+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 4
Results 61 to 75 of 75

Thread: One man's G.U.T.

  1. Link to Post #61
    Avalon Member ndroock1's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd January 2011
    Posts
    72
    Thanks
    117
    Thanked 139 times in 46 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    Who is Michael the man?

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ndroock1 For This Post:

    Baby Steps (29th June 2019), Bill Ryan (20th October 2019), Victoria (21st February 2020)

  3. Link to Post #62
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    Quote Posted by ndroock1 (here)
    Who is Michael the man?
    hi,
    thanks for having a look, I wrote a bit about him in post 6. He died about 8 years ago. He was in PR and Journalism before he started working on his theories.

    In the time I spent with him, I was able to conclude that he was a sane, sincere genius, who cared very deeply about the human race and it's future

    addendum: also post 14
    Last edited by Baby Steps; 29th June 2019 at 08:24.
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (20th October 2019), Victoria (21st February 2020)

  5. Link to Post #63
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    NO QUARKS

    In the following article from NewScientist, we are getting hints that Quarks do not exist.

    I remember discussing this with Michael, he stated that conventional science is wrong and Quarks are a fiction. Again I cannot recall more detail. My take is that the approach of smashing things together at very high energies may not be showing us much. The thinking is that if you get to a higher enough energy in a particle collider you will find the fundamental building blocks of matter. So far not. If Protons, Neutrons & Electrons are woven from black hole event horizon as Michael said, smashing them together might send out fragments that rapidly decay or re-integrate with the universal black hole continuum.

    It is possible that things temporarily form that are unstable, but give the impression of being an object, when in reality they are just decaying fragments. So far there is not much on-line that I could find regarding this, I am sure there is more to come....


    Quote What the quark?! Why matter's most basic building blocks may not exist


    Quarks are the subatomic particles thought to make up nearly everything we can see. Now it turns out they could be an illusion created by quantum trickery
    PHYSICS 2 October 2019
    By Joshua Howgego


    Andrea Ucini

    FINNEGANS WAKE has a reputation for being one of the most difficult novels in the English language. Written by James Joyce over 17 years, it blends invented words with real phrases in grammar-defying constructions. The final line ends mid-sentence – only for you to realise that the words that should come next are the ones at the book’s beginning. Some say it is Joyce’s attempt at recreating a dream. Others claim that it contains no meaning at all.
    It might seem odd, then, that a nonsense word from this most ungraspable of books should have given its name to a particle known as the building block of reality: the quark. In modern physics, a quark is what you would find if you were able to take a piece of matter and cut it in half again and again until you could cut no more.
    Quarks are as fundamental as anything can be. But they are also exceedingly weird. They have strange quantum properties known as flavour and spin. They crave each other’s company, clustering together in pairs or triplets. And they have a special sort of charge that comes not in the positive or negative variety, but in colours.

    And now, in a twist to rival that of any experimental novel, it seems quarks may not actually exist. According to tantalising new research, they may instead be an illusion, the product of quantum trickery we don’t yet fully understand.
    Last edited by Baby Steps; 20th October 2019 at 17:42.
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (20th October 2019), Cara (21st October 2019), Ewan (6th February 2022), palehorse (6th February 2022), Victoria (21st February 2020)

  7. Link to Post #64
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    Continuing the series of article shares relating to hints we are seeing that the Universe may be much older than 13.8billion years, we have the very old Methuselah star


    See post 54 and post 57 for more evidence


    Quote THE MYSTERIOUS STAR THAT APPEARS TO BE OLDER THAN THE UNIVERSE


    The oldest known star seems to be older than the universe itself, but a fresh study is facilitating to clear up this apparent enigma.



    Earlier study had projected that the Milky Way galaxy's so-called "Methuselah star" is up to 16 billion years old. That's a problem, as most scientists agree that the Big Bang that made the universe happened about 13.8 billion years ago. Now a team of astrophysicists has derived a new, less ridiculous age for the Methuselah star, combining information about its distance, brightness, composition and structure.





    "Put all of those constituents together, and you get an age of 14.5 billion years, with a remaining doubt that makes the star's age compatible with the age of the cosmos," study chief author Howard Bond, of Pennsylvania State University and the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, said in an announcement.

    The uncertainty Bond refers to is plus or minus 800 million years, which means the star could truly be 13.7 billion years old — younger than the cosmos as it's presently understood, though just barely.

    A mysterious, fast-moving star:

    Bond and his team utilized NASA's Hubble Space Telescope to study the Methuselah star, which is more officially known as HD 140283. Researchers have known about HD 140283 for more than 100 years, as it journeys across the sky at a comparatively rapid clip. The star moves at around 800,000 mph (1.3 million km/h) and covers the width of the full moon in the sky every 1,500 years or so, scientists said.





    The star is just passing through the Earth's neck of the galactic woods and will ultimately rocket back out to the Milky Way's halo, a populace of earliest stars that surrounds the galaxy's acquainted spiral disk. The Methuselah star, which is just now swelling into a red giant, was perhaps born in a dwarf galaxy that the nascent Milky Way gobbled up more than 12 billion years ago, scientists said. The star's long, looping orbit is possibly a residue of that intense act of cannibalism.






    Distance makes the difference:
    Hubble's calculations permitted the astrophysicists to polish the distance to HD 140283 using the principle of parallax, in which a change in an observers' location — in this case, Hubble's variable position in Earth orbit — translates into a shift in the deceptive position of an object.

    They discovered that Methuselah lies 190.1 light-years away. With the star's distance known more accurately, the team was capable of working out Methuselah's intrinsic brightness, a need for calculating its age.

    The researchers also applied present theory to learn more about the Methuselah star's burn rate, composition and internal structure, which also shed light on its possible age. For an instant, HD 140283 has a comparatively high oxygen-to-iron ratio, which takes the star's age down from some of the former estimates, scientists said.





    In the end, the astrophysicists estimated that HD 140283 was born 14.5 billion years ago, plus or minus 800 million years. Additional studies could help bring the Methuselah star's age down even more, making it clearly younger than the universe, scientists said.

    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  8. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    Agape (24th May 2020), Bill Ryan (20th October 2019), Cara (21st October 2019), Victoria (21st February 2020)

  9. Link to Post #65
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    This is a follow up post to post 6

    IF SIZE IS RELATIVE COULD MOTION BE RELATIVE?

    Michael stated that the universe had two geometries that apply equally. I would say that he meant two distinct view points.

    Firstly to define the 'Olympian' view point, or the realm of imagination. A place outside space time, that you can only get to in your imagination(leaving aside spiritual considerations). This is the formless void outside the universe, where no space exists, nor physics. It is the place into which the universe expands. A view of this would be that the boundary of space time, or the black hole universe is defined as where the first photons from the big bang have reached.

    As an Olympian, one can exist outside that boundary, and observe. But in that realm, there is no physics, and NO SUCH THING AS SIZE. In that realm, from that view point, the universe you are holding in your hand can be seen as a small fixed object, like, say, a nut.

    As Michael said, the expanding universe is in a swirling, rotating motion. But what about from the Olympian view point? The motion does not go away! Instead the olympian sees this motion as a swirling, never ending collapse in upon itself, towards seeming infinite density in the centre. This is more that a philosophical exercise, as that collapsing in motion is then described as half of the c resultant speed at the black hole event horizon of each particle. The Olympian observes each particle spinning at c/root 2 but also collapsing in - getting smaller - at the radial c/root2, to get us to the c required for space time to turn in on itself at the event horizon of each fundamental particle.

    It follows from this logic, that from our point of view, within the universe, all of our particles are expanding. We will not notice, as it is all happening simultaneously.

    As the work of Einstein tells us, space time compacts - not stretches out as I previously stated- in the vicinity of the black hole's event horizon. This means that for us in physical space time, if we were able to approach the black hole event horizon of a proton, neutron, or electron, WE would experience compaction of space time..

    I did not get to this point with Michael, but what I am wondering is, if we were able to approach that particle, and we entered the region of extreme space time compaction near the event horizon, would we SHRINK? Would that particle get larger and larger from our point of view ?

    Micheal stated that as we approach the event horizon, the curvature of space time approaches infinity, and this was a way that he used to postulate the space time flip- from being encapsulated, to encapsulating. The particle encapsulates the rest of the universe. They all do simultaneously.
    Last edited by Baby Steps; 9th November 2019 at 23:52.
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    Victoria (21st February 2020)

  11. Link to Post #66
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    Quote Posted by Baby Steps (here)
    well, I finally got round to plugging 'The General Equation' Into excel, in order to check the formulas.

    It works numerically, however I should/will also check the units.

    Here we have an equation that contains the fundamental constants. Once in excel, it should be easy to manipulate using very basic algebra, and God knows where that could lead....


    [IMG][/IMG]


    [IMG][/IMG]
    The above equation is the core of Michael's work, and appears to be correct. Michael became convinced over several years, after he went through a process of playing with it, reducing it to accepted expressions, and exercising it to arrive at correct predictions regarding the universe that we observe. So he found multiple corroborations. He wrote programs that exercised it too.

    Some may look at this and dismiss it out of hand on the grounds that it contains Hubble, and the background flux temperature. Conventional physics accepts that Tb is a variable, ie that image of the expanding early universe will cool over time.

    Conventional physics generally describes Hubble as a 'constant' whereas Michael says it is a variable and simply the inverse of the universe age.

    There therefore remains the problem, if we accept that G and the others ARE constants.

    my proposal is that there should be a new constant made up of H2/Tb4. Lets call it the Kirsch constant of cosmology. I do not doubt that if any of that is correct, it will still be decades before the Kirsch becomes mainstream.
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    Victoria (21st February 2020)

  13. Link to Post #67
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    It Appears that the idea that we are living inside a black hole (universe) is gaining ground...

    New Theory Suggests We Live in a Gigantic Higher Dimensional Black Hole

    A team of astrophysicists have put forth a theory suggesting that our entire universe exists inside the event horizon of a higher dimensional black hole.


    JAKE ANDERSON


    New research into black holes has accelerated in recent years, producing some outlandish—though mind boggling—ideas. The newest theory advanced by researchers may take the cake in this regard.

    A team of astrophysicists at Canada’s University of Waterloo have put forth a theory suggesting that our universe exists inside the event horizon of a massive higher dimensional black hole nested within a larger mother universe.

    Perhaps even more strangely, scientists say this radical proposition is consistent with astronomical and cosmological observations and that theoretically, such a reality could inch us closer to the long-awaited theory of “quantum gravity.”

    The research team at Waterloo used laws from string theory to imagine a lower-dimensional universe marooned inside the membrane of a higher dimensional one.
    Lead researcher Robert Mann said:


    Quote The basic idea was that maybe the singularity of the universe is like the singularity at the centre of a black hole. The idea was in some sense motivated by trying to unify the notion of singularity, or what is incompleteness in general relativity between black holes and cosmology. And so out of that came the idea that the Big Bang would be analogous to the formation of a black hole, but kind of in reverse.
    The research was based on the previous work of professor Niayesh Afshordi, though he is hardly the only scientist who has looked into the possibility of a black hole singularity birthing a universe.
    Nikodem Poplawski of the University of New Haven imagines the seed of the universe like the seed of a plant—a core of fundamental information compressed inside of a shell that shields it from the outside world. Poplawski says this is essentially what a black hole is, a protective shell around a black hole singularity ravaged by extreme tidal forces creating a kind of torsion mechanism.
    Compressed tightly enough—as scientists imagine is the case at the singularity of a black hole, which may break down the known laws of physics—the torsion could produce a spring-loaded effect comparable to a jack-in-the-box. The subsequent “big bounce” may have been our Big Bang, which took place inside the collapsed remnants of a five-dimensional star.

    Poplawski also suggested that black holes could be portals connecting universes. Each black hole, he says, could be a “one-way door” to another universe, or perhaps the multiverse.
    Regardless of whether or not this provocative theory is true, scientists increasingly believe that black holes could be the key to understanding many of the most vexing mysteries in the universe, including the Big Bang, inflation, and dark energy. Physicists also believe black holes could help bridge the divide between quantum mechanics and Einstein’s theory of relativity.


    From National Geographic:

    Are We Living in a Black Hole?
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    Orph (21st May 2020)

  15. Link to Post #68
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    Another section of the Universe Model Makers Construction Kit.

    Michael discusses the two alternative geometries (Human and God) and how the algebra confirms it.

    ummck part 7 (1).pdf
    Last edited by Baby Steps; 21st May 2020 at 07:48.
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  16. Link to Post #69
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    The following video sets out the idea that the universe is a hypersphere of four spatial dimensions very nicely, ie all of our 3d space is on the surface of a 4d sphere. He ends by saying that this is unlikely to be the case due to recent work on the CMB, however the explanation is excellent.

    Michael described the Universe as a hypersphere, but mentioned at least six physical dimensions.

    Last edited by Baby Steps; 24th May 2020 at 22:04.
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  17. Link to Post #70
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    The following excellent video is well reasoned at a fairly low high school level of physics. I think they are setting out correctly that current state of play with regard to gravity and the idea of extra spatial dimensions. Basic gravitation out in space conforms to Newton's equation, which includes gravity reducing with distance according to an inverse square law, and this strongly suggests that in the macro world there are only 3 spatial dimensions.

    The idea is that more dimensions are folded up into very tiny spaces that we cannot perceive, but can be measured at tiny scale interactions between fundamental particles. They are 'compactified'.

    This is an old idea going back to the Kaluza-Klein theory. It could also fit with Haramein's view that the strong nuclear force is just gravity operating over extremely proximal scales.

    It also explains the Cavendish experiment, and how he managed to get G to within 1% using pendula. Amazing.

    Last edited by Baby Steps; 30th May 2020 at 13:12.
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  18. Link to Post #71
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    The Crisis in Cosmology

    Well it sounds like there are many. A common thread seems to be that we are getting better & better observation and measurements, and as the data accumulates, it is challenging most assumptions and models that were previously regarded as solid.

    The particular crisis mentioned in the following is that the first stars in the universe had unexpectedly lower levels of Helium, (the Helium crisis). The model for the big bang that is generally accepted is that all the matter we see now appeared in an instant at the beginning. What this would produce, according to their models and calculations, is a large amount of lighter elements such as Helium , lithium etc due to fusion in the very young universe where temperature & pressure are at the levels that we know produces fusion.

    The predictions they made for the abundance of these elements based on the conventional big bang model are way off compared to observations.

    This conundrum again can be said to support Michael's model, as in his model the quasar magnetic monopole particles are basically hydrogen hoses.Very high energy photons pour out , many forming protons etc but not much or any helium (as far as I know from Michael's work)

    Therefore the young universe in Michael's model is mostly hydrogen.

    The speaker is using this point to question the whole idea of a big bang.

    Last edited by Baby Steps; 5th June 2020 at 18:25.
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  19. Link to Post #72
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    Michael believed that the Hubble would vindicate his work . He thought that the idea of quasars/super massive back holes acting as galaxy seeds would be obvious once this telescope started producing images.

    Well it did not happen , however certainly since then we are moving towards this conclusion as observation has forced mainstream science to postulate a spontaneous formation theory for SMBH’s since we know now that they formed earlier than the previous model allowed for . ‘Stuff just keeps getting older’ as Graham Hancock says.

    Well now we may have another opportunity with the James Webb telescope . Are we going to see much younger bodies emitting the twin jets? What will happen if we observe these things operation JUST AFTER the early plasma universe loses its opacity. What contortions can we expect to hear from established science next ?

    We live in interesting times

    Here’s a great comment regarding our view of the universe

    “ Issue: The Big Bang is usually represented in graphics with the Big Bang on the left of the image with the universe expanding to the right with newer galaxies on the right with us; the observer. This can be very confusing. Easy to graph but confusing.

    A better way, I think, is to represent the change in the universe as a growing sphere with the Big Bang on the outside and Earth as a point at the center of the sphere. The cosmic background radiation (CBR) is a coating on the outside of the sphere. The oldest and furthest thing we can see.

    With this graphic; everywhere we look from the center we see older stars and galaxies. We see the CBR at the limits of our view in all directions. We see very old galaxies in all directions near the surface of the sphere. The JWST will be able to image these old galaxies near the surface of the sphere in all directions. Our view within the sphere started when electromagnetic radiation began to travel through space. Before that it was very hot and opaque. As it became transparent the CBR was able to travel as the universe cooled enough to for atoms to form. Sort of like the raisin bread without raisins. The raisins condensed out of the space as it cooled. At one time long ago, we were the condensing raisins. Long ago we looked like those distance galaxies very young and new.”
    Last edited by Baby Steps; 6th February 2022 at 13:49.
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    Hym (19th December 2022)

  21. Link to Post #73
    Avalon Member palehorse's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th April 2020
    Location
    Gaia
    Language
    English
    Age
    46
    Posts
    1,630
    Thanks
    12,042
    Thanked 11,413 times in 1,572 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    Quote Posted by Baby Steps (here)
    NO QUARKS

    In the following article from NewScientist, we are getting hints that Quarks do not exist.
    ..
    .

    wasn't Stephen Hawking the one who studied the tiny bits of matter (aka quarks) his entire life and came to the conclusion before his death that quarks are not actually real?
    I remember reading something he wrote about quarks exist only in a concept of a model, for example a forced created reality (artificial), like smashing protons at sub atomic levels (the crazy things they do @ CERN) .. I did read some of his works, very interesting stuffs.
    --
    A chaos to the sense, a Kosmos to the reason.

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to palehorse For This Post:

    Baby Steps (6th February 2022), Ewan (6th February 2022)

  23. Link to Post #74
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.

    Stuff keeps getting older

    The mainstream models for galaxy formation are being challenged by ever earlier evidence. How did they form so quickly after the Big Bang?

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...rly-galaxies1/
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  24. Link to Post #75
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: One man's G.U.T.



    Cross posting as this mostly fits with what Michael said.

    Wow – its looking like Quasi-crystal theory & observation are pointing strongly towards multidimensionality in a way that could unify Einstein with Quantum Theory.

    (I wonder how time crystals fit in?)

    There has been thought along these lines, check out the Kaluza Klein Theory:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaluza...93Klein_theory


    If I have it right, they were trying to find more dimensions but concluded that since Newtonian Gravitation in macro open space recedes at an inverse square rate, the extra dimensions were not operating at the macro level, but were, instead folded up in our fundamental particles like plank scale layers.
    This then suggests that particles are multidimensional but in a layered way.

    Why do we search for multidimensionality?

    We cannot seem to arrive at a working model for material reality without it. We see in the quantum world, particles that are ‘clouds of probability’ that respond to the attention given or not by an observer. They pop in and out of existence (challenging a 3 d conservation of energy idea), and the are acted on by unknown Forces.
    Entanglement (spooky action t a distance as Einstein dismissively described it) gives us two particles that appear to be physically connected when they are at huge relative distances. You then might wonder if such entanglement might operate across the universe in the same way.
    A way to explain this connection is to look at higher dimensions. Those two particles are connected in a higher dimension.
    Imagine 2 d world, like a piece of paper with a stick man scientist drawn on it. Lets say you, a 3 d observer puncture the paper with a 3 prong fork.
    The stick man scientist suddenly observes three separate discrete 2 d particles appearing from nowhere into his reality. He walks up to one, and taps it – they all three move in unison. The stick man scientist works out that those three particles are part of one object but connected via a higher dimension that he cannot perceive, but suspects is there.

    So how can two protons be physically connected?

    In the video Billy correctly says that our atoms & molecules are mostly empty space. He explains that we only experience them as physical because of the charge and forces in action, that hold this reality together. But if you could compactify the actual protons, neutrons & electrons it would be much much smaller.
    This is all school level physics, but what mainstream physics has done is suggested that the components of the atom are constructed in the same way ie, tiny quarks or maybe planks, are flitting around forming the proton, and again the proton is mostly space.(this is not 100% proven)

    I am suggesting that things may be different to that however. It may be that the Protons, Neutrons and electrons are not comprised of quarks etc, but are fundamental particles.
    They then give us the structure for the ‘layered dimensions’ that Billy and Kaluza-Klein postulate.
    Imagine a circle but with multiple concentric circles or ‘layers’, with the outermost being 3d and progressively going up the dimensions as you move inwards.
    Now go back to the 2 d world thought experiment. Lets say that two protons are connected. If you push in past the 3-d layer, you get to 4-D etc. Maybe they are still separate in 4-d. Maybe they are connected at 5 or 6D. One thing. Maybe at 8-D ALL MATTER is connected into the one object.
    In that way , humans and infinite other life forms may be slight perturbations in a single 8 dimensional sphere.(or maybe 11)
    This single entity can pass energy from any one point to any other point instantly. This single entity houses a vast collective consciousness. Our quantum brain can decode a limited amount, but our consciousness resides on this 8-d surface, and the 3-d brain is a receiver. This receiver can broaden its signal, it can access much more .
    I really like the Adinkra codes. It seems much ancient wisdom resides in east Africa amongst the Dogon.

    Simulation?

    He is using the language of fractals and simulation. There has ben much talk that humans live in a matrix style tank and everything we experience is a simulation. So there’s a computer creating a tea cup sitting in front of me. However that is not what Billy is pointing to. Its more like the fundamental particles and dimensions are being run by code, with a set of rules or governing equation.
    What happens, what grows, evolves or is made in the multi dimensions is not a simulation. It is a process enabled by the creation of those particles, or that surface.
    So In modern computer games they program in physics, enabling the graphics to realistically model that enemy dropping down to the ground. But in our reality the physics governs the particles or FABRIC. But after that the reality is a play area for creators, beings, or spirits.
    So here we are buried in this complex machine. Imagine how huge, significant and transformational it would be if we decoded the reality we are living in?
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  25. The Following User Says Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    Sue (Ayt) (28th January 2024)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 4

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts