Timewave Zero - Countdown to Transition

Originally posted by Lexx790
reply to post by Zagari

 

Zagari
I am one who very much appreciates your efforts here even though I dont contribute. Its a little above my current knowledge level.
Please dont be dis-heartened by the negative vibes.
Many here appreciate the astounding amount of work you have done and I personally will continue to "watch this space" with interest.
Peace

+1

Keep it going, im just reading through the pages at the moment as dont want to start asking questions you have already answered hence im not contributing at the moment

I will take a break. I'm going on holiday on Sunday, for 2 weeks, I think I will not be able to post in the while. I will think about a decision in the while. Maybe its time I make this research for myself and for my own interests. I'm very reluctant to give up, anyway, because I never truly give up. Maybe I should just simply reducing my posting here. To simply giving information, showing up/ explaining resonances,answering questions, no other comment.

reply to post by Zagari


i continue to be impressed by the time, effort and passion you have for this subject.
mistakes will be made, interpretations will be questioned as well as the validity
of the algorithms/program.
for me, it is as much about the operator as it is about the program.
keep on keeping on.
best wishes fakedirt.

Originally posted by fakedirt

mistakes will be made, interpretations will be questioned as well as the validity
of the algorithms/program. for me, it is as much about the operator as it is about the program.

If the program's coding is invalid, then it makes no difference whatsoever who the operator is.

reply to post by RongoRongo


your opinion is noted and understood.
f

reply to post by fakedirt

It's not opinion it's an undeniable fact. "If the program's coding is invalid, then it makes no difference whatsoever who the operator is."

reply to post by Zagari


I agree with Lexx, there are more quiet followers to the thread than you think of, we should ignore all these new naysayers who have joined ATS just a few days ago only to falsify TWZ. I believe it is the same person, always getting blocked and making new aliases.

We don't need the trolls to ruin this thread which going on for YEARS now, and active these days thanks to you, Zagari. We are finally in the final lap, what important is what and if something is ahead of us in the coming months, and this is serious...

Enjoy your holiday, refreshing is always a good thing to do. Remember that in this thread there are much more passive followers than active trolls.

I always say "When made to look a fool, run away".

reply to post by RongoRongo


if you have the definitive knowledge of twz, then step up to the plate, present your documents and wipe away in one fell swoop zagari's two plus years of input. with three days membership under your belt (assuming you havn't been banned previously) i look forward to the many pages you are about to present.
f.

Originally posted by fakedirt
reply to post by RongoRongo

 

if you have the definitive knowledge of twz, then step up to the plate, present your documents and wipe away in one fell swoop zagari's two plus years of input. with three days membership under your belt (assuming you havn't been banned previously) i look forward to the many pages you are about to present.
f.

You can look forward to old age for all I care, I don't jump when you say "Boo". Do your own homework, everything you need to know about the shamware is in this thread.

Go read and in a week or so when you have regained a slip of credibility, I will be happy as a clam in a cold bay to debate you.

Originally posted by fakedirt
reply to post by RongoRongo

 

if you have the definitive knowledge of twz, then step up to the plate, present your documents and wipe away in one fell swoop zagari's two plus years of input. with three days membership under your belt (assuming you havn't been banned previously) i look forward to the many pages you are about to present.
f.

May I be of assistance?

Where to start, where to start.

The Timewave theory is staggering, unimaginable, and inspiring in a way that’s intense but very hard to grasp (until you smoke '___', I suppose). It’s also amazingly ‘West-centered’ (never mind human-centered). Post-industrial cultures appear to be going through an ever-intensifying series of changes that could point to a major transformation in the next 15 or so years. Fine and dandy.

But what about ‘undeveloped’ cultures, and those whose religious/calendrical systems have nothing special on the cards for the near future? Were the hidden forces that dish out the inspiration for sacred calendars having a laugh when they gave these people ‘wrong’ time-scales? ‘Look at those dorks, they don’t know what's gonna hit them!’ And what about the (admittedly very few) indigenous tribes still relatively untouched by the ‘progress’ of the last 10,000 years?

reply to post by CiAlice

McKenna didn't care about indigenous cultures regarding TW, they don't buy software.

Originally posted by RongoRongo
reply to post by CiAlice

 

McKenna didn't care about indigenous cultures regarding TW, they don't buy software.

Apparently, Timewave overlooks all but the heavily industrialized output. Which is problematic and hypocritical since the mathematical roots of Timewave are in the ancient indigenous non industrialized Chinese of the I Ching era.

Let's look at a few quotes from John Shelaik. Sheliak was the mathemetician who missed, then recanted, on the work of Matthew " I must conclude that the "timewave" cannot be taken to be what McKenna claims it is" Watson who was the one who originally pointed out that the algorithms major inconsistencies.

The results reported here make no final claims as to the validity of the TimeWave as it is expressed by Novelty Theory, nor does it claim that the current TimeWave is the best description of the Novelty process. It does show that the proper mathematical treatment of the FOD number set, produces a TimeWave that appears to be more consistent with known historical process. This consistency is general, however, and more work needs to be done to examine the specific reflections or projections that the TimeWave may be revealing. If Novelty Theory is a valid hypothesis, reflecting a real phenomenon in nature, then one would expect that it is verifiable in specific ways...The question is, are we are clever and conscious enough to decipher and express it correctly and appropriately?

Note that Shelaik, McKenna's friend, still questioned Timewave, that is he questioned the entire core of the theory, as having any relative validity.

Originally posted by RongoRongo

Originally posted by fakedirt
reply to post by RongoRongo

 

if you have the definitive knowledge of twz, then step up to the plate, present your documents and wipe away in one fell swoop zagari's two plus years of input. with three days membership under your belt (assuming you havn't been banned previously) i look forward to the many pages you are about to present.
f.

You can look forward to old age for all I care, I don't jump when you say "Boo". Do your own homework, everything you need to know about the shamware is in this thread.

Go read and in a week or so when you have regained a slip of credibility, I will be happy as a clam in a cold bay to debate you.

lol with such an eloquent reply, i now understand why it doesn't resonate for you. perhaps it's time to drop the yosemite sam act, anger has an effect on health you know.
best wishes for you in your old age fakedirt

Click here for more information.

reply to post by RongoRongo

Correction, Matthew WATKINS not Watson, my bad.

reply to post by CiAlice


many thanks for the offer of assistance, as a long time reader of evasius's thread, i have a grasp of the issues currently on the hot plate.

with individuals arguing over who is right, which program is valid etc..my opinion is no-one knows with absolute certainty how to handle the dataset. if the relationship between conciousness and binary code is close, then all things must be permutated within making for a multi-faceted observation for current human capacity.
kind regards fakedirt.

Mckenna passed away in the year 2000 without having left us a Timewave handbook of sorts. The only information he left on how to read the Timewave has to do with the rise and fall of the Timewave and it relation to the increase and decrease of novelty in our world.

I found his method inadequate because other equally or perhaps even more significant events along his vague criteria did not always correspond to marks of peak novelty on the graph. Take for example the World Trade Center attacks of 9-11. That event occurs at the top of a peak of habit as does the start of 2nd Iraq War. [plot1/graph2]

Taking down skyscapers with airplanes was a most novel event, but that event did not correspond with a mark of peak novelty as we ought to expect per Mckenna’s criteria. It was a first time ever kind of event that riveted the attention of the entire televised world for several days. If 9-11 wasn’t novel then I don’t know what is.

Now we have several problems with Timewave all which imo damn it completely. Unvetted closed source software , confusion over the versioning (if there is a workable version), obvious and unavoidable egregious errors...mathematically sound software is an on-off proposition. It either works properly or it does not.

Timewave obviously does not but, in truth, the science community has ignored Timewave for the reasons I have reported. Terrence Mckenna’s Timewave Theory is poorly understood in practical terms well noted in the last few dozen pages of this thread highlighted by one or two posters who farcically believe they have grasped the intricacies of the concept (certainly not the mathematics).

It is well known how it was devised, but no one has done much to either prove or disprove it. I believe the reason is that Timewave has, and should have, failed the sniff test of classical scientific attention.

Originally posted by fakedirt
reply to post by CiAlice

 

many thanks for the offer of assistance, as a long time reader of evasius's thread, i have a grasp of the issues currently on the hot plate.

I have seen no demonstration of your understanding of the cosmology of I Ching or its King Wen sequencing and FOD sets of numbers. Did I miss something?

Without that education, you can only understand Timewave as a toy that produces graphs from mid-air, majickally, and without substantiation.

Originally posted by fakedirt with individuals arguing over who is right, which program is valid etc..my opinion is no-one knows with absolute certainty how to handle the dataset. if the relationship between conciousness and binary code is close, then all things must be permutated within making for a multi-faceted observation for current human capacity.
kind regards fakedirt.

If no one knows how to interpolate the datasets, then Timewave is dead in the water as a discussable point of software development.

Originally posted by fakedirt
reply to post by CiAlice

 

many thanks for the offer of assistance, as a long time reader of evasius's thread, i have a grasp of the issues currently on the hot plate.

I have seen no demonstration of your understanding of the cosmology of I Ching or its King Wen sequencing and FOD sets of numbers. Did I miss something?

Without that education, you can only understand Timewave as a toy that produces graphs from mid-air, majickally, and without substantiation.

Originally posted by fakedirt with individuals arguing over who is right, which program is valid etc..my opinion is no-one knows with absolute certainty how to handle the dataset. if the relationship between conciousness and binary code is close, then all things must be permutated within making for a multi-faceted observation for current human capacity.
kind regards fakedirt.

If no one knows how to interpolate the datasets, then Timewave is dead in the water as a discussable point of software development.