Timewave Zero - Countdown to Transition

reply to post by MrXYZ


Can't wait for my 23rd birthday in early 2013 to spend my birthday looking at all those skeptics grasping at straws to explain what is happening.
It will be like the industrial revolution with steroids.
Can't wait to spend my 23rd birthday with aliens, teleporting or whatever will come in 2013.
Can't wait to see my friend sending me a message telling me " I should have listened to you "...

I frankly don't know how much more research can be useful to bring chronical skeptics to think tmz is reliable. With all the data written in here, if someone would bring this thread to some president, he/she would take it seriously.

In 2009 I had doubts about timewave, the same in 2010, but this year I've been convinced that Mckenna was right, the timewave is real.

This thread is the most important document currently existant in human history. One should only read every page to find the proof that is required.

Even those who say 9/11 wasn't indicated as novel can now read that there is the 64 n. pattern in that date.
That date is directly linked to the date of the eschaton.
It is 64 times 64 days distant from december 2012.

I will be here until the end of the time ( that for me is February 23 2013 ) to say that timewave is right and bringing proof to it.
The people who don't want to listen are impossible to change. Who has got it, will be prepared.

I am absolutely convinced the problems of the economy will end in late 2012 and the economic numbers will be record high in 2013, like nothing that has ever been seen before,
I have my personal doubts about the existance of aliens as much as I have doubts about the existance of God, but I'm convinced we are going toward technological singularity.

The last two pages have been a return to the past, let's say November 2010, I hope it will be different in a few days.


Oh, and nobody of the skeptics in here has EVER brought something of SUBSTANCE to debunk the timewave, only poor quality videos and vague definitions, always driving away the people from the subject.

No skeptic can say " nothing will happen ". That would be a prediction and they should be against predictions.

I don't think that we will see something of substance from stereologist , XYZ and the other ones.
I postd resonances, novelty calendars and similarities between past and present.
In this contest, in this subject, that is what counts, not questions about the calculation of novelty.

The novelty is seen in numbers, in pictures. Even a kid would understand how to differentiate between novelty days and how to calculate novelty. Those doubts about novelty are just absurd. It is all a way to drive away from the subject.
Clearly they don't have the software in their hands to see.
They talk about something they never experienced, never seen with their own eyes.

reply to post by Zagari


So McKenna timed the entire thing (aliens, teleportation, lol) to coincide with your birthday? How quaint!

reply to post by MrXYZ


No, my birthday is 70 days later...( my godfather is born on that date ).
But I have my doubts about the end date, I admit December 21 2012 may be cherry picked, because I looked at the graph of 1945 and September 8 1945 is the most novel day of that year.
But that is no problem...The year doesn't change, but the month may be November and the day may be November 18 2012 at 13 pm ( my time zone ).

I am expecting the following dates to test the timewave: December 2- 3 2011, April 9 2012, November 18 2012, December 21 2012.

In December 2010, after my personal research on tmz, I questioned the end date calculation. I believe that the 64 days pattern is indispensable in timewave zero. All novelty points are connected by a distance of 64 days between each other.
Therefore, the real process should be similar to November 2010 - January 2011. Than, the graph went almost off scale and if one can see the single year 2010, the graph goes off scale.
The same should happen in 2012, bringing the end date 6 days before my birthday, on February 23 2013.

But I studied 1945 graph. November 2012 end date is more reliable. ( my personal opinion ).
Last night I made other calculation. If one wants to set the ending events on November 18 2012 or December 21 2012, that date should be off scale since 64 days, bringing the OFF SCALE DATE to be either September 15 2012 or October 18 2012.
I took my note books where I wrote the resonances of the timewave for 2011-2012 and I made correlations. It seems to work with the September 2012 off scale date ( caution, this is not the end date ). The end date rests the same, Nov. or Dec. 2012.

Well, these are my personal works, anyway, I may be completely wrong, but this is my understanding of the theory.

It is actually all about the number 64, the whole graph is based on 64.
The I ching has 64 hexagrams. Dna has 64 codons.
We may say that the " off scale date " toward the final path to the eschaton was in fact September 11 2001,because the date is distant from the final one, 64 times 64 days.
That was a date with globl consequences. A real and factual precursor of the end date.

Following this process, the off scale date should be the future resonance date of 9/11, that occurs always, and must occur always, 64 days before a given end date.

I hope my personal thinking process is understood, even if completely off, it may be something.

I found a post from ursprachist that says that if we calculate distance between a date of today and December 21 2012 and divide the result for 64 we get the hexagram number for that day.

The hexagram of I Ching for tomorrow is the 6, arguing, conflict and lawsuit.
Sounds interesting!

reply to post by Zagari

I frankly don't know how much more research can be useful to bring chronical skeptics to think tmz is reliable. With all the data written in here, if someone would bring this thread to some president, he/she would take it seriously.

You actually have not done appropriate research. All you have done is to look for support and avoided looking for failures. A real research looks for those things that support an idea and also look for those things that refute an idea.

TWZ is only real in the sense that it exists. It is not a description of the world or how it behaves. You think this thread is somehow important, but it is nothing more than a list of things you desire to be true. You work from the assumption that TWZ describes the world and use that to claim issues are novel or not.

You describe the problem well here:

I will be here until the end of the time ( that for me is February 23 2013 ) to say that timewave is right and bringing proof to it.

Here you tell us that TWZ is your religion. You have been treating it like holy scripture and now you affirm that stance once again.

I have my personal doubts about the existance of aliens as much as I have doubts about the existance of God, but I'm convinced we are going toward technological singularity.

Again with the use of the term singularity. I doubt you have a proper definition for the term, but simply use it because it sounds good.

Oh, and nobody of the skeptics in here has EVER brought something of SUBSTANCE to debunk the timewave, only poor quality videos and vague definitions, always driving away the people from the subject.

I asked about 1890. I asked what it resonates with and I stumped the thread. I was met with vitriolic commentary for daring to challenge the close minded people that refuse to test TWZ. No one could come up with even the basic idea of what set the date apart of novel.

No skeptic can say " nothing will happen ". That would be a prediction and they should be against predictions.

Another false claim. There are many predictable issues: tides, eclipses, and all of the other things where you can get a table of scientific predictions.

I postd resonances, novelty calendars and similarities between past and present.

You have avoided the next step which is to test the TWZ and see if you can refute it. What counts is actually trying to refute TWZ. I believe you haven't tried because down deep you know it is a sham. You know if you tried you would see fallacies.

Even a kid would understand how to differentiate between novelty days and how to calculate novelty.

Please calculate for October 14, 2011. Please show us how you calculated the value.

Those doubts about novelty are just absurd. It is all a way to drive away from the subject.

I have asked for 150 pages how to calculate or determine novelty and I have been met with all sorts of childish commentary. That is the essence of the problem. If it was as easy as you state, then why have you balked in answering for over 150 pages?

Clearly they don't have the software in their hands to see.

There is the problem. You can't calculate it can you? All you can do is to treat TWZ as holy scripture.

reply to post by Zagari

All novelty points are connected by a distance of 64 days between each other.

Not possible since the time frame changes.

If one wants to set the ending events on November 18 2012 or December 21 2012, that date should be off scale since 64 days, bringing the OFF SCALE DATE to be either September 15 2012 or October 18 2012.

Are you already seeing failures and are looking for an excuse?

reply to post by stereologist


I am experimenting. Remember this whole thread is a test for Timewave Zero. I am free to post my own personal works about the way timewave may work better, even if I am not the new Sheliak...

Also, timewave is not my religion. I have no religion. I am young and enthusiast that this theory exists, simple as that. And I reply to this thread because it needs to go on, we need to discuss.
I miss the pages where Evasius was posting, it was better than me in mantaining control of this thread and explaining the timewave.

This theory is simply the best way to explain the universe and time that I had ever come across.

P. S. I wrote " caution, this is not the end date, this is a off scale date, the end date would be the same as before ".

reply to post by stereologist


The novelty for October 14 2010 is calculated as 6. 13, when instead October 4 2011 is 6.02 and November 22 2011 is 4.97. , December 3 2011 is 4.88.
Lower the number, higher the novelty. It also varies on the same day. I took the hour the day was shown to be most novel, than touching the bottom. So, an earlier hour can be less novel than the next one.

If we look at 2011 graph as a general year, we can easily see that any novelty point that occurs from and after September 23 2011 is higher than the one of January 17 2011.

Only because those novelty calculations have no term, it doesn't mean there is no way to calculate it. Novelty is easy to understand.
Any novelty point occurring after 1945 is hugely more intensely novel than any novelty point occurring in 17th century.


Technological singularity is a point when no prediction can be done regarding technological progress, because is the moment such process of technological evolution has reached a point of no return, and man has no more control on the process.
This can happen when we invent a machine able to auto-replicate itself and design better versions of itself, so that now man is no more useful.
This process is said to be hypotethical and may happen between 2025 and 2045 according to some.

reply to post by Zagari


You do treat this as religion.

This theory is simply the best way to explain the universe and time that I had ever come across.

So why are all of the posts about Earth bound events?

reply to post by Zagari

The novelty for October 14 2010 is calculated as 6. 13, when instead October 4 2011 is 6.02 and November 22 2011 is 4.97. , December 3 2011 is 4.88.
Lower the number, higher the novelty. It also varies on the same day. I took the hour the day was shown to be most novel, than touching the bottom. So, an earlier hour can be less novel than the next one.

How did you calculate these values?

If we look at 2011 graph as a general year, we can easily see that any novelty point that occurs from and after September 23 2011 is higher than the one of January 17 2011.

What do you mean by a novelty point? The entire graph is supposed to be a plot of novelty.

Only because those novelty calculations have no term, it doesn't mean there is no way to calculate it. Novelty is easy to understand.
Any novelty point occurring after 1945 is hugely more intensely novel than any novelty point occurring in 17th century.

I believe you meant to say units rather than term. I do realize that English is a second language for you and I want to be sure that I understand your post. You are stating that novelty is a unitless value, right? Even McKenna did not suggest that novelty was easy to understand.

Technological singularity is a point when no prediction can be done regarding technological progress, because is the moment such process of technological evolution has reached a point of no return, and man has no more control on the process.

This sounds more like a threshold than a singularity.

The notion of a self replicating machine is sometimes used as a suggestion that there are no other intelligent life forms in our galaxy.

It's all the little details that make tmz so amusing.

Like the end date, I wonder where they got the idea to have it end on 12-21-12.

Couldn't even be original.


I guess it's too bad the Mayans didn't get to patent their calendar.

Bare with me while a plaster a smile on my face and plough through this # one more time...

I asked about 1890. I asked what it resonates with and I stumped the thread. I was met with vitriolic commentary for daring to challenge the close minded people that refuse to test TWZ. No one could come up with even the basic idea of what set the date apart of novel.

That is a false claim. Both before and after you asked that we posted pages of resonances about the 1890s, the industrial revolution and how it resonates with what's happening today. You had in your mind ONE of the technological progressions that occurred at that time, which fit in with all of the other resonances thematically in that it was a move toward automation and industrialisation (Something about computers if I recall correctly, or was it trains which we'd already been talking about for some time?).

I have asked for 150 pages how to calculate or determine novelty and I have been met with all sorts of childish commentary. That is the essence of the problem. If it was as easy as you state, then why have you balked in answering for over 150 pages?

No, you've been answered multiple times. The answer is still the same - you can't calculate novelty. You can't quantify it. Its not a quantifiable quality, at least not in our current understanding and paradigm. The difference is that you claim this invalidates the theory and we don't see it that way. We just don't think that having a number next to novelty makes any difference to whether or not the theory is valid - for one the theory works just fine using relative values, but of course this becomes subjective. You've made your point on this and I fully accept your stance - I fully agree that this theory is not adequately supported scientifically. We just don't care, get over it.

To actually scientifically support this would take an enormous amount of work, literally comparing every single event in the entirety of the history of the planet to the wave and seeing how well everything lines up. Then you'd have to do complex analysis on every resonating event to see if they are closely enough related to call it a match. Unless someone out there is willing to pay me to do this (so I don't have to have another job to survive) its not gonna happen. Get over it.

There is the problem. You can't calculate it can you? All you can do is to treat TWZ as holy scripture.

He already told you how to calculate it in the first post he made about it (I think taking the days between now and end date and divide by 64). This isn't a measure of novelty but tells you which of the iChing characters the day resonates with. I think its kind of like a horoscope and as such of no value to science. Since the iChing was used to construct the wave, it will coincide with the graph and give you a rough idea of how likely novel events are on a given day.

Zagari - as much as I think this idea is on the right track, I don't think its perfect and I don't think we've proved it beyond all doubt (as I said to do so would be almost impossible). By all means be enthusiastic about it, just take it with a dose of healthy skepticism and remember that we might be wrong

Originally posted by TheOven
It's all the little details that make tmz so amusing.

Like the end date, I wonder where they got the idea to have it end on 12-21-12.

Couldn't even be original.


I guess it's too bad the Mayans didn't get to patent their calendar.

On the other hand, it makes perfect sense if the Mayans knew what they were talking about. Just over a year (Or perhaps a week!?!) till we see!

Oh and Believing is Seeing, not the other way around. Its a shame the person who came up with the original quote didn't get to patent their idea

This is a quite interesting subject.

Time does appear to be speeding up, and the now extending.....

reply to post by Cecilofs

That is a false claim. Both before and after you asked that we posted pages of resonances about the 1890s, the industrial revolution and how it resonates with what's happening today. You had in your mind ONE of the technological progressions that occurred at that time, which fit in with all of the other resonances thematically in that it was a move toward automation and industrialisation (Something about computers if I recall correctly, or was it trains which we'd already been talking about for some time?).

Actually your claim here is false. These so-called resonances had nothing to do with one of the most important events in automation.

No, you've been answered multiple times. The answer is still the same - you can't calculate novelty.

I continue to ask when people continue to make ludicrous claims about novelty and changes in novelty.

You can't quantify it. Its not a quantifiable quality,

The TWZ graph claims otherwise.

We just don't think that having a number next to novelty makes any difference to whether or not the theory is valid

This tall tale called TWZ involves a numerical plot. How can you even claim relative changes in novelty when you cannot produce numbers? How can anyone claim an event is novel if there is no way to characterize it numerically?

We just don't care, get over it.

And that is why I say it is nothing more than religion.

To actually scientifically support this would take an enormous amount of work, literally comparing every single event in the entirety of the history of the planet to the wave and seeing how well everything lines up. Then you'd have to do complex analysis on every resonating event to see if they are closely enough related to call it a match. Unless someone out there is willing to pay me to do this (so I don't have to have another job to survive) its not gonna happen. Get over it.

I see this as invalidating your initial claim in this post because there you mentioned posting a few resonances and now you claim you need to do much more. Which is it going to be? Is a few items sufficient or not?

This isn't a measure of novelty but tells you which of the iChing characters the day resonates with.

You are right. It is not novelty, but some other value. Yet what was posted?
"The novelty for ..."

Since the iChing was used to construct the wave, it will coincide with the graph and give you a rough idea of how likely novel events are on a given day.

That actually is not true. Look at the construction of the graph and see that this does not cover the issue of differences and any of the other machinations used to create TWZ.

Originally posted by TheOven
It's all the little details that make tmz so amusing.

Like the end date, I wonder where they got the idea to have it end on 12-21-12.

Couldn't even be original.


I guess it's too bad the Mayans didn't get to patent their calendar.

That wasn't the original date but Terence Mckenna moved it out if convenience to coincide.

Fudged Date

However, originally McKenna had chosen the end of the calendar by looking for a very novel event in recent history, and using this as the beginning of his final 67.29 year cycle. The event he chose was the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, which gave an end-date in mid-November of 2012, but when he discovered the proximity of this date to the end of the current 13-baktun cycle of the Maya calendar, he adjusted the end date to match! 5

link with source

reply to post by dethduck


And this is why we should consider November 18 2012 at 13 pm as an end date.
I agree that the date in December is not what we search for...

reply to post by Cecilofs


Trust me, I had already did that kind of work, at least 2 centuries and a half and nobody paid me !!!
I hope this theory is right, even if probably the end date is not what we know...
Since I was a teenager, I wanted to learn more non-scientifical explanations for the universe, such as astrology and that was the big thing for me from 2005 to 2009.
I guess I lost a lot of my scientifical attitude " I wanna be a scientist " that I had when I was a kid...
Sometimes I wonder what would happen if I stopped thinking about this theory and trying to live without those metaphisical thoughts...
In my own actual condition, posting in this thread is the only novelty I can get to do, since its a lot of months that my life is increasingly habitual...
Maybe I shouldn't have taken the " guide " of this thread, that place was for evasius and some other ones...

reply to post by Zagari


It took me completing a science degree to realise I didn't want to be a scientist lol. You are ahead of the game

Your analysis is appreciated and definately worthwhile, its just that statistically, when we are talking about a theory that spans the entire 13 billion odd years of the universe, you'd need to analyse at least all of human history in great detail to prove a correlation.

Again, I never claimed that these resonances we put forward are 100% proof - they are just little pieces of the puzzle that add up to a better understanding of what's going on.

The novelty values used in the construction of the wave are all relative - it just graphs changes in the relative novelty over time, so again you don't need any absolute values for it to make sense. McKenna himself admitted the concept of novelty is "slippery", hard to define and can't be assigned hard values. I'm not really sure why we are still arguing about this. The definition of what is novel and what is not IS subjective and therefore open to all sorts of bias. That doesn't necessarily mean there's not a connection. Again its why I prefer to take a broad look at things.

Call it a religion all you want, it doesn't matter to me. I don't ascribe to any religions, I just read a lot of interesting ideas and like to try and see how they fit together. I don't think the specific details of TWZ are completely accurate, I just think its a good over-arching idea. One that seems to be reflected in what is happening in the world around us.

What changes are occurring in your life Stereologist? Or is it just business as usual? In the last few months I have changed jobs, experienced a new (to me) and painful medical condition, been going through a period of high personal growth and I've been witnessing the changes happening around the planet - most notably recently the increased awareness of how #ed our system is and people starting to take action about it.

Interesting times

Originally posted by dethduckTerence Mckenna moved it out if convenience to coincide.

Given the nature of the theory, any starting point was going to be arbitrary. If the theory is correct, then the only way to align it properly is to know when the end date is, which isn't possible till after the end date.

Once again, IF the 2012 predictions are accurate then it makes McKenna's alignment accurate as well. Till then we just go on what we have and wait and see.