Discussing the recently appeared science underground papers of "Daniel"

page: 8
74
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 04:40 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


I think your claims are poorly thought-through rubbish, and argued exclusively from a decided, unwavering point-of-view.

But we can't throw you in the [HOAX] bin now can we?




posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by JayDub113
 



I think your claims are poorly thought-through rubbish, and argued exclusively from a decided, unwavering point-of-view.


I've made it clear why I believe this to be a hoax and why I believe it is rubbish. I have challenged you to defend "Daniel," and all you can do is attack me personally. This speaks volumes.


But we can't throw you in the [HOAX] bin now can we?


No, because I am not misrepresenting who I am in order to manipulate people into accepting lies. "Daniel" is. Note how he manages to incorporate every item that uncritical conspiracy theorists thrive on:

UFOs: check.

Secret government projects: check.

Alien greys: check.

Time travel: check.

Geoengineering (chemtrails): check.

HAARP: check.

Mainstream science is wrong: check.

Cosmic catastrophe 2012: check.

Global spiritual transformation: check.

Do you believe that his claims are true based on his credentials? He has produced no credentials. Do you believe his claim based on their internal logic? Here is an example cited earlier in this thread:


What happens with FTL travel is that as you pass the speed of light (the EM barrier), the spatial dimension in the direction of travel shifts into the coordinate time realm, as speed is a reciprocal relation between space and time—cross the barrier, and you start having a temporal dimension instead of a spatial one. But, since time is 3D, not a 1D vector, you have to keep the ship going straight in the coordinate time realm, which means you need to be able to see the realm to properly navigate it. This is what the Orion Cube does. Upon transition to FTL velocity, the volume of the ship has been altered to 2 spatial dimensions and 1 temporal one—which means that in space, it appears as an area, not a volume, usually a flat disc or saucer shape, depending on the FTL speed. It gets flatter the faster it travels beyond the speed of light (the reciprocal relation: more time, less space). In time, it is cylindrical or jet-like, like a meteor streaking through the temporal landscape that needs an accurate flight path so it arrives at both the correct location in coordinate space, and in coordinate time.


First, he claims that when one travels faster than light, time becomes multi-dimensional rather than linear. This brings up the problem of navigation. After all, if you are traveling faster than light, you will crash into anything in your path before the light it reflects can reach you. How is the problem solved? "Daniel" has no idea, so he says "This is what the Orion Cube does." He doesn't explain what the "Orion Cube" is or how it works, but it solves his problem. This was written on the fly. As problems in his fantasy arise, he pulls a deus out of his machina. Then he says that objects traveling faster than light become 2 dimensional, which means they are a surface without depth. Then he says it gets flatter depending on its speed. How is that possible? You cannot get "flatter" in a dimension you do not possess!

Now that you have decided to call people names because they don't believe in the hoax, rather than discuss the implications of the physics, or rather metaphysics, that the hoax was framed to sell, I'm going to suggest that this thread be put where it belongs. If people want to discuss time travel, do it honestly, rather than with bogus credentials.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 08:10 AM
link   
So I have done a little research on that blog transpower.wordpress.com.

You remember the experiment at CERN back in September 2011 in which faster than light velocities of muon neutrinos have been measured?

Time Article I

In February 2012 the whole story seemed to be settled. A cable supposedly was the reason:

Time Newsfeed

Ronald W. Satz wrote a paper in October 201 called Theory of Faster Than Light Neutrinos about it. By using the assumptions of Dewey B. Larson’s Reciprocal System he is able to calculate the measured velocity within the experimental error.

The observed velocity of the muon neutrinos was about 7.5 km per second faster than the speed of light, or to put in more graphic terms the neutrinos have been moving 16,715,566 mp/h or 26,901,097 km/h faster than light.

One of his statements struck me:

While in the material sector we move with meters per second (m/s), in the cosmic sector we move with seconds per meter (s/m).

I stepped out of the train as we had a few minutes until next departure and I was trying to observe how I move my body 5 meters in lets say 5 seconds. I then was trying (:lol
to move in time. Ridiculous attempt maybe. The only thing that happened was that I saw a picture in my mind with me sitting in the train again, which of course happened some minutes later.

Later I saw an elderly nun in white robes and I wanted to ask her "Are you travelling with speed of light through space-time?". Of course I didn't dare.

A lot of laymen, maybe infantile questions come up:

As I move my body (me beeing the observer of the body) through space in time do I travel through time in space?

Am I travelling with less then FTL, FTL or above FTL through space or time or space-time or time-space?

Or are all of these thoughts still complete rubbish?

In any case Waltz in the paper states that



according to the Special Theory of Relativity, nothing can travel faster then the speed of light


these findings therefore being "anomalous" whereby



... the Reciprocal System agrees, matematically, with the Special Theory of Relativity, but not conceptionally.


and




... the Reciprocal System agrees, mathematically to the extension of the Special Theory of Relativity to the cosmic sector, but not conceptually.
edit on 10-11-2012 by consolution because: filled in links



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by consolution
reply to post by JustJoe
 


I found this I, Pet Goat II video on Vimeo but I can only watch it later.




I found that to be a truly amazing animation with interesting references.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   
You know the part where Daniel is talking about how we got carbon dating all wrong, and that the release of radiation varies dramatically?


I just ran across an article on Flipboard (on my tablet, just while musing about) and they were talking about the very same thing. That, oddly and without any hypothesis for it, it appears that the radioactivity of a substance was changing at a different rate than expected. It was about 1% change, so not drastic, but absolutely measurable. And that was just very recently.


Like I said before, a lot of his information rings true to me. It fits. I really sat down and just put the thoughts through my head, and meditated a bit on the meaning, and the intentions. I had no problem accepting it.

I've also got this sneaking notion that, perhaps in just a few short months, a lot of these naysayers and armchair critics are about to eat crow.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by consolution
 


According to Dr. Satz:

News Flash (10/01/2011): Dr. Satz’s new paper, “Theory of Faster Than Light Neutrinos,” is now available–this solves the conunbrum of the recently-reported CERN experiment which shows that neutrinos can move faster than light. Only the Reciprocal System is capable of providing the solution! Update: Another experiment has shown no such effect–however, again the Reciprocal System provides the answer–in the retest, material neutrinos, rather than cosmic neutrinos, were used, and these cannot go faster than c in the material sector.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by manykapao
 


I once played a very experienced chess player,I had never played a game in my life and didnt even know what the pieces represented or were named.I lost the first game.Before the second game I asked my friend to tell me what each piece could do but not tell me its name--he did that in a few minutes,then we played and I two moved him and won.All I had to do was understand the capabilitys of the components and find natural sequence and balance then tip it in my favor or create non-balance-----names would have screwed me up.My friend actually had this rediculous book of 20,000 chess moves or something he pulled out to prove I hadnt really won that way,I had.Years later I googled it and discovered that the two move win is kasparovs trademark favorite move.The human mind currently exceeds any computer we can concieve of building,we just havent collaborrated and learned how to acess that ability to extrapolate and reverse extrapolate.i never played chess again,its easy and boring,and that fact reinforces why i was never interested during my life.And it was emphatic to deny my buddy the third game tie breaker,I really didnt have the heart to beat him again and to much integrity to throw a game--it wasnt fair once I knew what the pieces could do.He had over 15 yrs playing the game,ha ha haPerfect balance in a chess game is a two move ending.The first move is imbalance the second is a correction ,end of story.

Think of it like this,no question can possibly ever be asked unless the answer already exists,the question itself is catalysed by the answer and contains to some degree with certainty a contextual component of the answer within it.I used to take exams without ever studying the courses and get very high marks using this method.ALL the data is there if you learn to find natural balance contextually and then simply tip it either way until it fits your dynamic.Remote viewers do this extrapolation---but its in longhand--you can use reverse extrpolation to execute this data function in a much more expedient and natural manner as a type of shorthand.Yes all of the past present and future data is available because humanity grows its own cumulative reality,each of us is an individual source that can create an infinate number of possible realitys useing any combo of other humans like a lottery combo package.But there is a finite number of balls in play at any time and this number is continually changing going from balance to imbalance and repeaating.A living database.Each single human brain is capable of doing and being anything it chooses--all are equal in potential.So imagine six billion people working together trying to play a song,and each of them has the individual potential to acess the exact mumber of realitys that their own mind can produce using the cumulative power of every other mind alive at ny time interacting with every possible thought they could contrive.I was reading a post where remote viewers were trying to predtict lotto numbers and couldnt do it,ha ha ha its easy because there is a very small finite number of possibilitys when presented to a human brain,I looked at one years worth of results and picked the prime numbers and then compared them to the years worth of numbers and won the jackpot several times,then I took another years woth and tried to apply the same combonation----and it worked,because there is a finite number of possibilitys,and i wont say more or anyone can figure it out.I am poor and will remain that way because i am not willing to pay the karmatic price of the money.Ever.This is why Alchemists didnt become rulers of the world,there is a karmatic balance to everything and we are incidental to its existance and execution.They knew this ,its how they were able to understand how to naturally transmute metals ect,just through observation .

The first thing to note is that there are parameters to work with here,that can be defined but math wont work,because of the constantly fluctuating numbers of minds or inputs or potential cumulative reality components due to death and birth,math is useless.We must use natural dynamic analysis based on balance and imbalance or non-balance.

A visual thinker can utilise I believe almost all of their brain capacity to do these extrapolations,in realtime simply by thinking about things,remote viewers seek out tactile physical ways to tap into specific areas of their own brain potential by literally fooling their brains hypnotising themselves if you will to activate JUST specific areas of their cognitve potentials.Then they use a pencil thin beam of potential to do their readings,this is why you need a bunch of them doing the same thing to even be able to make a reasonable guess that will have any decent kind of accuracy----remember this is literally READING the future----ever wonder why they called it "reading "the future--did you think they meant like as in reading it out of a book,ha ha ha.

Sorry I am starting to ultra-focus and I dont want to get that involved today,once I start the engines its hard to shut them down without a long cooling off period,and that monopolises my time and tangible life experience,nice chatting with you i have laundry to do.
edit on 10-11-2012 by one4all because: (no reason given)
edit on 10-11-2012 by one4all because: (no reason given)


I have to go check my Quik-Pick Lotto numbers,I didnt say I didnt gamble just that I do it with integrity,nothing wrong with a Quik-Pick ,no Karmatic imbalance there.Ha haha,what are the odds now ,MMmmm--aint life grand.
edit on 10-11-2012 by one4all because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by fourthmeal
americankabuki.blogspot.com...

Another Daniel post


Oh, yes, this is the third and last part of Daniel' paper.

Here some more links for that:

Daniel's paper 1,2 & 3

Download link for paper 3.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
Faster than light propulsion can be achieved by 'shielding' a craft from the effects of gravity in one particular vector. The force of gravity then propels the craft at extremely high speeds, depending on how efficient the shielding is - orders of magnitude faster than light.

Really, it would be necessary to create radial flow, where incoming gravity vectors from one side of the object were bent away from the body of the object. I think perhaps a rotating body my create radial flow, this would be too weak and crude to create a force of workable magnitude.

I am not sure if rotating magnetic fields might cause radial flow - perhaps, but you would need massive flux density and probably extreme rotation speeds.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by consolution


In any case Waltz in the paper states that



Ronald W. Satz, not Waltz ...



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by consolution
 


Satz also says this in his paper (I have simplyfied the formulas):



The maximum one-dimensional speed of a material object in the material sector is
v(m_max) := c(m) m/sec


which is speed of light, 299,792,458 meters per second.

And then



And the maximum one-dimensional speed of a cosmic object in the cosmic sector is
v(c_max) := c(c) sec/m


which, if I understand corrrectly, means that if we could max it out would move with 299,792,458 seconds, or 4,996,540 minutes, or 83,275 hours, or 3,470 days or 9.5 years per meter.
edit on 10-11-2012 by consolution because: link



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by fourthmeal

Originally posted by consolution
reply to post by fourthmeal
 


Thanks. I will watch them later. Are there any good articles on this?


Keep in mind that IF we're following Daniel's method of thinking here, we're following the Dewey Larson Reciprocal System (RS), not the standard model. And on that level, there's (shocker coming...) conspiracy. I took a long hard look at the RS system and firstly I'll say I'm not a physicist. I have no expertise, and few here will. However, in just the simple equations I've bothered to fool with, it WORKS for me.

Reciprocal System covered here, transpower.wordpress.com...

Dr. Satz makes good points, very valid. Since electricity in the real world is more my thing, I especially enjoyed reading about those equations and theories, which experiments can be done on a low cost scale to prove the theory.

Now, if we're talking about "traditional" quantum mathematics, then it will be at odds to what is postulated here, in some ways. I've always found the traditional system to have way too many exceptions and made up workarounds to be "natural". I think the RS system is much closer to the actual truth, but right now the grant money isn't going to RS folks.



That is really an interesting source, thanks for bringing this up.

Among the available documents is for example an An Outline of Larsonian Economics in which Dr. Satz states a General Economic Equation and 17 relating principles, commented with




“In addition to being specific, these principles are universal. Unlike many of the conclusions of conventional economics, they are not limited to any particular economic system or to any special set of conditions. They governed the Cave Dwellers in their strenuous efforts to earn their living at the dawn of history, and they will apply with equal force to the streamlined multi-cylinder economic machine of the far distant future. They govern economic processes, not merely the systems of which these processes are constituent parts, and they are applicable to the processes wherever and under whatever system they may appear. The familiar contention that a socialistic economy is subject to a set of principles that differ from those which rule our individual enterprise system is as absurd as if we were to contend that the laws of physics applicable to a concrete bridge are not the same as those which apply to a steel structure.


He also goes into universal principals guiding the management of companies. I don't agree with all his conclusions (yet), but it's definitely an interesting read.

Even more fascinating is his Graphical Representation of the Reconstructionist World-View wherein he states:



A biological organism in the physical sector is a material entity controlled by an inverse entity


This pretty much reflects my thoughts since I entered the subject from reading Daniel's papers. Our bodies are biological organisms, material entities in the physical sector; we ourselves are "inverse" entities from the cosmic sector.

If that is what we really are, if we want to stay in the Larsonian concept for a minute and if I grasped it properly, then WE are actually travelling with Faster-Than-Light-Speed through the cosmic sector of space-time while our bodies travel with Less-Than-Light-Speed in the material sector.

Please correct me if I am wrong.


edit on 10-11-2012 by consolution because: (no reason given)
edit on 10-11-2012 by consolution because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by consolution
 



The maximum one-dimensional speed of a material object in the material sector is
v(m_max) := c(m) m/sec


How can something have a "speed" when it is one dimensional?



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by consolution
 



The maximum one-dimensional speed of a material object in the material sector is
v(m_max) := c(m) m/sec


How can something have a "speed" when it is one dimensional?


The object is 3d. The maximal speed of movement of the object in one of these 3 dimensions is Speed of Light.

That is how I understand it.



posted on Nov, 10 2012 @ 10:00 PM
link   
Great to see this material coming out , i am sure a few logical minds will be bent, progress does that , lsol



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by consolution

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by consolution
 



The maximum one-dimensional speed of a material object in the material sector is
v(m_max) := c(m) m/sec


How can something have a "speed" when it is one dimensional?


The object is 3d. The maximal speed of movement of the object in one of these 3 dimensions is Speed of Light.

That is how I understand it.



That's not what it says, so you must not understand it properly.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001

Originally posted by consolution

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by consolution
 



The maximum one-dimensional speed of a material object in the material sector is
v(m_max) := c(m) m/sec


How can something have a "speed" when it is one dimensional?


The object is 3d. The maximal speed of movement of the object in one of these 3 dimensions is Speed of Light.

That is how I understand it.



That's not what it says, so you must not understand it properly.


I really don't want to be picky, have the last word or make this into a grammar discussion.

But in his sentence "one-dimensional" is an adjective of "speed" and not of "object", isn't it? And isn't the formula "v(max) = c m/s" true according to Einstein's Theory of Relativity and the other widely accepted axioms of physics?

I thought this is the formula we don't have to discuss because it reflects what we already know. The revolutionary thing is the second statement "v(max)= c s/m" about the cosmic sector.
edit on 11-11-2012 by consolution because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by consolution
 



But in his sentence "one-dimensional" is an adjective of "speed" and not of "object", isn't it?


Exactly. You cannot have motion in a single dimension. You need at least two, so you can move from point A to point B over time T.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by one4all
 


very interesting post. I think we agree on many things. I have had a similar approach to things when I was still an apprentice to them. I have more faith in instinct than experience. I think when we are aware of the means of altering our reality we are also aware of the karmic charge it puts on us.

It is funny. Those that want to do and do not know how, would not want to do if they knew how.

I don't know if that makes allot of sense, but you are right about us all being connected. Like one big brain with many units in constant communication. The effect of one on another or the whole is tremendous.

I would say that we are a one mind, without the grand scope of things. Like parts to the same machine, but without the concept of the whole we consist of. That whole could span across time and space and dimensions.

It would be connected under principals of cohesion on varying states we could not comprehend from the limiting view of our planet with its own rate of space time progressing at a finite pace due to its gravity and mass.

That time itself is a handicap to our perception of the universe and so the many forms consciousness can take would absolutely escape us if we were to try and perceive them from a single one, especially one we are conditioned to favor.

Deconstructing our minds and our preconceptions is key to being able to process data from other "points" of view.

streams of consciousness accusable form anywhere, anytime, by anyone being. All of creation is interconnected.

Great stuff, life is.

P.S.
I find your approach to the chess game to be spot on. Disassociation leaves only pure thought forms to be processed without the contamination of our forced and created reality.



posted on Nov, 11 2012 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by consolution
 


Why oh why does he deserve the slightest bit of credibility when he's a "scientist" talking about ascension





top topics
 
74
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join