scale

Completely false and now laughable.

The function is not self similar in the self of fractals. It has fractal dimension 1. You stated that yourself and then altered your answer to 1.1 without justification.


2- for McKenna et al's BOUNDED plot of the fractal function between 10^-44 sec and 10^10 years- the fractal dimension is ~1 - as is ALL fractals that are bounded within a finite recursion

Another laughable claim. Clearly you have NO understanding of fractals. The point of fractals is that they are space filling. TWZ is not.


3- for a complete plot of the timewave additive function from ZERO seconds to 10^10 years- the fractal dimension is ~1.1 [ I use Hausdorff dimensions]- why?

You used Hausdorff dimensions or measures. i doubt you kow what you are posting. This is really a laughable bluff on your part.


why? the completed fractal plot to zero adds infinite pertubation of the 1D waveform so it partially fills a 2D plane- this is an estimate-

This is not an estimate. If you knew anything whatsoever about math you'd have stated approximation, but your bluff is pathetic.


you can calculate the true value by going to the wikipedia entry for fractal dimension and then use Wolfram Alpha to do the calculation for the Timewave

Oh please show us. I simply don't believe you because the fractal dimension is 1.


also the reason why a curved or kinky line has a higher partial dimension than a straight line is simple- a dimension is a degree of freedom- a straight line has no freedom in the 2nd dimension- but any curved or kinky line must move through the 2D plane- and is longer than a straight line- which means it has more information - and that information comes from movement in the 2nd dimension- this should make the concept easy to understand for those with no math training

You obviously have never taken a math course other than basic arithmetic. Please take something like high school algebra for starters. You have not a clue about the term dimension or what constitutes a fractal.


4- the selection of the King Wen Sequence by McKenna was not arbitrary nor is the sequence itself-

It is an arbitrary selection. Were this not an arbitrary selection then there would be reasoning provided for the selection. None is, ergo this is arbitrary.


5- it is silly in 2011 to accuse someone of lying or being in error about a simple mathematical concept anyone can google or wiki- because it has been years since I dealt with fractals I actually CHECKED my definitions and estimations on fractal dimension before I posted- and rechecked them- if there were any errors I would have corrected them MYSELF- so the accusation is moot

You are clueless about your claims. To claim that any lineal feature is any more space filling than a straight line is laughable.

This is what someone with little math training needs to understand. If you zoom in on a fractal you continue to see complexity. Think of all of those cool videos of fractals. Zoom in on TWZ and you see no complexity, only a simple line like feature. Thus this is not fractal and setAI is doing a rather poor job of attempting to hoodwink you.

The rest of his post is just word salad nonsense.


How about backing up your claims with some evidence? How about a page number from one of Mandelbrot's books? Or a direct quote from Hausdorff? Or a mathematical formula that disproves what setAI is claiming?

Not once did you cite a single resource for your rebuttals, which as far as anyone would be concerned in a debate of any kind, makes your claims void...

If you don't have something more than just YOUR word, the one that you seem to keep on expecting everyone to believe, you are trolling.

You mentioned censorship when another poster complained about your etiquette, yet if you are trolling it is simply being moderated and removing your senseless and opinionated dribble that you're intentionally spewing because you've gotten yourself in over your head and have no other way to compensate. You have NO evidence in any post that you've made in the last 5 pages other than your claims and act like everyone else is stupid or inferior to you, and you are driving people away from here to take their interests elsewhere for no other reason than your constant barrage of arrogance.

I've said it before and so have other posters... you are sounding like a child with a good vernacular and nothing more.... and even more so like a sociopath that might have a problem.
You are like the kid in the zoo that gets told 100 times to stop sticking your hands in the cage until it finally gets bitten off....

I have looked at the Timewave enough times, as have enough other people, to know that it is fractal and slices of it absolutely do repeat without any doubt whatsoever, so there is self-similarity, which is the simplest concept of a fractal. This is what is referred to by many here as RESONANCE in the Timewave, when a period of time looks exactly like another period of time, only shorter in duration. This is a demonstration of the self-feeding function of the fractal. In order for you to see the self-similarity, you have to apply an anisotropic transformation, which if you understood ANYTHING about fractals like you pretend to, you would know exactly what that means and would have already mentioned it a dozen times by now in your claims because it is one of the most important points that McKenna, a CHAOS MATHEMATICIAN, made regarding the Timewave, so go ahead and Google it and get back to us with some more nonsense with no evidence. You would have known that had you taken even a fraction of time to look into McKenna's work/math.

You can keep coming on this thread with your frivolous banter, but without citing some resources, you are a troll and need to be dealt with. Find another forum if you don't like it, I'm going to complain about you to the mods and I hope others do too... eventually, there will be consequences for your disruptive and ignorant behavior.

~Namaste
edit on 24-6-2011 by SonOfTheLawOfOne because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-6-2011 by SonOfTheLawOfOne because: typo



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zagari
reply to post by Zagari
 


May 15 2011, the graph is now going down --- until May 30 2011 ---.
Just had 3 of my most COOL days ever...The best weekend spent with friends since months...
I use to write my life on a sort of diary and lately I'm writing pages for a single day...Something that never happens.
Resonances are: 1910 and 1977.

I can relate. I actually went on a vacation and met some of my online friends in real life.

These were some of my best days and jumping from a diary page of an entire week
to a day per page was intense. Lots of things went on each day ,
I explored many things new to me and gained in valuable experiences.



The wave ,in a sense ,measures consciousness expansion. That much is clear to me now.
You are everything you perceive because you make it a part of your very being.
Thus ,the more you perceive ,the more your conciousness expands. Its alertedness.

Notice the things outside which are actually inside your perception. The subtle patterns are there ,
if you know how to look. The heart beats in a steady beat.
But does it always beat at the same speed or in the same way?
The relation of the heart to the Timewave?
I'm merely working towards igniting some new perspectives with this.

I'm highlighting that there's a definite pattern to certain points of the day in the Timewave.



Every time this particular resonance of the entire wave happens at this time ,
21:21 GMT is always at the bottom of the "drop of 2008" part of it.

This indicates to me that a certain time of the day when the wave displays a certain resonance
it may relate to other days with the same resonance.
It could also mean that certain times of the day like that may be better for certain activities.

Yes ,there's a lot of speculation here. But its worth looking into. Make of it what you will.
edit on 24/6/2011 by Mystic Technician because: Spelling fixes

edit on 24/6/2011 by Mystic Technician because: (no reason given)

edit on 24/6/2011 by Mystic Technician because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 10:41 AM
link   
here is a big download of material for you-

a friend sent this to me- strangely it comes from a Dharma Initiative site- oddly enough the producers of Lost hired a mathematician to analyze the Timewave- I didn't watch much of that show so I don't know if Timewave theory was ever brought up:



Mathematical analysis of Timewave Zero function

From a mathematical point of view, it is a fractal function where each point is calculated as the sum of a doubly infinite series.
Let v(x) be a function equal to 0 for all x minor than B and whose value is always finite (minor than a given C).
Having defined such a function, we can define its "fractal transform" this way:



Timewave Zero function is the "fractal transform" of a saw-tooth function.
www.dharmainitiative.it...

so that is settled


also- over the last decade futurist John Smart has published papers on what is essentially an extension of the basic ideas in Whitehead-McKenna Novelty Theory- he posits that the acceleration of intelligence leads all civilizations to collapse into the computational equivalent of a black hole with maximal local concrescence- and that this is why we see no evidence of other intelligence in the heavens even though some are billions of years old and should have re-engineered the whole visible universe by now:

Answering the Fermi Paradox:
Exploring the Mechanisms of Universal Transcension

© 2002-2011, John M. Smart.

Abstract

I propose that humanity's descendants will not be colonizing outer space. As a careful look at cosmic history demonstrates, complex systems rapidly transition to inner space, and apparently soon thereafter to universal transcension. For sixty years answers have been attempted for the Fermi paradox, the intriguing question of why we haven't had contact from older advanced civilizations in our galaxy, given that life-supporting stars and high-metallicity planets apparently identical to our Sun and Earth emerged much earlier a bit closer to the galactic center than our Sun and Earth (1 to 3 billion years earlier, according to Lineweaver 2004), yet a fully replicative process of cosmic expansion by any one of these civilizations, traveling at just 30 kilometers per second (just twice as fast as our existing New Horizons spacecraft) would take just two million years to cover the entire galaxy with automated robot probes (Beech 2008).

The vast majority of attempts to explain the paradox neglect what may be the most parsimonious explanation—a process of constrained universal transcension as civilizations develop. I propose that any species or von Neumann probe complex enough to improve its intelligence while traveling through interstellar space would transcend shortly after beginning its journey, and less complex probes would not be sent for information-theoretic reasons. As our universe creates intelligence at any point within it, the portions of the universe that are distant to that intelligence are likely to rapidly becomes an "informational desert" (an environment from which little marginal information or complexity can be created) to that intelligence. In an analogy to living systems, our universe appears to be a finite developmental soma (body) that is deeply simulated in evolutionary terms by each local emergent intelligence (germline), and eventually outgrown, in a cosmic evolutionary developmental process we may term a "developmental singularity."

Intelligent life on our planet may be engaged in the creation of such a developmental singularity, a process that should be rapidly accelerated by the technological singularity likely to occur in this century. This trend is apparently driven and elucidated by the mechanism of space, time, energy, and matter (STEM) efficiency and density increase, or "compression," in all known universal computation. Emergent complex systems consistently discover how to use less of these finite universal resources (space-time and energy-matter) to encode information and perform computations/simulations/thoughts. This leads them to become dramatically more materially, energetically, spatially, and temporally dense (accelerated) over time, rapidly approximating black hole-equivalent energy densities. Systems of emergent local complexity thus lead rapidly to "intelligent" cosmological developmental singularities, highly compressed structures, censored from universal observation, which are very likely distantly related to the quasars and black holes that are developmental endpoints of simpler (universal, galactic and stellar evolutionary development) cyclic physical-computational substrates in the multiverse.

Fortunately, researchers in astrobiology and the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) may provide empirical confirmation of this transcension hypothesis within the next few decades by actively seeking and identifying "radio fossils," which we define as unintentional, weak, by-product transmissions of kHz, MHz, and GHz radio signals (radio, TV, radar, etc.), that are statistically likely to emanate from the surface of all planets with early technological civilizations. We further argue that a predictable fraction of such signals must inexplicably cease transmitting as each civilization enters its own local developmental singularity. We argue that intentional, high-powered transmissions (aka 'beacons') are never constructed by advanced civilizations for ethical and information theoretic reasons, because such one-way messages can be clearly shown to reduce and homogenize, not improve universal evolutionary complexity en route to a developmental singularity, and because the physics of transcension will very likely tell us that the only way to meet and naturally select with other universal intelligences is to take the path of inner space, not outer space, in our cosmic future.

www.accelerating.org...


The Transcension Hypothesis:
Why Sufficiently Advanced Civilizations May Invariably Leave Our Universe,
and the Implications for METI and SETI.

© 2011, John M. Smart.

Abstract:
The emerging science of evolutionary developmental (“evo devo”) biology can aid us in thinking about our universe as both an evolutionary system, where most processes are unpredictable and creative, and a developmental system, where a special few processes are predictable and constrained to produce far-future-specific emergent order, as seen in the developmental processes in two genetically identical twins. The transcension hypothesis proposes that a universal process of evolutionary development guides all sufficiently advanced civilizations increasingly into inner space, the domain of very small scales of matter, energy, space, and time, and eventually, to a black-hole-like destination. Transcension as a developmental destiny would be a plausible solution to Fermi's Paradox, a problem which presents a particularly great explanatory challenge if ours is a biofelicitous universe. Various evolutionary and information theoretic reasons, mechanisms, and models for constrained transcension have been proposed and a few are briefly examined here. In this hypothesis, simpler civilizations that succeeded in resisting transcension by staying in outer (normal) space would be developmental failures, which are statistically very rare late in the life cycle of any developing system. If transcension is developmental, we may expect brief broadcasts, or subtle signs of galactic engineering in small portions of a few galaxies, but constrained transcension should be by far the norm. The transcension hypothesis has testable implications for our current and future METI and SETI agendas. In a developmental transcension, sending one-way METI may provably reduce the evolutionary diversity in all civilizations receiving the message. If true, a Prime Directive against one-way messaging would be a future moral development in all sufficiently advanced civilizations, once they recognize they are on course to a black hole destiny. Fortunately, SETI can provide an empirical test. The hypothesis predicts regular cessation of EM leakage signals from all early technological civilizations soon after they develop the ability to use EM technology. Such signals would reliably cease as each civilization entered their own technological singularities (emergence of postbiological intelligence and life forms) and soon afterward, recognized they are on an accelerating path to black-hole-like environments.

www.accelerating.org...




edit on 24-6-2011 by setAI because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-6-2011 by setAI because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by SonOfTheLawOfOne
 



How about backing up your claims with some evidence? How about a page number from one of Mandelbrot's books? Or a direct quote from Hausdorff? Or a mathematical formula that disproves what setAI is claiming?

Why don't you put the burden on the other side as well?

It's a piece wise linear function --- duh!


If you don't have something more than just YOUR word, the one that you seem to keep on expecting everyone to believe, you are trolling.

So everyone here including you is a troll by this claim of yours since no one including you supplied references.

You might try taking a deep breath and try to support evidence. Can you do that after counting to 10?


I have looked at the Timewave enough times, as have enough other people, to know that it is fractal and slices of it absolutely do repeat without any doubt whatsoever, so there is self-similarity/quote]
You might try reading Mandelbrot to learn what self similarity is. There is nothing in TWZ that is self similar with respect to the concept of fractals.

Consider f(x)=sin(x) it is not fractal and it is as self similar as TWZ.


This is what is referred to by many here as RESONANCE in the Timewave, when a period of time looks exactly like another period of time, only shorter in duration.

There is a huge difference between the space filling concept of fractals and the resonance issue you refer to as the "self similarity" of fractals. In fractals if you zoom in arbitrarily far you continue to see the idea of self similarity. Think of all of the beautiful videos of Mandelbrot sets. That does not happen with TWZ. Zoom in and soon all you see is a straight line segment. Zoom in more and it is just a straight line segment. That does not happen with fractals. The complex shapes continue to be seen.


you have to apply an anisotropic transformation

Can you provide a reference to this claim? No. Because this has nothing to do with fractals.

Clearly you have some rather large misconceptions about fractals. Here is a link to the idea of fractal dimension in which you can see that objects such as curved lines and spheres are 1 and 2 dimensions respectively.
Fractal Dimensions

Please see if you can calculate the fractal dimensions of objects such as a circle and then see that the TWZ is nothing more than a shape of fractal dimension 1.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by setAI
 


Now where in the reference web page is there anything other than an unsubstantiated claim that the TWZ is fractal.

What a failure!



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 11:26 AM
link   
The paper then goes on to show that the function is a piece wise linear function, ie. not fractal.

How bogus is that!



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 03:43 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by SonOfTheLawOfOne
 



The final rendering is a fractal waveform compiled mathematically (vector math) from the merging of 3 separate bi-directional linear waveforms

A finite merging of linear waveforms cannot be fractal.


Please demonstrate to us all how this is not true and cite references and resources to the contrary. Put up or shut up, it's really that simple.

You have provided zero evidence that this is fractal. Were is fractal then the fractal dimension would be given. That is how we would all know it is fractal. This is nothing more than a piece-wise linear function and that has fractal dimension 1.


You keep referring to a fractal in the altruistic sense of the word.

What word did you actually mean to use here?


A fractal that is self-similar does not have to be exact, and if you really did know anything about Mandelbrot or had actually read one of his books, you'd know that.

Strawman argument. I've made no such claim. All I am stating is that a piece wise linear function has a fractal dimension of 1. TWZ is not fractal.


Your constant harping on the definition of fractals along with your misunderstanding of their use points to your understanding being limited to graphics or 3D modeling of some kind.

Another nonsense claim on your part.


Your constant harping on the definition of fractals along with your misunderstanding of their use points to your understanding being limited to graphics or 3D modeling of some kind.

Mandelbrot points out that fractals do not exist in nature, but their approximations do. These approximations may exhibit fractal properties for 3 or 4 levels as in pulmonary structures or vascular systems. They are not fractal. Neurites were once thought to be rough approximations to fractals. That is now known to be incorrect.


This repeating sequence, along with the fractional Brownian motion of the combined sequence, is what creates the recursive "fractal" feature of the Timewave and allows for resonance to be viewed in the renderer, but let's not get too far over your head by actually providing evidence that you say nobody has...

If you had read and understood anything about fractals then you'd know that:
1. A repeating sequence is not fractal.
2. There is no "Brownian motion" here.
3. A finite combination of non-fractal forms is still not a fractal


To quote Sheliak directly from his paper on the Timewave formula:

The quote you use says nothing about the fractal nature of TWZ.

Instead of making boisterous posts of little content why don't you tell us all what the fractal dimension is.


I have provided enough evidence in this post alone to close the argument you are fighting for dear life to uphold

The issue is simply that you and others are bellowing about this being fractal yet provide no evidence other than others saying without evidence that the plot is fractal. If it were fractal then it would have a fractal dimension other than 1. It does not.


What evidence do you have to back this up? Please show everyone that there is nothing in TWZ that is self similar? Show us all that the Timewave doesn't have repeating patterns in it?

Again repeating sequences along the x-axis does not make a fractal. The function f(x)=sin(x) is not fractal and is repeating. Please read Mandelbrot and learn. The repeating patterns need to be at different scales of view. That does not happen here.

A fractal is a space filling object. TWZ is space filling with a fractal dimension of 1.


Why do you keep trying to pick apart the math when you don't even have a grasp on it???

So you do know why TWZ is not a fractal, but you are pretending that it is? Why are you being a troll?


A formula for a sinusoidal wave? Really?? You're saying that a repeating wave such as a sine wave, the kind that comes from a continuous tone/sound, is similar to the Timewave? This makes absolutely no sense... not only that, but you just said TWZ is not self similar, but now you are comparing something that IS self similar to it, essentially saying that Timewave IS self similar.... talk about "foot in mouth" disease...

I'm sorry this was too hard a concept for you to understand. I'll try to find a simpler example to show you that the type of self similarity everyone thinks is pertinent to fractals is not. I apologize for going over your head with this example.


Because I know for 100% fact that there are people on this thread that can take screenshots of different larger sections of the Timewave that you can zoom in to and see the same pattern repeat.

Really? They can do this indefinitely? I doubt you. I know this is a false claim.


Yes, I can. The fractal transformation is directional (anisotropic). It has to begin with a start or end point and move in the opposite direction, which is why the software asks you how many days back from the end date you want to go. Here is the formula

The only thing in that image is an effort to show that the function is bounded. There is nothing there about it being fractal. There is nothing there about the rest of your claims.


Clearly, YOU don't have an understanding of true fractals or the math behind them, and your only knowledge appears to come from 3D rendering software and not actual mathematics.

Another failure on your part. I do not have such rendering software. My understanding comes from mathematics.


When calculating the Timewave, you first start with a wave going forward. It has a starting point and an end/terminal point. The King Wen sequence is used to generate the "random" points along the wave using the First Order of Difference, which as I explained before, is the number of lines that change as you move through each hexagram. The number set is derived from the I-Ching hexagrams. This process uses a piecewise linear function which expands and combines the line segments connecting each point in the sequence to form the "wave" from the start to the end. Each wave is then flipped and inverted (180 degree rotation of the wave about the x,y axes origin (0,0)), then joined at the start and end points to create a bi-directional wave, which is also the most basic building block of the Timewave. The piecewise linear nature AND wave directed flow lend themselves to vector mathematics, which are what is being used to create the full Timewave. When the three sets of bi-directional waves are created (linear, trigramatic, hexagramatic) and merged, they create "noise", also known as a Guassian process, which is otherwise known as fractional Brownian motion or the Wiener Process. Since the waves represent a probability distribution and reflect a form of "noise" that has to be filtered out, it IS fractal because of it's fractional Hausdorff dimension.

Fine. You redefine everything and tell the story, but you make a mistake in your claim in saying that merging a finite number of non-fractals create noise. That's simply a ludicrous claim that is the essence of TWZ. You get to the crux of the issue and then you simply state it is endowed with noise. You claim that the noise is Gaussian without proof.

Again, this is not fractal.


This is what everyone is trying to determine and figure out... which is why some people try to connect events the way they do. Rather than just dispel it as myth, perhaps you should try to better understand it. It's ok to admit when you are wrong or don't know something and ask a question.

Everyone is pretending that this is fractal and has meaning. This is a 150+ page thread about shoehorning.


You are really way off on your math and your attitude.

My math is on target. I am not the one pretending that a finite collection of non-fractals becomes fractal.


If you choose to disrupt the discussion with no evidence of any kind other than your opinion, I will continue to complain every single time you do and encourage others to do the same.

The last time someone tried to organize a vigilante group there were a number of temporary bannings from ATS.

You might want to invest your time in learning why you are mistaken.

edit on 27-6-2011 by stereologist because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by stereologist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 12:59 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   

A friendly reminder...



...to please remain on topic and refrain from personally attacking your fellow members. Adherence to this simple request is expected.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 07:20 PM
link   
Speaking of on topic, the point of this thread was to track the transition to the end point at 2012, not to dissect the math of the Timewave. I'm sure there are other threads for that or one can be graciously created.

After getting a deep refresher course on Timewave, and since we're talking about tracking novelty, I'd like to see what others believe novelty consists of as it pertains to the I-Ching? What is it within the I-Ching that is being delineated by the King Wen number sequence or is hidden within the probability of the hexagram values? I think this is pretty important because that is in essence what is being plotted on the Timewave, is a set of probabilities based on something embedded within the I-Ching. Is that something nature? Pure math? Consciousness?

I highly recommend that other members look into the work of Laurent Nottale and some of his work and theories around fractal time and space (heavy math and physics), as well as Susie Vrobel and some of her papers on the fractal time concept. Both of these individuals are intimately involved in the study of time and consciousness. You should also look into what Roger Penrose terms as "insight", which I believe will resonate with most of the members on this thread. Last but not least, if you haven't looked into the work of Stuart Hameroff and his study of consciousness from a medical perspective, I highly recommend you check him out and look at the publications on his site..

These individuals have been working on very similar work to McKenna and Timewave theory. Very good reading on all of them and will definitely shed more light on the idea of consciousness and how it interacts with time.

Enjoy! Sadly, I will not be posting here anymore. Good luck to everyone on their journey and I wish you all the best in the coming year!


~Namaste
edit on 28-6-2011 by SonOfTheLawOfOne because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-6-2011 by SonOfTheLawOfOne because: was moderated, so I am done playing these stupid games... I have better ways to waste my time.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 09:26 PM
link   
What is important for everyone to understand is that studies of the nature of time are unrelated to whether or not TWZ is fractal or not. If time is fractal or quantum or continuous is not related to the issue of whether or not TWZ exhibits fractal nature.

TWZ is not fractal. It is a piece-wise linear function that is not fractal. The idea that it is fractal has been claimed to add some mystical quality to the plot.

One of the interesting points in time to me is 1890. In that year a very important project was undertaken. Because that project involved a particular technology, that technology was put to an important test that propelled the technology into the corporate and academic world. That technology would end up reshaping the future as it could be applied to an enormous range of problems. From 1890 to the 1920s a number of books promoted the increased use of this technology and gave a myriad of case studies in which it was shown that a better and more robust future was available.

If TWZ were really able to show instances of novelty then I would think that important dates such as 1941 and 1963 would resonate with 1890 and thus make it possible for people to determine the technology of interest. Anyone finding these resonances?



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 03:29 AM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


Its pretty hard to find resonances when you are dancing around your point. The only reason I can see for this is further derailing the thread. I for one am not going to engage you further on this topic unless you actually tell us what you are talking about.

Whatever your agenda it seems you've succeeded. Grats on ruining an otherwise awesome thread.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Cecilofs
 


If you want, you can add him as a foe and try to get the thread back on track.


Hopefully Zagari returns in the future.
edit on 30/6/11 by shadowland8 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Cecilofs
 


One of the mystical issues of the TWZ is that it is fractal. It is not.

I asked about 1890 and what years resonate with it. I asked if 1941, 1963 and other years resonated with 1890.

Dead silence.

So now people want to know what I am talking about. The issue is that if people told me what dates resonated with 1890 I could see if TWZ made sense. The reason I do not want to pick the resonating years is that I do not want to accused of misusing the plot and making amateurish mistakes. No. I want the people familiar with TWZ to pick the dates so that I can see if this makes sense.

This is a test. This is a test of TWZ that appears to have evoked fear from those that know this test may very well show that TWZ is bad.

Don't fear the test. Testing is important to separate the nonsense from the good. I may be very pleasantly surprised to see that at least in this test TWZ works.

Aren't people willing to run a test?



posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 03:21 AM
link   
Sigh...again I know its futile but...

As has been discussed at length already...

The absolute resonances for 1890 are ~5800BC and Mid-Late January 2011.



Please excuse the rough editing. This picture shows TWZ from 1880 to 2012. I have marked in 1890 and 1963. Note the repeating pattern in the white boxes, which while not exactly the same shape shows some similarity, implying some resonance between the two dates.

There does not appear to be any link between 1890 and 1941.

So now you can tell us what you are talking about, why there is a link between that and the dates 1890, 1941 and 1963 and how this debunks TWZ.
edit on 2-7-2011 by Cecilofs because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-7-2011 by Cecilofs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Expanding upon what Cecilofs posted ,I have discovered these resonance patterns..



We are currently resonating strongly within the light blue highlightings.

As you can see ,the resonances within the purple highlightings are close to identical.
In between the resonance patterns I've highlighted ,there apparently are smaller
versions of the same. I have yet to look into how they are arranged.

This is what the Timewave looks like for 4th of July 2011 ;



We see that familiar resonance again with that special point of 21:21 GMT (wintertime)
as we go generally further into novelty while the day passes.

Looking at the highlighted resonances again we see that they match this year
and next year as well as all those years between 1880 and 2012 ,
which means we're repeating the influences of all these years again
and influences of this year of 2011 are then overlayed and added to 2012
as the patterns are also repeat again as you can see by the highlighted resonances.
These last two years are influenced in much the same way ,
but the dips into novelty in 2012 mean twice as much relative to 2011.



The final cycle that is larger than a year begins on 2nd-3rd of December 2011 ,
and also ends in 21st Dec 2012 ,like the other larger cycles nearing the end of the wave.

** Its not futile ,Cecilofs.

edit on 4/7/2011 by Mystic Technician because: Edit to add**

edit on 4/7/2011 by Mystic Technician because: Edit to fix



posted on Jul, 5 2011 @ 08:59 AM
link   
Look at the parallelism in history/technology every 67 years:

1816 " The year without summer " after Tambora eruption and 1883 " Krakatoa brings down global temperature "

1848 " Year of turmoil " and 1915 " during first world war "

Otto Bismarck and Hitler

The Belle Epoque and the decades 1950-1970

The first world war and 1980s Cold War

1918 spanish flu and Chernobyl radiations and also Aids

1903 first flight and 1970 first supersonic flight with Concorde

1900 Boxer Rebellion and 1967- 1968 " Youth riots "

The suffraggettes and modern fashion for women

Mussolini rise and 1980s- 1990s rise of Berlusconi

Russian famine in 1920s and Soviet Union collapse

1914 " royal death " on their wedding day anniversary and 1981 wedding of Princess Diana and Prince Charles

The New London School explosion, worst catastrophe to take place in a school building and 2004 Beslan school hostage crisis

Spanish Civil war and 2004 Madrid terror attack and following riots

1938 New England Hurricane , very powerful , costly and dangerous and Katrina 2005 hurricane ( New Orleans )

Rudolph Valentino death, major grief for fans of this actor...67 years later...River Phoenix death and major grief for fans of this actor.
Rudolph died on AUGUST 23 and River was born on AUGUST 23.

The Dust Bowls and 9/11

Russian Famine and Ethiopian famine

1st cartoon character Felix the Cat and 67 years later, the debut of Simpsons

Surrender of Greece and 67 years later situation in Greece in 2008

War of The Worlds 1938 radio debut...67 years later...War of the Worlds modern movie

What more similarities do you need?

With future resonances all the past events will re-occur in a modern way...I imagine there is an example with first flight 1903, supersonic flight 1970 and solar engined flight in 2011...





edit on 5-7-2011 by Zagari because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-7-2011 by Zagari because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
The graph actually ends in a gradual way: there are 3 END STAGES, one is THIS year on OCTOBER 31 2011 ( Original graph ) DECEMBER 3 2011 ( modern graph ) and this stage represents an ending event in itself, it will be a change of epoch in humanity, something that will freak the whole world in a way never witnessed before.

I want to make clear that the other two END STAGES as we know of, have a distance of 6 DAYS between each other, than the graph changes epoch- time cycle in hours and minutes and seconds and than it is non- measurable anymore.

I want to make clear that by December 2011 we will see 90% of the END STAGE of humanity's evolution, progress, and probably than, destiny.

I foresee 3 possible outcomes other than time travel, that would be more of a sudden change...

- Technological singularity- We are currently in a stage that should be called " Toward singularity, but still too far " or " Pre- pre- singularity period ".
We may enter " Real pre-singularity stage " in a very concrete way by December 2011. Progress may start to go on in a total different way, with another rapidity, with a real rush that would end up in Technological singularity being achieved 6 DAYS BEFORE END DATE.
Because by than, we will experience more change since the dawn of humanity in days , than more change than ever before in minutes, seconds.
By the end of the first year after singularity we will get a 200 centuries worth of technological progress, like living through 200 centuries of changes in a year.
This is what I read about it.

- Than , as a poster said also in another thread, that the graph measures changes in the human genome evolution and diversification, than I thought that super-volcanic eruptions produce eventually massive changes in the human genome evolution, since after Toba eruption the 20.000 remaining people " created " the current diversification in humanity.
We might have a super eruption and following 6 years long winter in 2011...
Than, suddenly, massive migrations of people would occur and human genome would change forever.

- Aliens; we might enter in contact with a alien civilization in December 2011, and real visual contact would occur likely around Easter 2012 ( Last big peak ) and than the irreversible merging of cultures by the end of 2012 might be the final event.



new topics

top topics



 
575
<< 155  156  157    159  160  161 >>

log in

join