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: 163
575
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 03:44 PM
Checking in.
I'm glad to see that this thread is alive and well. I'll be in to read more later.

(I was half expecting cobwebs!)

posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 04:32 PM
reply to post by stereologist

Found this example too which is quite interesting (From wikipedia) "Fifteen views of evolution: When plotted on a logarithmic graph, 15 separate lists of key events in history and prehistory show an exponential trend. Graphed by Ray Kurzweil, "

The graph and list of 'events' is here en.wikipedia.org...
aradigmShiftsFrr15Events.svg

This is the graph

posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 06:05 PM
reply to post by Wobbly Anomaly

That is an odd plot to say the least. Here is the link for others that want to see the source
Paradigm Shifts for 15 lists of Key Events

Begin with the Sagan points which are green circles. There are green circles plotted somewhere just over 10 billion years ago. The vertical axis is "Time to Next Event." There are green circles a short distance down and right of the 3 green circles at the upper left end of the "line". This is because the graph is in fact a log plot of the first derivative. This is a difference plot, which is an approximation of the first derivative. The plot is log-log.

The problem here is that the shape of the graph is dependent on the time to the next event. The plot is dependent on which events are chosen. By picking and choosing events the plot can be shaped.

Ray Kurzweil does not make it clear how he orchestrated these plots. I want to see the data before I believe this claim. It appears to be based on Kurzweil's claim of a technological singularity.
www.csicop.org...

For more on Kurzweil and his ideas
www.michaelshermer.com...
periodicals.faqs.org...

edit on 22-8-2011 by stereologist because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 08:08 PM
reply to post by Wobbly Anomaly

Im sure you are being pedantic for the sake of it, cheeky :-) The speed that we are able to physically get from a) to b) has increased exponentially, as you say hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of years on foot, thousands of years on animals, hundreds of years with engines on the ground, 50ish years with flight 100's of times faster than ground based transport. Follow that trend and we should see millions of miles an hour in the next 10 years.

Pedantic? Hmm. I was not being pedantic. Travel speed has been limited by physical issues. It is not exponential in nature. On foot we are limited by the ability of muscle to move. That limit for humans has not changed appreciably over time. Then we relied on animals. Again the issue is limited to the ability of muscles to move. That limit has not changed appreciably over time. Engines on the ground are limited to many factors. Yes, there has been appreciable change. The early limits due to travel surfaces be it roads or rails and vehicles is still limited. Those limits are due to physical factors such as heat engine efficiencies. Air flight is well over 50 years old. There was aerial combat in WWI. Still commercial air travel is constrained by such things as the speed of sound.

The only trend here is the limitation due to the physical processes involved. Even were your so-called trend in any way valid then your claim of millions of miles per hour in the next 10 years is a failure. Please rework your math to see how wrong your claim is.

Without repeating the above, we have moved from creating energy from fire in our prehistory to nuclear weapons and particle accelerators.

Particle accelerators consume power. Nuclear weapons do not create energy that can be consumed.

Processing an amount of information (not intelligence) the information we process now did not exist in pre-history (physics, computers.....etc) but much (not all) of our past is passed down ie we hav'nt forgotten how to play music or count or grow crops, but we have learnt about space travel, the universe at large, quantum theory....etc

Do any individuals know more today than before? There are more topics and there are more people. There is no evidence at all that people are processing more information than before.

I read somewhere that the human brain, as far as we know, is the most complex thing in the universe, but as you go back in time, structures break down, galaxies return to atoms which in turn were just a soup of particles which seems to have come from an even simpler state, similar to a singularity.

The human brain is complex. So are the brains of other creatures. We still do not understand the origin of intelligence or thinking from the organic structure of brains. In terms of the universe selecting a brain is like selecting a single molecule from the Earth and claiming the localized structure of the Earth is doing something different.

I suppose that the original statement was so vague that it could be argued either way making it rather useless.

edit on 22-8-2011 by stereologist because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 10:50 PM
I downloaded timewave zero, entered the date Sept. 26, 2011 (date elenin passes between earth and sun) and resonated backwards and came up with the exact date that Nazis were appointed the heads of German states. Innnteresting...

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 02:26 AM

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Wobbly Anomaly

Consider the speed at which humans can travel.
Foot travel was there for a long time and is limited. For millions of years Homo traveled at that speed.
Within the last few thousand years animals were used for travel. Again there is a limit to that speed.
Then the machines arrived. That is still limited. Cars today do not travel faster than cars 50 years ago. Trains for the most part are no faster. Planes are no faster.

No variation of Moore's Law applies to travel.

The amount of power we produce is proportional to consumption. Is our consumption up or stable? Are we consuming in an exponential pattern? I don't believe that is true.

Humans are no better at processing knowledge or memes than they were thousands of years ago. People were intelligent then and they are today.

The "localized complexity of the universe" is not changing either. Our understanding may change, but not what you suggest.

Moore's Law absolutely could apply to travel though in the overall sense that there is a doubling time of technological advancement that is always being reduced, not just what Moore's Law sais in particular but what Moore's Law suggests.

Moore's Law doesn't directly imply anything from a technological standpoint other than how it relates to computer chips and how those computer chips are used in said technology. But the overall concept of one breakthrough technological advancement leading to more technological advancements is sound.

With regard to "travel", that's much trickier than most people think from a relativistic point of view. We have no way of knowing exactly how fast we're traveling through the universe right now while sitting in our computer chairs or on our couches. Earth is rotating, earth orbits the sun, sun travels around the galactic arm with relation to other stars, the galaxy hurdles through space at an inconcievable speed, etc..etc..

It all adds up. But it is impossible to know how fast anything is really going since we don't know all the variables. Maybe the only reason "general theory of relativity" time dilation is possible is because traveling towards the speed of light gets you closer to slowing down with relation to space/time in general. But still, too many unknown variables.

Towards the end of Stephen Hawking's "The Universe in a Nutshell", he talks about how dark matter might be gravity bleed through from parallel universes as well which is pretty compelling. Scientists are now studying circular structures in the microwave background radiation from the big bang, saying that it could be proof of other universe "bubbles" out there interacting with the edge of our own universe.

It is also possible that each of those bubbles has different laws of physics than our own. We also know that the laws of physics is not the same throughout our own universe. IMO, her argument that the structure of the universe might be changing locally just depends on how you define "local". But it is absolutely true that the universe is in a constant state of flux.

-ChriS

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 06:17 AM

Originally posted by thingthing
I downloaded timewave zero, entered the date Sept. 26, 2011 (date elenin passes between earth and sun) and resonated backwards and came up with the exact date that Nazis were appointed the heads of German states. Innnteresting...

Exactly why Timewave Zero is meaningless and can mean anything. Like Nostradamus. Or any other fail pseudoprophetic bullsheeeet.

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 06:49 AM

Originally posted by BlasteR
Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Wobbly Anomaly

With regard to "travel", that's much trickier than most people think from a relativistic point of view. We have no way of knowing exactly how fast we're traveling through the universe right now while sitting in our computer chairs or on our couches. Earth is rotating, earth orbits the sun, sun travels around the galactic arm with relation to other stars, the galaxy hurdles through space at an inconcievable speed, etc..etc..

It all adds up. But it is impossible to know how fast anything is really going since we don't know all the variables. Maybe the only reason "general theory of relativity" time dilation is possible is because traveling towards the speed of light gets you closer to slowing down with relation to space/time in general. But still, too many unknown variables.

I was certainly looking at it as our speed relative to our immediate environment. Its an excellent point though and maybe another way to address it would be to say our increasing ability to introduce conditions into a system which can effect our relative motion through 'space' as plotted against our relative motion through time. In the grand scheme of things (as far as maximum manipulation of spacetime goes) then we are only just scratching the surface, all be it an exponential surface....a bit like early inflation in the universe....maybe...digress. But we are able more and more to alter our position in the x,y graph of spacetime.
edit on 23-8-2011 by Wobbly Anomaly because: evolution

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 07:03 AM
reply to post by BlasteR

Moore's Law absolutely could apply to travel though in the overall sense that there is a doubling time of technological advancement that is always being reduced, not just what Moore's Law sais in particular but what Moore's Law suggests.

Moore's Law doesn't directly imply anything from a technological standpoint other than how it relates to computer chips and how those computer chips are used in said technology. But the overall concept of one breakthrough technological advancement leading to more technological advancements is sound.

Moore's Law is a specific issue - number of ICs on a cheap chip. It cannot be "absolutely" applied. You might claim that there are analogous situations in other areas. Moore's Law only describes ICs - nothing else.

The development of IC chips is based on a rapid refinement of a particular technology. That does not mean that other areas can be as rapidly developed.

With regard to "travel", that's much trickier than most people think from a relativistic point of view. We have no way of knowing exactly how fast we're traveling through the universe right now while sitting in our computer chairs or on our couches. Earth is rotating, earth orbits the sun, sun travels around the galactic arm with relation to other stars, the galaxy hurdles through space at an inconcievable speed, etc..etc..

So now you try to create a fake scenario claiming we are traveling fast. Again there is a huge mistake here. That has nothing to do with technology. Second there is no absolute frame of reference in the universe.

It all adds up. But it is impossible to know how fast anything is really going since we don't know all the variables. Maybe the only reason "general theory of relativity" time dilation is possible is because traveling towards the speed of light gets you closer to slowing down with relation to space/time in general. But still, too many unknown variables.

Please learn the basics before making such claims. Learn what a frame of reference is.

Before rambling off on parallel universes and other things that are highly speculative go back to the basics and figure out why you made a number of logical mistakes.

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 07:06 AM
reply to post by Wobbly Anomaly

Its an excellent point though and maybe another way to address it would be to say our increasing ability to introduce conditions into a system which can effect our relative motion through 'space' as plotted against our relative motion through time.

Here again comes the fallacy of thinking that there is an absolute reference system or a reference system for space.

But we are able more and more to alter our position in the x,y graph of spacetime.

Please provide an example of this claim.

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 12:56 PM

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Wobbly Anomaly

Its an excellent point though and maybe another way to address it would be to say our increasing ability to introduce conditions into a system which can effect our relative motion through 'space' as plotted against our relative motion through time.

Here again comes the fallacy of thinking that there is an absolute reference system or a reference system for space.

?........That comment was specifically about relative motion, not sure why you thought it was about absolutes

But we are able more and more to alter our position in the x,y graph of spacetime.

Please provide an example of this claim.

Easiest example is if an object travels through space at close to the speed of light its movement through time is greatly reduced (X=space y=time an increase in velocity in either x or y produces a reduction in the other). Not my theory, Einstein's.

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 02:49 PM
reply to post by Logman

Exactly the type of comment from someone that doesn't know anything about how this graph works...
History is cyclic...

Anyway, I remember that Japan quake was 13 days late on the graph ( 1896 Japan quake and discovery of radio resonance ). Guess what was scheduled for 13 days ago...6.3 quake in Usa...

I looked at the date, it shows a jump of novelty lasting from August 23 to August 30.
edit on 23-8-2011 by Zagari because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 06:32 PM

Originally posted by Zagari
reply to post by Logman

Exactly the type of comment from someone that doesn't know anything about how this graph works...
History is cyclic...

Anyway, I remember that Japan quake was 13 days late on the graph ( 1896 Japan quake and discovery of radio resonance ). Guess what was scheduled for 13 days ago...6.3 quake in Usa...

I looked at the date, it shows a jump of novelty lasting from August 23 to August 30.
edit on 23-8-2011 by Zagari because: (no reason given)
Hmmm, the earthquake and now the hurricane that is about to hit the east coast?

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 09:01 PM
reply to post by Wobbly Anomaly

That comment was specifically about relative motion, not sure why you thought it was about absolutes

Relative to what? Space? I did not say just absolute. Please comment on what I wrote.

Easiest example is if an object travels through space at close to the speed of light its movement through time is greatly reduced (X=space y=time an increase in velocity in either x or y produces a reduction in the other). Not my theory, Einstein's.

The statement is not if it is possible, but the claim is that we are "able more and more" to accomplish this.

Please provide an example.

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 09:04 PM
reply to post by Zagari

Who would have thought that this thread would disintegrate back into shoehorning?

Actually, I did. There has been virtually nothing to this thread other than desperate attempts to claim novelty happening.

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 09:06 PM
reply to post by Lil Drummerboy

That earthquake was a nothing event. No deaths. Hardly any destruction.

Californians must be laughing their buttocks off at this moment as are Turks and the Japanese and the Indonesians and Alaskans and Chileans and Peruvians and New Zealanders at the folly of thinking this teeny weensy quake in the US was even newsworthy.

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 09:19 PM

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Lil Drummerboy

That earthquake was a nothing event. No deaths. Hardly any destruction.

Californians must be laughing their buttocks off at this moment as are Turks and the Japanese and the Indonesians and Alaskans and Chileans and Peruvians and New Zealanders at the folly of thinking this teeny weensy quake in the US was even newsworthy.
I replyed to you in the 5th night thread
edit on 23-8-2011 by Lil Drummerboy because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 12:43 AM
reply to post by stereologist

1) I was not applying Moore's Law "absolutely". That would be ridiculous, as I said already..

I'm not even remotely suggesting that Moore's Law is somehow applicable to technology in any way, shape or form... I said that too. Moore's Law is Moore's Law. I get it.

However, one could look at what Moore's Law potentially suggests about technology and consider the possibilities. That's all we were doing here.

2) There is no fake argument about whether how fast we are or are NOT traveling. Speed is relative. That is just basic physics. The more variables in the equation you have, the more accurately you can represent speed with relation to a traveling object and space/time in general.

You can't solve for "X" if you don't even know what all the variables in the equation are.

You can get closer and closer to the solution over time, perhaps, with new discoveries - sort of like Drake's Equation. That's about it.

Travel isn't as simple as a car traveling at 60 mph. Not if you account for all the variables.

The sun travels around the galaxy at approximately 640,000 miles per hour. That's only one variable. It adds up fast.

-ChriS

posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:36 AM

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Wobbly Anomaly

That comment was specifically about relative motion, not sure why you thought it was about absolutes

Relative to what? Space? I did not say just absolute. Please comment on what I wrote.

Easiest example is if an object travels through space at close to the speed of light its movement through time is greatly reduced (X=space y=time an increase in velocity in either x or y produces a reduction in the other). Not my theory, Einstein's.

The statement is not if it is possible, but the claim is that we are "able more and more" to accomplish this.

Please provide an example.

Relative to the immediate environment, eg a plane relative to the ground.

posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 05:07 AM
I was wondering this:

Given that the 64 years long cycle is going to end on December 2 2012, and given the discovery of the links between 1970s this spring, 1980s this summer ( 1989 Tienamnen and Norway July 2011 is an example ) and now 1990s ( 1992 L.A. riots and London riots 2011 ), as of now, today linked with summer 1995...

What if we are going to repeat also 1995 to 2001 and 2001 to 2011 events THIS year and not the next one?
Because the cycle ends THIS year, and than after December 2 2011 for 13 months we repeat the modern resonances for past events in a renewed even more modern way.

What happens on the most novel point this year on December 2 2011 ( or on October 31 2011 for the original graph ) will be directly influencing the final event.
So, that, probably, after that day we are going to repeat the events from November 14 2010 to December 2 2011.

Think about it. We are in a completely new cycle by December 2 2011.

top topics

575