NASA has released its "I Told You So" video early.....Should I release mine early too?

Originally posted by smith88
reply to post by NorEaster

 

I really appreciate your work here sir. Not only as a musician, scientist, philosopher, and artistic being, but as just me (if that makes sense...?). Eloquently placed your comprehensions, resolves, and thinking styles to music and spoken word.
I hope you make more of these creations; I see much dedication and am happy to see this work.

Please keep it going. Best wishes with everything.

Thank you. I really appreciate your taking the time to let me know that you liked it. It lifted my morning.

Originally posted by Trublbrwing
reply to post by NorEaster

 

I was half tempted to watch your video, then you wrote this.........

"I completely debunk the concept of infinity - using Quantum Physics - to prove that I know what I'm talking about when it comes to reality."

Infinity is the cornerstone of reality, if you don't grasp the concept everything is impossible and useless. Once you understand it everything makes sense.

And yet, the whole basis of quantum physics was the quantization of physical reality - limiting the size, in both directions of all that exists as physical. The quantum is the indivisible small that can exist. This proven fact of physical reality means that there is no such thing as infinite smallness. Now, infinite - as defined - means that something is unbound by limitations. And yet the quantum binds smallness to an indivisible unit that cannot be cut in half. In effect, the quantum obliterates the "unlimited" nature of physical reality, since reality can't offer infinite smallness. The direct inference, when you are confronted with this fact, is that if physical reality is limited by a quantiuzed smallness, then it must also be limited in largeness or expansiveness, since infinity - as defined - involves unlimited everything, including smallness - which has been proven to not exist.

It's called the ramification of logical inference, and it's very strict in the real world of physical existence. Human beings can conceptualize anything, and that's the miracle of the human mind. Nothing else exists that can create such impossible-to-exist conceptualizations.

reply to post by NorEaster


I already posted this...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by randomname

what actually is sad, is that the mayans will go down as the biggest fail in the history of mankind.

Well, that's only if you take them out of context. They were pretty damn good calendar makers...

Noreaster,

Great work on the video friend. I enjoyed it and didn't expect you to be such an exuberant spirit. And, as usual, I agree with much of what you say. I am curious whether you've made any headway on your new book. I enjoy your writing so much I anticipate its realization.

This video amuses us.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
Noreaster,

Great work on the video friend. I enjoyed it and didn't expect you to be such an exuberant spirit. And, as usual, I agree with much of what you say. I am curious whether you've made any headway on your new book. I enjoy your writing so much I anticipate its realization.

edit on 14-12-2012 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)

Thanks for the ups.

It's hard to remember that this thread still exists since the shooting thread launched yesterday. I can't seem to think about anything else at the moment. Those poor little babies.

I'm actually working with a couple people who are much better at teaching than I am to craft a more effective information rollout structure for the next effort. The consensus is building to produce a few distinct volumes that each focus on differing aspects of the overall thesis, but it's all still pretty sketchy. The main concern is to have a solid plan for how to deliver such a complex presentation before approaching a publisher with a book proposal. Apparently, the breadth of this thing might be more than what a single book can fully accommodate successfully. Then again, there is a lot of background that must be established and/or reinforced before taking those structural elements and presenting them as the basis of this new existential point of view.

It's odd that I can easily view it all whole, but the true scope of implication - as its web stretches in all directions, once those implications have been fully identified - is really a challenge to appreciate. And yet, this is of primary importance to intricately detail, since it's in these minute intricacies (and how these intricacies connect to become the really obvious and recognizable whole that's now become transformed into a nearly counter-intuitive view of wholesale reality itself) where this very specific premise succeeds in the way that others don't. It's exciting, but there's still the threat of failure, since it's completely dependent on my own ability to successfully communicate what it is that we have here. So far, after two published editions, I'm still not delivering on my end of it all, and that's been frustrating.

Thanks again for the positive note.

Originally posted by Spacespider
reply to post by NorEaster

 

I already posted this...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

This thread was about whether I should go ahead and also release my "I Told You So" video early, since they did. It was a different debate. The ATS posters convinced me to release it. So, I did.

And there you have it.

Originally posted by yeahright

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

I think it's a very impressive work, and provides much food for thought. I haven't read the book yet, but it's most definitely on my list.

I liked the visuals, loved the music, and got just enough out of the content to want to get some more.

I respect our fellow member schuyler as much as any member we have, but have to disagree with him about the value of the video. And maybe 'disagree' is too strong. I can't make a judgement about whether or not it had any value for him. I think it's a worthwhile 15 minutes, and will no doubt watch it a few more times.

Good job, and I hope to be able to add more substantively to the discussion, once I've absorbed it. First impression is that the infinity argument has the same fallacy as Zeno's Paradoxes but I'm sure you've considered that.

Keep on pressing on, it's always interesting to consider your views.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

Thanks! I appreciate the encouragement. I really do!

Hi, first of all I'm new. It's an honor to join ATS especially after my fiasco(s) with GLP.

Wonderful piece of art! I appreciate all the visuals and poetry! Would you mind if people shared it under more "sensationalized" titles?

NASA's video really irked me for many reasons I won't go into here.

I've been trying to "disprove infinity" all my life by trying to visualize it and "get there" somehow. (I counted a lot of sheep to put me to sleep as a child!)

I wonder how it ever got to be a cultural concept in the first place. Maybe just by wondering it we somehow get there?

I thought the Plank's length was only a representation of how small we can currently measure (implying in the future with more advanced tools we might measure something smaller)?

Have you seen any lectures by Nassim Haramein? Maybe he could help explain the concept better?

I'm not an expert but in the past I was fairly good at math (and to a lesser extent physics). I say this because there seems to be a need for two languages of math (maybe it's not the universal language)? The concept of "zero" was not always necessary in the past so I wonder if it could be done away with also?

Then I got to thinking, what if zero and infinity are *almost the same yet opposites* (if that makes any sense) BUT/AND if we can conceptualize (nearly) infinitely small and infinitely large, perhaps we need polar "charges" such as a "negative zero" and "positive zero" to go along with "infinitely small" and infinitely large" especially for graphing coordinates.

Originally posted by anjuna
Hi, first of all I'm new. It's an honor to join ATS especially after my fiasco(s) with GLP.

Wonderful piece of art! I appreciate all the visuals and poetry! Would you mind if people shared it under more "sensationalized" titles?

What does that mean? I'm good with anyone sharing it, but what would a more sensationalized title look like?

I've been trying to "disprove infinity" all my life by trying to visualize it and "get there" somehow. (I counted a lot of sheep to put me to sleep as a child!)

I wonder how it ever got to be a cultural concept in the first place. Maybe just by wondering it we somehow get there?

People have always needed a label to attach to what they know, and especially what they don't know. I would imagine that each language has its own term for unfathomable amounts of whatever it is that they can't calculate the amount of. Infinity has served the English speaking people in that capacity, but the problem started when a majority of normal, non-scientific types began embracing the term as being a literal fact of physical reality. That's happened again and again throughout human history.

I thought the Plank's length was only a representation of how small we can currently measure (implying in the future with more advanced tools we might measure something smaller)?

This is what made the quantum such a "game changer". The term they use for the "stability" it established for anyone working with the laws of physics and all general sciences was the "quantization" of reality. It set a definable, dependable sub-structure beneath everything, and it has allowed the development of everything from computers to mathematical representations of sacred geometry to - well, pretty much everything that defines technology in the 20th century. You can't build upon what you can't determine to be stable and dependable, and until Max Planck figured out that the quantum of action exists - allowing the electron to "quantum jump" from one resting state to a new state (defined orbit within the structure of the atom) without going into a death spiral into the nucleus, no such stable foundation was known to exist.

The quantum is not actually measurable, but that's because of the fact that all that exists as physical within each and every full contextual environment (or reality confine) is built upon a quantized foundation. What would be used to measure such a foundation if the measuring technology is also materially based on that same foundation. That said, we don't need to measure the quantum unit to know that it does exist, and that it does provide structure and scale to what has progressively developed since the genesis of existence.

Have you seen any lectures by Nassim Haramein? Maybe he could help explain the concept better?

Thanks for the name I'll check him out.

I'm not an expert but in the past I was fairly good at math (and to a lesser extent physics). I say this because there seems to be a need for two languages of math (maybe it's not the universal language)? The concept of "zero" was not always necessary in the past so I wonder if it could be done away with also?

Both terms are useful. It's just important to have a clear understanding of what can and can't exist as physical. Reality is what it is, and while we can conceptualize freely, we can't change the nature of what sits at the base of reality and provides it form and stability.

Then I got to thinking, what if zero and infinity are *almost the same yet opposites* (if that makes any sense) BUT/AND if we can conceptualize (nearly) infinitely small and infinitely large, perhaps we need polar "charges" such as a "negative zero" and "positive zero" to go along with "infinitely small" and infinitely large" especially for graphing coordinates.

Infinitely small can be used as a quick term, but the quantum completely eliminated that term as representing an actual physical property. For graphics coordinates, it actually doesn't matter what term you use as long as the folks you are working with can understand what you're trying to communicate to them. Language ends up being what people agree on. It varies depending on where you are and who you're communicating with.

*edit* By the way, I see that you're from Upstate New York. I'm from the Utica area. Herkimer, to be exact. Where are you from?

Oh... I don't know. Perhaps more sensationalist titles like, "NASA prematurely issues statement about end of world...just in case we aren't here on Dec. 22nd to read it!"

I've watched hours and hours of Nassim Haramein speaking and he's a character but makes sense to me most of the time. Here's a somewhat hard to find video presentation (non-lecture style) that sums up a few of his major concepts. But I actually prefer it when he speaks slower and interjects his sense of humor and funny laugh in his lectures.

vimeo.com...
"Black Whole" on Vimeo (audio in English)

I think it's unfortunate that physicists generally just throw out numbers that are so small *they* consider them insignificant. Somehow I don't think the Universe wastes anything.

What I meant by using "negative zero" and "positive zero" being of importance to 3-D (x,y,z) coordinates: it could mean the difference between entering a part of space from one direction or another direction.

And greetings fellow upstate New Yorker! I'm in West Galway, between Amsterdam and Saratoga areas.

That NASA video sucks. It does verify that the Mayans knowledge of astrological science and time was better than most of ours today though. I gotta see your day after video when it is released the day after.

NASA must have figured it didn't make any difference if they were wrong because if it is the end there won't be anyone left to say they were wrong. They can't lose.

F NASA is what the Mayans are thinking

and F the movie 2012 is what they are also thinking

the mayan must hate how their calander got jacked and made into a joke

Originally posted by rickymouse
NASA must have figured it didn't make any difference if they were wrong because if it is the end there won't be anyone left to say they were wrong. They can't lose.

how true

Its hard to take anyone with the name "Carlson" seriously

Originally posted by anjuna
Oh... I don't know. Perhaps more sensationalist titles like, "NASA prematurely issues statement about end of world...just in case we aren't here on Dec. 22nd to read it!"

I'd rather something catchy, like "You Will Definitely Die!!!! (Not on Dec 21st, but that's beside the point)" Accurate, and timely.

And greetings fellow upstate New Yorker! I'm in West Galway, between Amsterdam and Saratoga areas.

I spent the winter of 1974-1975 in that area installing aluminum siding. Coldest I've ever been in my entire life.

1975 was (a couple years) before I was born. All of a sudden I don't feel so old now, thanks!

That was wayyyyyy back in the day before "climate change" when we had snow in the winters. Most people barely seem to remember....

Currently as of this winter of 2012, it's raining.

bump
+