Next Friday every Friday, the combining thread

[Carmody]

and this. All a bit of a problem.... as there are two components in the discussion that remain misunderstood. Time..and..gravity.

Now, if we take the slinky into an environment where gravity is different, we get a different result. The 'action' across 'time' (we are immersed in time so we are forced to use the analogy, forest and trees and all that, and at the same time, just what the heck is an observer, anyway?), this action across time, occurs differently.

Since the observer is immersed in 'time' as a reference point, the incorrect analogy of what time MIGHT be is brought to the table of the zero gravity experiment, and the results are explained in away that disassociates time and gravity from their actual fundamental. this is due to the loss of one frame of reference,and thus the 'observer' and contemplator of the experiment..tries to retain the other frame of reference (kittens do cling to legs when one stands up, nothing new there-the reactionary animal alive and well), time, and then explain the result in those terms, from that reference.

What the observer seems to fail to understand, is that the knowledge of the retained reference is only in the context of the two as a set. As in time -in a gravity well (pair). This analogy and position cannot be taken to the explanation of what happens to the slinky in the zero gravity space, as the equation is incorrectly surmised.

We must return to the original context, which is that we do NOT understand the origins of gravity and we do NOT understand the origins of time.

And thus there is NO real and workable remaining analogy in math and formulation that can be taken to the observed results in zero gravity. We see a difference but we cannot inject the ground based or earth based or 'time/gravity well' composite formulation into the zero gravity result. we can do so if we want to, but in that moment, we limit ourselves to the ground based observation as being injected into a situation which is wholly different.

Wholly different, as the explanation found, leaves out reams and reams of OTHER data that remains completely unexplained by the proffered frameworks. This frameworks of a formulation...the explanation that arose from bringing one half of a frame of reference into an experimental observation, where that frame does not apply.

http://phys.org/news/2012-12-falling-slinky.html

[Carmody]

what you are looking at, is the voltage related equivalent, the electron orbital vectoral polarity agreement or lack of agreement playing out. The very discrete aspect of particles as a pair of two dimensional vibrations paired as a dual vortex. And how they exchange two dimensional energies between one another, from the angle of dimension or reality representation that the observer observes from.

You are looking something that is analogous to lenz law, as a kinetic quantum analogy. the quantum relational aspects of voltage and complex vector, as core descriptor for time and gravity, as a pair.

'Gravity' as we call it, on earth, is a gradient, a proximity effect issue.

Time, through experimentation, by flying about with atomic clocks, has been shown to be of a similar connected nature.

And at the atomic quantum scale, we get the lenz like behavior of the slinky, in both zero g and in the gravity well (and slinky oriented accordingly in the gravity well). If we orient the slinky horizontally, in the gravity well, we will incorrectly surmise that the same situation occurs, IF we release one end of the slinky. (this, theoretically assuming a zero friction environment) If we release both ends of the slinky at the same time, we get the zero g result.

Thus, we can get to the understanding of how this pendulum seems to create far more energy than is put into it. we move from both frameworks, to one frameworks, as the pendulum swings.

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images...-_abstract.pdf

Since we are speaking of nano levels of dimensional integration with the so called matter, or pairings of 2d vortexes..this incredibly minor integration turns into the appearance of 3x to 9x higher levels of standard energetic measurement. Ie, plutonium broken apart, makes what appears to be 'huge energy'.


All we've really done, is undo the balanced 2d vortex pair apart, and one side of the highly charged but balanced dual-vortex equation emerges, and then immediately interacts with the environment (the dimensional and matter/time/space frameworks), and then blends in a way that looks like energetic impartation and transfer.

Remember that there was discussion on the point that astrology, astronomical alignment and earth position geometric relations to spherical oscillation patterns (ley lines and frequencies)..and how this drastically affected the level or yield of atomic weapons, depending on time and place of detonation. The experiments of Kozyrev and so on.

[RMorgan]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by RMorgan (here)
Well, this electromagnetic cloud is really interesting, but I´m afraid it doesn´t equate to the so called "photon belt".

Well, I presume that the term "photon belt" is a misnomer, for the reasons you give.

That however does not preclude the possibility of a "dust" cloud (more likely plasma I presume) straight ahead in our solar systems path. It would not surprise me to see a band of plasma misnamed as a photon belt, since conventional astronomy is still under reporting the extent of plasma in our universe, and since the visual light affects of plasma are what we'd likely notice first.

Hey P,

Well, the photon belt hypothesis is clearly completely different; It´s portrays an immense belt exclusively made of photons orbiting around the Pleiades.

If you read Hesse´s "The Last Day", you´ll see that he makes clear that the "photon belt" is supposed to be exclusively made of photons, not photons being reflected or emitted by matter.

Anyway, predictions were made about Earth entering the "photon" belt in 1992, 1994, 1997, 2000, 2004, 2011 (11/11/11) and now 2012, mostly by Sheldan Nidle (Yeah, the Galactic Federation of Light guru).

It seems that the new age movement likes to use this fantasy whenever they see fit.

Cheers,

Raf.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by RMorgan (here)
Well, the photon belt hypothesis is clearly completely different; It´s portrays an immense belt exclusively made of photons orbiting around the Pleiades.

If you read Hesse´s "The Last Day", you´ll see that he makes clear that the "photon belt" is supposed to be exclusively made of photons, not photons being reflected or emitted by matter.

Anyway, predictions were made about Earth entering the "photon" belt in 1992, 1994, 1997, 2000, 2004, 2011 (11/11/11) and now 2012, mostly by Sheldan Nidle (Yeah, the Galactic Federation of Light guru).

It seems that the new age movement like to use this fantasy whenever they see fit.

Ah so - thanks for the research.

[Carmody]

I never said photon belt. I said dust cloud. As in highly charged particle mix, if indeed such a thing exists. I'm not claiming that I'm being pointed at, I'm simply making sure that such a thought by any potential observers is not misinterpreted and in that moment... my being bunched into the same grouping.

[RMorgan]

Posted by Carmody (here)
I never said photon belt. I said dust cloud. As in highly charged particle mix, if indeed such a thing exists. I'm not claiming that I'm being pointed at, I'm simply making sure that such a thought by any potential observers is not misinterpreted and in that moment... my being bunched into the same grouping.

I was not talking about your statements, my friend.

I´m referring to the "photon belt" pointed in the OP´s video, which is full of holes, by the way, like portraying Alcyone as the center of our solar system.

Raf.

[Carmody]

Posted by RMorgan (here)

Posted by Carmody (here)
I never said photon belt. I said dust cloud. As in highly charged particle mix, if indeed such a thing exists. I'm not claiming that I'm being pointed at, I'm simply making sure that such a thought by any potential observers is not misinterpreted and in that moment... my being bunched into the same grouping.

I was not talking about your statements, my friend.

I´m referring to the "photon belt" pointed in the OP´s video, which is full f holes, by the way, like portraying Alcyone as the center of our solar system.

Raf.

understood. I was adding the clarity aspect, in the direct sense.

Once I understood the origins of time/space/gravity..which is really just a few more items added (observational position is changed)..and then it becomes very simplistic. once I understood that, all the problems ......go away. It is a cascading aspect, to be sure, but the issues of understanding the frameworks of human 'existence' or 'observational position/vector' do indeed go away.

[GlassSteagallfan]

Is the End of the World Coming This Friday?


Aaron Dykes
Infowars.com
December 17, 2012

Are we living in the end times? For years, the fast approaching end of the Mayan calendar, calculated to end Friday, December 21, 2012 during the winter solstice has been hyped as an apocalyptic conclusion to life as we know it.

After all, the wildness of the current political scene, the unfolding world government, the pace of fantastic technology surveilling and tracking our lives and much more seemingly coincide with many ancient predictions for the final days.

But NO, Alex boldly predicts in this powerful video, the world is not going to end this Friday.

Instead, Alex Jones breaks through the hoax, exposing the cynical use of intriguing observations in the ancient Mayan culture, along with any other useful doomsday scenarios, to condition the population to lay down to the forces of evil running over our lives. Rather than challenging the politics of our society in the here and now, and stopping potential Hitlers or Maos from coming to power, many are content to brace for the afterlife, the rapture, the ascension, the new age or any other version of the hereafter one ascribes to, passing over the influential voice individuals could have to affect change in this world — the one we actually live in now.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZK-U5XDbFaM

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZK-U5...layer_embedded

In reality, the Mayan culture had a great deal of astonishing knowledge but its cyclical calendar never predicted a doomsday end for the planet. No scholarly researchers, Mayanists, archaeologists or anthropologists have claimed the calendar signals an end; to the contrary, these academics and those still tied to the Mayan people have found an accurate marking of the start of a new cycle according to planetary movements, a new age where their long count date simply starts again.

The apocalyptic interpretation of 2012 was largely manufactured by a number of prominent New Age occultists, as well as numerous Hollywood fiction peddlers, who have distorted the calendrical prediction into an image that renders the individual helpless, and largely empowers the State to tackle some grand, emergency crisis. Consider films like “Armageddon” or “Deep Impact” where the government must deploy teams to destroy an asteroid headed for earth or the eponymous “2012″ in which most of the people of the world are consumed by a series of earthquakes, tidal waves and other mass scale destructive events, while a small elite contingent flock to a continuity of civilization “ark” controlled by governmental insiders.

When the world doesn’t end this time, let’s learn a lesson to engage in real problems we could collectively really do something about, that we have a duty to address, rather than waiting for the next obscure predictions for cataclysmic doom — like the planet Niburu or an extraterrestrial invasion– that will, for a time, captivate the imagination and induce a learned helplessness and acceptance of systematic evil that would normally be refused by the populace.

http://www.infowars.com/is-the-end-o...g-this-friday/

[Calz]

Posted by Carmody (here)

Once I understood the origins of time/space/gravity..which is really just a few more items added (observational position is changed)..and then it becomes very simplistic. once I understood that, all the problems ......go away.

Any "starting points" for "we the simplistic"???

(kudos for many members offering outstanding posts in this thread)

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Carmody (here)
Thus, we can get to the understanding of how this pendulum seems to create far more energy than is put into it. we move from both frameworks, to one frameworks, as the pendulum swings.

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images...-_abstract.pdf

That paper abstract links to the following site, with some intriguing images:

• Serbian: http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/
• English: http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/indexEng.htm

[RMorgan]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by Carmody (here)
Thus, we can get to the understanding of how this pendulum seems to create far more energy than is put into it. we move from both frameworks, to one frameworks, as the pendulum swings.

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images...-_abstract.pdf

That paper abstract links to the following site, with some intriguing images:

• Serbian: http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/
• English: http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/indexEng.htm

This is really intriguing, Carmody.

If this indeed is true, I´d like to see a real life practical demonstration.

Judging by his demonstrations, it seems this technology isn´t as good as he says:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=jNdF8mTfu4g

First, the course of this supposed water pump´s pistons is very small in this case; he would have to make a much longer pendulum to actually really pump reasonable amounts of water, which would require more external applied forces.

Second, since it´s not pumping any water in this demonstration, it´s dealing only with its own mechanical resistance, so it requires a very small external force in order to work in this specific case; In a real pumping scenario, he would be dealing with much more resistance.

I´m skeptical if such pump would work as stated in a real life situation, when the external forces required to actually move the pendulum and pump water would have to be much stronger.

Personally, I can´t see how this system would be any better than a regular electrical water pump; Maybe it would be even worse, in terms of energy economy.

I´ll believe it when I see it working, with proper measurements of energy input and energy output. If the output is proven to be bigger than the input; without cheating, of course.

Anyway, I hear about new free energy technologies every day, but so far, I haven´t seen anyone able to demonstrate the efficiency of such technologies in practical situations.

Another video:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=gC6Qlj1Mbo8

It looks nice at first, but the oscillator isn´t moving enough to pump enough water or generate enough energy, is it?

Would it work in a practical energy generation situation? How long the pendulum would have to be in order to generate enough energy? Would it have to use a set of gears in order to achieve a longer/faster piston course? How much energy would be lost in these gears by mechanical friction? How much energy would be required to move the pendulum in this case?

I suspect that if it did really work as stated, he would be showing it working in a practical energy generation situation, with proper measurements of input/output.

[Marin]

Posted by gripreaper (here)
At its basic level, the universe is energy. All manifestation can be broken down to light particles, and the ability of these particles to coalesce based on their speed of oscillation and density. This “hard reality” of which you speak is malleable by the very thoughts we project into the matrix, and science is also malleable by the fact that the observer, just by observing, shifts the data.

Exactly. A perfect example of where science meets spirituality.

There are several threads here that discuss the Holographic Universe. One of the more recent threads is Cidersomerset's:
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post598709

A number of experiments were discussed in the 5 part series. The double slit experiment among others. Clearly, some here are familiar with this material but others may be reading this for the first time. I think it's an important concept so thought I'd highlight some of the material.

http://www.holographicuniverseworkshops.com/

In summary: Your brian first receives a hologram in wave frequencies downloaded from the field. It then translates those waves into particles to create your holographic "physical reality" and then it sends that reality out there for you to perceive and experience.

When [quanta] electrons are viewed by an observer, these waves of possibilities "pop" and assume a specific location in space and time, which is what we see as "reality." This is called "collapsing the wave function."

The natural state of an electron is as a wave. It only pops out of it's wave state to form a particle in a specific location in space and time when it is being observed.

This new brain research indicates that the human brain is the "observer" that "collapses the wave function," since quantum physics says it is the "observer" that changes an electron from a wave into a particle.

Only conscious beings can be "observers." If this is the case, then we are are intimately hooked into the very existence of reality. Without us there would just be this expanding superposition of possibilities with nothing definitely ever happening.

Lynne McTaggert
"Reality is like unset jello....our potential life. We, by our very act of involvement (our act of noticing our observation) get that jello to set. We are intrinsic to the whole process of reality. Our involvement creates that reality. We have this involvement in everything. We are our world. There's no out there out there. There's no place where we end and everything else begins."

David Bohm:
"The tangible reality of our everyday lives, is a kind of illusion, like a holographic image. Underlying it is a deeper order of existence, a vast and more primary level of reality that gives birth to all the objects and appearances of our physical world in much the same way that a piece of holographic film gives birth to a hologram."

In other words, what you are seeing right now is a holographic 3-D total immersion movie, downloaded to your brain, translated into the holograms you see and projected "out there" for you to experience.

If this is true... who or what is choosing certain wave frequencies from the FILED and downloading them to a human brain to be converted into particles to become the reality we see and experience?

Consciousness.

As one researcher put it, "Quantum physics enables us to see directly that we can make sense of the world only if we base the world on consciousness."

Consciousness is what chooses the specific wave frequencies from the unlimited possibilities in the FIELD that it wants and downloads them to a human brain, which then converts them into space/time particles and out pops our holographic reality.

Fred Allen Wolf: "Quantum Physics says that consciousness is playing a role in the universe. It says that there is a secret underground that seems to be effecting (creating) the reality we live in."

Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, "Quantum mechanics says that there is a spiritual world that makes this choice, that there is another world that is intangible that effects and influences the physical world."

Dr. Andrew Newberg: "Whether the material world can actually be derived from a consciousness reality, or whether consciousness itself could even be the fundamental stuff of the universe."

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by RMorgan (here)
Well, the photon belt hypothesis is clearly completely different; It´s portrays an immense belt exclusively made of photons orbiting around the Pleiades.

I just happened on to what seems to me to be excellent research into the history of this idea of a "photon" belt: Morphogenic Resonance or a Plethora of Galactic Center Disinformation?. It was written in 1999 by Paul LaViolette (I'm a fan of his, so it's not surprising I find the research excellent.)

[thetruepathofwisdom]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by RMorgan (here)
Well, the photon belt hypothesis is clearly completely different; It´s portrays an immense belt exclusively made of photons orbiting around the Pleiades.

I just happened on to what seems to me to be excellent research into the history of this idea of a "photon" belt: Morphogenic Resonance or a Plethora of Galactic Center Disinformation?. It was written in 1999 by Paul LaViolette (I'm a fan of his, so it's not surprising I find the research excellent.)

Cheers Paul,

This should be interesting. It is speculated that we should be completely immersed in this belt by 9:11 tonight Eastern Australia Time

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by thetruepathofwisdom (here)
This should be interesting. It is speculated that we should be completely immersed in this belt by 9:11 tonight Eastern Australia Time

Such speculations sound waaaay overly specific to me. I would expect it to take decades or centuries or longer for the solar system to pass through such an inter-stellar cloud.

In other words, if we will be "completely immersed in this belt by 9:11 tonight Eastern Australia Time", then we were more or less "completely immersed" in it last year, and will still be next year, as well.

(Oh - and I take the word "belt" in this context to refer to the so called "photon belt," which I take to be pretty much nonsense.)

[161803398]

somebody just told me that scientists in Switzerland are trying to create anti-matter tomorrow.

So, if anything blows up tomorrow I think it will be from them.

Other than that, I like the Galactic Bday theory. Or what about the Galactic Pizza theory?

[TOTHE]

Our next big event: a close approach to Galactic Center of Cloud G2 around July 2013. Astronomers are watching this one.

An overview by PAUL A. LaVIOLETTE, PH.D.
http://starburstfound.org/superwaveblog/?p=246

Source
http://starburstfound.org/superwave-...d-catastrophe/

Paul’s foundation
http://starburstfound.org/

Paul’s bio:
http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/LaViolette.html

Paul’s books, interviews & videos:
http://www.etheric.com/

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by TOTHE (here)
Our next big event: a close approach to Galactic Center of Cloud G2 around July 2013. Astronomers are watching this one.

An overview by PAUL A. LaVIOLETTE, PH.D.
http://starburstfound.org/superwaveblog/?p=246

Excellent - thanks.

Here's Paul LaViolette's summary of this cloud near our galactic core:

I have looked at literature that has been published about this cloud, have considered all aspects carefully, and have reached the conclusion that this encounter could very well initiate an energetic flare from the Galaxy’s core as astronomers predict, but that this will likely not be powerful enough to produce a superwave. That is, it will not be sufficiently energetic to launch a cosmic ray volley that could locally overpower the interstellar magnetic field and allow long-range flight of the cosmic rays out of our Galaxy’s nuclear bulge. Also, if it were able to release cosmic rays along rectilinear trajectories towards us and produce a superwave, I don’t believe that the consequences would pose any kind of health hazard. Although there is a rather remote possibility (which I cannot presently rule out) that such a superwave may be a Magnitude 1 superwave that carries an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) and geomagnetic disturbance similar to a Carrington solar flare event, one that would be able to disrupt our electrical grid and satellite communication systems. Also a magnitude 1 event could possibly cause significant seismic activity similar to the December 2004 tsunami event that struck two days before our satellites registered the largest Galactic gamma ray burst in modern history. But these more serious EMP and gravity wave consequences should occur only if the G2 cloud break up and consumption occurred quickly, as we will discuss below.

Note that this means "near our galactic core" from what we can see now. The galactic core is roughly 26,000 light years away from earth, so in one sense whatever happened when cloud G2 came close to our galactic core already happened, 26,000 years ago, and we're just waiting for the news to arrive, next year, at light speed.

[araucaria]

Posted by Paul (here)
Note that this means "near our galactic core" from what we can see now. The galactic core is roughly 26,000 light years away from earth, so in one sense whatever happened when cloud G2 came close to our galactic core already happened, 26,000 years ago, and we're just waiting for the news to arrive, next year, at light speed.

Thanks to you LaViolette quoters, I'm a fan of his too. I am still puzzling over the correlation between our precession cycle of 26,000 years with our distance from the galactic centre, 26,000 light years. There has got to be some connection, albeit indirect.

[Bill Ryan]

-------

Quote from 'Daniel', David Wilcock's Montauk insider contact: (from the PDF linked here or here)

Re: photon belt... in order to have a "belt," for example the asteroid belt, there needs to be some cohesion between the constituent parts.

Photons do not gravitate--there is nothing to keep photons together, in a belt or otherwise. If there is a belt, it may emit photons but cannot be made of them.

That's correct, as every physicist will confirm (while rolling his eyes at yet more New Age absurdity). The 'photon belt', I'm afraid, is another New Age fiction that's become part of the quite widespread but hugely mistaken belief system -- like the 'alignment' which actually isn't any alignment at all.

But Paul LaViolette, who's pretty smart and by no means a crackpot, may be on the right track when he talks about cyclical superbursts from the Galactic Center which affect us fairly regularly (in cosmic timescale terms).

If we experience the effects of something like this, its correct to state that it must have happened a very long time ago and is on its way to us at light speed, with nothing we can do about it either to detect it or get out of the way.

It's rather like a gunshot from a sniper in the bushes: by the time you hear it, it's too late to duck. If you can hear it at all, the bullet's already missed you!

What this boils down to re Paul LaViolette is that there's absolutely nothing we can do about this, so we may as well regard it as an interesting theory -- and nothing more.

By definition, we cannot predict this at all, except in the terms he has described (which is that it may be cyclical). But 'cyclical' certainly does not mean being able to predict anything to the nearest day, or even to the nearest century.

(The Yellowstone supervolcano may be cyclical, too. It works in the same kind of way, in that it blows when certain physical circumstances all pile up together, as they do periodically, and create a trigger.)