The Legacy of Thuban Omni-Science De Alpha Draconis Omega

bobhardee wrote:Do you know if any of what you just posted has anything to do with the island rising out of the Arabian sea?

 


Decoding Mandala for the World Logos Timeline for the Fulfilment of Scriptural Prophecy from March 31 to September 2013
















"THEeXchanger": Now that's a sexy Dragon Suzy Luna Serafinis! - One Becoming Incorporated in Excelsis Astralis!

http://www.themistsofavalon.net/t6780-the-legacy-of-thuban-omni-science-de-alpha-draconis-omega#96791

[9:57:10 PM-Saturday, October 5th, 2013 +11UCT]

Sirius 17: well Jorgelito will like those videos
Shiloh: Yes I thought of your series when he asked me to explain. I watched the first 4 and saw this equation lol
Sirius 17: lol
Shiloh: So I copied it, as it proves the string theory.  It is in part 3
Sirius 17: yes what equation is that
Shiloh: Some complex series expansion, linking gravity with the nuclear forces
Sirius 17: lol wtf is 496
Shiloh: But on the left side the n factor had to cancel to 0 as a number 496. The right side is just our nice T(n)=n(n+1) as an arithmetic  summation for all natural numbers in (31x32):2=496. This is what I term the Feynmann path integral in the 'Universal Wavefunction'. It is the Fibonacci Series in the quadratic equation solving for phi
Sirius 17: oh ok
Shiloh: This they cant see yet. n(n+1)=1 gives you Fibonacci with n=X=0.618033... Euler's famous equation
Sirius 17: right
Shiloh: They use it and discovered strings through the Beta Function and the Gamma Function
Sirius 17: so they saw them purely through the math?
Shiloh: It is a nice rundown this video series; yes
Sirius 17: oh dear....the poor MOAbytes will have to learn a bit of math to get strings lol
Shiloh: They will ignore it. But it is a nice post indeed, as it shows where the strings are experimentally verified
Shiloh: This is the follow up after the videos; Penrose would get it and see it
Sirius 17: well of course he would...Galactic Halo(Group) Scale...lol, couldn't give them a better hint
Shiloh: Never mind, but yes this proves the Cosmic Rays as strings experimentally
Shiloh: See how it MODULATES the micro in the macro and the quantum branes in the galactic scales?
Shiloh: You will understand the basic structure of the universe as a waveparticle dualism then; having put up with my semantics for 3 years now
Sirius 17: well i do understand this
Shiloh: I know that you do
Sirius 17: as well as understand that the human body is a replica of the macro scale; a mini universe; the real 'god particle';  lol

The SciAm article below from 1998 links to the above in clarification of the questions raised.

http://auger.cnrs.fr/presse/ScAm_jan97.html

Cosmic Rays at the Energy Frontier

The Life of a Cosmic Ray

These particles carry more energy than any others in the universe. Their origin is unknown but may be relatively nearby.

by James W. Cronin, Thomas K. Gaisser and Simon P. Swordy

Roughly once a second, a subatomic particle enters the earth's atmosphere carrying as much energy as a well-thrown rock. Somewhere in the universe, that fact implies, there are forces that can impart to a single proton 100 million times the energy achievable by the most powerful earthbound accelerators. Where and how?

Those questions have occupied physicists since cosmic rays were first discovered in 1912 (although the entities in question are now known to be particles, the name "ray" persists). The interstellar medium contains atomic nuclei of every element in the periodic table, all moving under the influence of electrical and magnetic fields. Without the screening effect of the earth's atmosphere, cosmic rays would pose a significant health threat; indeed, people living in mountainous regions or making frequent airplane trips pick up a measurable extra radiation dose.

Cosmic-Ray Accelerator

Perhaps the most remarkable feature of this radiation is that investigators have not yet found a natural end to the cosmic-ray spectrum. Most well-known sources of charged particles--such as the sun, with its solar wind--have a characteristic energy limit; they simply do not produce particles with energies above this limit. In contrast, cosmic rays appear, albeit in decreasing numbers, at energies as high as astrophysicists can measure. The data run out at levels around 300 billion times the rest-mass energy of a proton because there is at present no detector large enough to sample the very low number of incoming particles predicted.
Nevertheless, evidence of ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays has been seen at intervals of several years as particles hitting the atmosphere create myriad secondary particles (which are easier to detect). On October 15, 1991, for example, a cosmic-ray observatory in the Utah desert registered a shower of secondary particles from a 50-joule (3 x 10²⁰ electron volts) cosmic ray. Although the cosmic-ray flux decreases with higher energy, this decline levels off somewhat above about 10¹⁶ eV, suggesting that the mechanisms responsible for ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays are different from those for rays of more moderate energy.

In 1960 Bernard Peters of the Tata Institute in Bombay suggested that lower-energy cosmic rays are produced predominantly inside our own galaxy, whereas those of higher energy come from more distant sources. One reason to think so is that a cosmic-ray proton carrying more than 10¹⁹ eV, for example, would not be deflected significantly by any of the magnetic fields typically generated by a galaxy, so it would travel more or less straight. If such particles came from inside our galaxy, we might expect to see different numbers coming from various directions because the galaxy is not arranged symmetrically around us. Instead the distribution is essentially isotropic, as is that of the lower-energy rays, whose directions are scattered.

Supernova Pumps
Such tenuous inferences reveal how little is known for certain about the origin of cosmic rays. Astrophysicists have plausible models for how they might be produced but no definitive answers. This state of affairs may be the result of the almost unimaginable difference between conditions on the earth and in the regions where cosmic rays are born. The space between the stars contains only about one atom per cubic centimeter, a far lower density than the best artificial vacuums we can create. Furthermore, these volumes are filled with vast electrical and magnetic fields, intimately connected to a diffuse population of charged particles even less numerous than the neutral atoms.
This environment is far from the peaceful place one might expect: the low densities allow electrical and magnetic forces to operate over large distances and timescales in a manner that would be quickly damped out in material of terrestrial densities. Galactic space is therefore filled with an energetic and turbulent plasma of partially ionized gas in a state of violent activity. The motion is often hard to observe on human timescales because astronomical distances are so large; nevertheless, those same distances allow even moderate forces to achieve impressive results. A particle might zip through a terrestrial accelerator in a few microseconds, but it could spend years or even millennia in the accelerator's cosmic counterpart. (The timescales are further complicated by the strange, relativity-distorted framework that ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays inhabit. If we could observe such a particle for 10,000 years, that period would correspond to only a single second as far as the particle is concerned.)
Astronomers have long speculated that the bulk of galactic cosmic rays--those with energies below about 10¹⁶ eV--originate with supernovae. A compelling reason for this theory is that the power required to maintain the observed supply of cosmic-ray nuclei in our Milky Way galaxy is only slightly less than the average kinetic energy delivered to the galactic medium by the three supernova explosions that occur every century. There are few, if any, other sources of this amount of power in our galaxy.

When a massive star collapses, the outer parts of the star explode at speeds of up to 10,000 kilometers per second and more. A similar amount of energy is released when a white dwarf star undergoes complete disintegration in a thermonuclear detonation. In both types of supernovae the ejected matter expands at supersonic velocities, driving a strong shock into the surrounding medium. Such shocks are expected to accelerate nuclei from the material they pass through, turning them into cosmic rays. Because cosmic rays are charged, they follow complicated paths through interstellar magnetic fields. As a result, their directions as observed from the earth yield no information about the location of their original source.
By looking at the synchrotron radiation sometimes associated with supernova remnants, researchers have found more direct evidence that supernovae can act as accelerators. Synchrotron radiation is characteristic of high-energy electrons moving in an intense magnetic field of the kind that might act as a cosmic-ray accelerator, and the presence of synchrotron x-rays in some supernova remnants suggests particularly high energies. (In earthbound devices, synchrotron emission limits a particle's energy because the emission rate increases as a particle goes faster; at some point, the radiation bleeds energy out of an accelerating particle as fast as it can be pumped in.) Recently the Japanese x-ray satellite Asca made images of the shell of Supernova 1006, which exploded 990 years ago. Unlike the radiation from the interior of the remnant, the x-radiation from the shell has the features characteristic of synchrotron radiation. Astrophysicists have deduced that electrons are being accelerated there at up to 10¹⁴ eV (100 TeV).

The EGRET detector on the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory has also been used to study point sources of gamma rays identified with supernova remnants. The observed intensities and spectra (up to a billion electron volts) are consistent with an origin from the decay of particles called neutral pions, which could be produced by cosmic rays from the exploding star's remnants colliding with nearby interstellar gas. Interestingly, however, searches made by the ground-based Whipple Observatory for gamma rays of much higher energies from some of the same remnants have not seen signals at the levels that would be expected if the supernovae were accelerating particles to 10¹⁴ eV or more.
A complementary method for testing the association of high-energy cosmic rays with supernovae involves the elemental composition of cosmic-ray nuclei. The size of the orbit of a charged particle in a magnetic field is proportional to its total momentum per unit charge, so heavier nuclei have greater total energy for a given orbit size. Any process that limits the particle acceleration on the basis of orbit size (such as an accelerating region of limited extent) will thus lead to an excess of heavier nuclei at high energies.

Eventually we would like to be able to go further and look for elemental signatures of acceleration in specific types of supernovae. For example, the supernova of a white dwarf detonation would accelerate whatever nuclei populate the local interstellar medium. A supernova that followed the collapse of a massive star, in contrast, would accelerate the surrounding stellar wind, which is characteristic of the outer layers of the progenitor star at earlier stages of its evolution. In some cases, the wind could include an increased fraction of helium, carbon or even heavier nuclei.
The identity of high-energy cosmic rays is all but lost when they interact with atoms in the earth's atmosphere and form a shower of secondary particles. Hence, to be absolutely sure of the nuclear composition, measurements must be made before the cosmic rays reach dense atmosphere. Unfortunately, to collect 100 cosmic rays of energies near 10¹⁴ eV, a 10-square-meter detector would have to be in orbit for three years. Typical exposures at present are more like the equivalent of one square meter for three days.
Researchers are attacking this problem with some ingenious experiments. For example, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration has developed techniques to loft large payloads (about three tons) with high-altitude balloons for many days. These experiments cost a tiny fraction of what an equivalent satellite detector would. The most successful flights of this type have taken place in Antarctica, where the upper atmosphere winds blow in an almost constant circle around the South Pole.
A payload launched at McMurdo Sound on the coast of Antarctica will travel at a nearly constant radius from the Pole and return eventually to near the launch site. Some balloons have circled the continent for 10 days. One of us (Swordy) is collaborating with Dietrich Müller and Peter Meyer of the University of Chicago on a 10-square-meter detector that could measure heavy cosmic rays of up to 10¹⁵ eV on such a flight. There are efforts to extend the exposure times to roughly 100 days with similar flights nearer the equator.

High-Altitude Balloon

Across Intergalactic Space
Studying even higher-energy cosmic rays--those produced by sources as yet unknown--requires large ground-based detectors, which overcome the problem of low flux by watching enormous effective areas for months or years. The information, however, must be extracted from cascades of secondary particles--electrons, muons and gamma rays--initiated high in the atmosphere by an incoming cosmic-ray nucleus. Such indirect methods can only suggest general features of the composition of a cosmic ray on a statistical basis, rather than identifying the atomic number of each incoming nucleus.
At ground level, the millions of secondary particles unleashed by one cosmic ray are spread over a radius of hundreds of meters. Because it is impractical to blanket such a large area with detectors, the detectors typically sample these air showers at a few hundred or so discrete locations.
Technical improvements have enabled such devices to collect increasingly sophisticated data sets, thus refining the conclusions we can draw from each shower. For example, the CASA-MIA-DICE experiment in Utah, in which two of us (Cronin and Swordy) are involved, measures the distributions of electrons and muons at ground level. It also detects Cerenkov light (a type of optical shock wave produced by particles moving faster than the speed of light in their surrounding medium) generated by the shower particles at various levels in the atmosphere. These data enable us to reconstruct the shape of the shower more reliably and thus take a better guess at the energy and identity of the cosmic ray that initiated it.
The third one of us (Gaisser) is working with an array that measures showers reaching the surface at the South Pole. This experiment works in conjunction with AMANDA, which detects energetic muons produced in the same showers by observing Cerenkov radiation produced deep in the ice cap. The primary goal of AMANDA is to catch traces of neutrinos produced in cosmic accelerators, which may generate upward-streaming showers after passing through the earth.
In addition to gathering better data, researchers are also improving detailed computer simulations that model how air showers develop. These simulations help us to understand both the capabilities and the limitations of ground-based measurements. The extension to higher energies of direct cosmic-ray detection experiments, which allows both ground-based and airborne detectors to observe the same kinds of cosmic rays, will also help calibrate our ground-based data.

Rare Giants
Cosmic rays with energies above 10²⁰ eV strike the earth's atmosphere at a rate of only about one per square kilometer a year. As a result, studying them requires an air-shower detector of truly gigantic proportions. In addition to the 1991 event in Utah, particles with energies above 10²⁰ eV have been seen by groups elsewhere in the U.S., in Akeno, Japan, in Haverah Park, U.K., and in Yakutsk, Siberia.
Particles of such high energy pose a conundrum. On the one hand, they are likely to come from outside our galaxy because no known acceleration mechanism could produce them and because they approach from all directions even though a galactic magnetic field is insufficient to bend their path. On the other hand, their source cannot be more than about 30 million light-years away, because the particles would otherwise lose energy by interaction with the universal microwave background--radiation left over from the birth of the cosmos in the big bang. In the relativistic universe that the highest-energy cosmic rays inhabit, even a single radio-frequency photon packs enough punch to rob a particle of much of its energy.

If the sources of such high-energy particles were distributed uniformly throughout the cosmos, interaction with the microwave background would cause a sharp cutoff in the number of particles with energy above 5 x 10¹⁹ eV, but that is not the case. There are as yet too few events above this nominal threshold for us to know for certain what is going on, but even the few we have seen provide us with a unique opportunity for theorizing. Because these rays are essentially undeflected by the weak intergalactic magnetic fields, measuring the direction of travel of a large enough sample should yield unambiguous clues to the locations of their sources.

It is interesting to speculate what the sources might be. Three recent hypotheses suggest the range of possibilities: galactic black-hole accretion disks, gamma-ray bursts and topological defects in the fabric of the universe.

Astrophysicists have predicted that black holes of a billion solar masses or more, accreting matter in the nuclei of active galaxies, are needed to drive relativistic jets of matter far into intergalactic space at speeds approaching that of light; such jets have been mapped with radio telescopes. Peter L. Biermann of the Max Planck Institute for Radioastronomy in Bonn and his collaborators suggest that the hot spots seen in these radio lobes are shock fronts that accelerate cosmic rays to ultrahigh energy. There are some indications that the directions of the highest-energy cosmic rays to some extent follow the distribution of radio galaxies in the sky.

The speculation about gamma-ray bursts takes off from the theory that the bursts are created by relativistic explosions, perhaps resulting from the coalescence of neutron stars. Mario Vietri of the Astronomical Observatory of Rome and Eli Waxman of Princeton University independently noted a rough match between the energy available in such cataclysms and that needed to supply the observed flux of the highest-energy cosmic rays. They argue that the ultrahigh-speed shocks driven by these explosions act as cosmic accelerators.

Perhaps most intriguing is the notion that ultrahigh-energy particles owe their existence to the decay of monopoles, strings, domain walls and other topological defects that might have formed in the early universe. These hypothetical objects are believed to harbor remnants of an earlier, more symmetrical phase of the fundamental fields in nature, when gravity, electromagnetism and the weak and strong nuclear forces were merged. They can be thought of, in a sense, as infinitesimal pockets preserving bits of the universe as it existed in the fractional instants after the big bang.

As these pockets collapse, and the symmetry of the forces within them breaks, the energy stored in them is released in the form of supermassive particles that immediately decay into jets of particles with energies up to 100,000 times greater than those of the known ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays. In this scenario the ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays we observe are the comparatively sluggish products of cosmological particle cascades.
Whatever the source of these cosmic rays, the challenge is to collect enough of them to search for detailed correlations with extragalactic objects. The AGASA array in Japan currently has an effective area of 200 square kilometers, and the new Fly's Eye HiRes experiment in Utah will cover about 1,000 square kilometers. Each detector, however, can capture only a few ultrahigh-energy events a year.

For the past few years, Cronin and Alan A. Watson of the University of Leeds have been spearheading an initiative to gather an even larger sample of ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays. This development is named the Auger Project, after Pierre Auger, the French scientist who first investigated the phenomenon of correlated showers of particles from cosmic rays. The plan is to provide detectors with areas of 9,000 square kilometers that are capable of measuring hundreds of high-energy events a year. A detector field would consist of many stations on a 1.5-kilometer grid; a single event might trigger dozens of stations.

An Auger Project design workshop held at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in 1995 has shown how modern off-the-shelf technology such as solar cells, cellular telephones and Global Positioning System receivers can make such a system far easier to construct. A detector the size of Rhode Island could be built for about $50 million. To cover the entire sky, two such detectors are planned, one each for the Northern and Southern hemispheres.
As researchers confront the problem of building and operating such gigantic detector networks, the fundamental question remains: Can nature produce even more energetic particles than those we have seen? Could there be still higher-energy cosmic rays, or are we already beginning to detect the highest-energy particles our universe can create?

Further Reading
Introduction to Ultrahigh Energy Cosmic Ray Physics. Pierre Sokolsky. Addison-Wesley, 1988.
Cosmic Rays and Particle Physics. Thomas K. Gaisser. Cambridge University Press, 1990.
High Energy Astrophysics, Vol. 1. Second edition. Malcolm S. Longair. Cambridge University Press, 1992.
Cosmic Ray Observations below 10¹⁴ eV. Simon Swordy in Proceedings of the XXIII International Cosmic Ray Conference. Edited by D. A. Leahy, R. B. Hicks and D. Venkatesan. World Scientific, 1994.

The Authors
JAMES W. CRONIN, THOMAS K. GAISSER and SIMON P. SWORDY work on both the theoretical questions of how cosmic rays are created and the practical problems inherent in detecting and analyzing them. Cronin, a professor of physics at the University of Chicago since 1971, earned his master's degree from the university in 1953 and his doctorate in 1955. In 1980 he shared the Nobel Prize with Val L. Fitch for work on symmetry violations in the decay of mesons. Gaisser, a professor of physics at the University of Delaware, has concentrated on the interpretation of atmospheric cosmic-ray cascades; he earned his doctorate from Brown University in 1967. In 1995 Gaisser spent two months in Antarctica setting up cosmic-ray detectors. Swordy, an associate professor at Chicago, has been active in cosmic-ray measurement since 1976. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Bristol in 1979.

Many readers have trouble with the concept of a 'higher dimension', not surprisingly because the human brain encoding cannot visualise hyperspace, meaning some region or volume of space additional to the experienced Cartesian coordinate system of 3 orthogonal (normal at 90 degrees to each other) directions like length, width and breadth.
Changing the orthogonality then results in curved space or curvilinear coordinates and the 'cube' of Minkowski becomes a skewed and sheared in any of the directions and with the 90 degree angle changing into acuteness (less than 90^o) or obtuseness (more than 90^o).

The 'expert' scientific nomenclature (language) then describes this curved space in differential equations relating the positions of the 'points' in both space and time in a 4-dimensional description called Riemannian Tensor Space or similar.

This then leads mathematically, to the formulation of General Relativity in Einstein's field Equations:

  for the Einstein-Riemann tensor     and is

built upon ten so-called nonlinear coupled hyperbolic-elliptic partial differential equations" which, needless to say,  are mathematically rather complex and often cannot be solved analytically without simplifying the geometries of the parametric constituents (say objects interacting in so called tensor-fields of stress-energy {T_μν} and curvatures (Riemann-Einstein tensor {G_μν}), either changing the volume in reduction (Ricci tensor {R_ij} with scalar curvature R as {Rg_μν} for the metric tensor g_μν) or keeping the volume of considered space invariant to volume change (Tidal Weyl tensor R_μν).

The difficulties lie in the fact that the equations are nonlinear and coupled in many terms, resulting in families of equations, which are then expressed in the shorthand notations of the Einstein conventions as in the specialist semantics of the so trained and educated scientists and especially cosmological physicists, who are attempting to formulate the dynamics of the physical universe in such terminology.

The difficulty for the layman to understand General Relativity in this extraordinary complex formalism so becomes self evident and Quantum Relativity was developed to add a particular conceptual framework to the specialised formulations in a what might be labelled a Newtonian Quantum Cosmology not addressing the local dynamics of a system (say as calculation of the perihelion of Mercury as the perturbation correction of Newtonian Cosmology by General Relativity due to the curvilinear coordinate system applicable; but in describing the universe as a hologram and wholism and by this necessity independent on any coordinate system.

This is termed Demetrication and so  allows the examination of the prespacetime scenarios of the cosmogenesis in what becomes the cosmogony preceding the cosmologies of proposed models for the universe and multiverses seeded upon a protoversal seed and collectively integrated as an omniverse.
The inherent difficulty between the classical description of General Relativity in terms of macrocosmic geometrical curvature fields of locally defined metrics with the delocalised (or quantum entangled) quantum fields of microcosmic energy states so becomes apparent as an effect of the metric background used to describe the cosmologies itself.

For example the Quantum Field Theories describe the Electron in terms of its singularity as a 'point particle'; yet the same formulations also require the Electron to be a Classical wavicle, defined by its electrodynamic properties, say as defined in the Alpha Finestructure and the mass-energy equivalence of E=mc² and more appropriately the Energy-Momentum Relation E²=E_o²+(pc)².
The 'explanation' for this schizophrenic behaviour of the Electron being both classically macro and quantum micro simultaneously then rests at the core of the true unification Cosmologies.

As the basic formulations in General Relativity describe the 4-vector, say the Minkowski coordinate system where the 4th spacelike dimension is given by the lightpath X=ct; Quantum Relativity begins its 'demetrication' modus operandi of the unification in reexamining the nature of this 'Imaginary spacelike Minkowski timedimension'.

General Relativity is appropriate for all cosmologies describing a physical universe and where physical here encompasses the propagation of electromagnetic radiation and so the invariance of the lightspeed as the 4th dimension of the lightpath X=cT in the Minkowski metric:  R²+X²=c².

This is conventionally written as (ds)²=(cdt)² - (dl)², showing that the nature of the Time coordinate in the lightpath X=ct in the 4-vector of say velocity dl/dt=v is nought but the extension of the Pythagorean Theorem in 4 spacial dimensions, where the 4th dimension is not some coordinate W, but the lightpath X in a 4-vector space of say:
R⁴={ct,x,y,z} with R³={x,y,z} for the conventional and familiar metric linesegment (ds)²=(dx)²+(dy)²+(dz)²

Rewriting
(ds/c)² = (dt)² - (dl/c)² = (dt)²{1-(dl/dt)²/c²}=(dt)²{1-v²/c²}=(dT)²

then immediately crystallizes the postulates of Special Relativity in a Proper Time T applicable to both stationary and moving observer, provided the metric ds>0 in a TIMELIKE definition for the formulated parameters.

(ds/dt)² = c²(dT)² =c²{1-v²/c²}=c²-v² for the Pythagorean summation (ds/dt)² + v² = c².

This shows that physically ANY movement through space will REDUCE the movement through time by the simple vector summation of the classical velocity v, bounded by the lightspeed invariance in ds >0.

Subsequently ONLY a null velocity v=0 will allow a MAXIMIZED movement through Time in this formulation for ds/dt=c=ds/dT.
Terrestrial physics, inclusive the string-brane formulations in extended metric spacetimes, now continues to explore this foundational basis with ever increasing mathematical complexities, as can be ascertained in the semantics and labelings of the 26-dimensional string proposal following.

Quantum Relativity differs in the allowing the linear 'flow of time' to become an emergent property of a demetricated prior energy state. This then defines a prior minimum spacial metric, related to but not restricted to the so termed Planck parameters of modern quantum field theory.

In the conventional approach, the TIMELIKENESS of the metric element (ds)²=(cdt)²-(dl)² >0 is allowed to assume its SPACELIKENESS in the inequality (ds)²=(cdt)²-(dl)² <0 in what might be termed the 'Inner Minkowski Space' of the Euclidean metric  bounded by the LIGHTLIKENESS of (ds)²=(cdt)²-(dl)²=0, that is the v=c identity of the c-invariance of the relativities as BOTH an upper and a lower bound for 4-dimensional spacetime continuum.

Of course for the SPACELIKENESS of the inner space the linear flow of time is rendered superluminal in a 4-dimensional Hyperspace of 4 space dimensions and where the 4th spacial dimensions becomes colocal, albeit subject to curvature in enfoldment, with the preexisting volume-space of the R³ 3-vector space of an ordinary Newtonian cosmology.

Quantum Relativity then approaches the definition of higher multidimensional Riemannian coordinate systems in a rather simplified form of allowing the 'higher dimensions' to enfold themselves in colocality.
This is commonly understood in the precipes of string-membrane cosmology as the conifoldment of a circularised 'mini spacetime dimension', such as a LOOP about an extended macro dimension (such as an ant crawling around the 'thickness' of as garden hose in popular example).
Quantum Relativity considers the Universe as a Manifold reducible (in its preinflationary definition) to just 2 dimensions and where these 2 dimensions (of say a Complex Plane) GENERATE the 3rd dimension by the definition of the Curvature attained by separation of some minimized displacement defining the underpinning demetrication in a Minimum spacetime configuration causative for the so termed Big Bang singularity itself.

On a complex plane manifold the metric (ds)² NOT embedded in a preexisting R³ space cannot curve into 3 dimensions from R², as its own self generation from Nullspace R⁰ into R¹ required the Unification or Unitisation of the selfmapping of the singularity being both a Null-eigenstate AND an Infinity-selfstate simultaneously.

In other words, the Unity did not exist and no counting process of summation or integration (mathematically termed enumerability) was then possible.
This selfmapping of the singularity of a mathematical point onto itself, did however allow a distinction between the former and the latter selfstate to be made.
Quantum Relativity describes the detailed processes of this in terms of principles with the 3rd principle of order preceding, but becoming necessity for the physicalisation of the before-and-after ordering as the concept of linearized flow of time in the entropy arrow of the forwards direction.

Then, the selfmapping of 'Nothingness=Everything Singularities' or 'mathematical points' of this pre Big Bang scenario of distinguishing between them, allowed a Primordial Separation between the singularities and this separation become defined in the UNITY Interval of the minimum metric for the emergent Inflaton-Instanton of the string-membrane quantum Cosmogony and the Big Bang classical Cosmologies of Einsteinian relativity.
The distinction between two selfmapped points so became a string metric as the 1st dimension and before the so called Planck Time was physicalised in the string epoch from Planck-Time to Weyl-Time in the Cosmogony.

This 1D string as the (ds)² metric displacement so became defined as the selfinteraction of the previously selfmapped singularity and because this metric definition could redefine itself as INVARIANT with respect to Angular Displacement AND VARIANT with respect to Linear Displacement, the 2nd dimension could emerge as the rotational symmetry of the complex plane and the geometry of the circle or a 1-sphere or a 2-ball in topological linguistics (the 0-sphere being the ±1 separation of two mathematical points as the 1-ball of a diameter say).

Then the rotational plane could itself CURVE its LINEARITY as a Manifold in 2 dimensions, thus transforming its IMAGINARY Thickness as the defined Minimum Metric of the Weyl-Perimeter and emerging as the Big Bang Wormhole parameters.
As stated later on, this supports and emphasizes the model of the Universe being 'born' from a previous Black Hole Cosmology; this Black Hole being however not any Black Hole of whatver prior brane cosmologies, but the Primordial Singularity itself.

The extraterrestrial physics (as is the case until certain transformations within spacetime render the extraterrestrial as new terrestrial); then specify the 'thickness' of the primordial 3rd dimension as the parameter allowing the topology of the 2D manifold of the 1-sphere to become the boundary for the 2-sphere, that is the self closure of the spherical space in topological transformation.
Just as a malleable sheet of paper or plastic say can be moulded into an idealised spherical envelope say, provided there preexists 3D space to do this in; so can the 2-sphere become the lower boundary as a surface for an encompassing 3-sphere in R⁴, also known as Riemann's Hypersphere or as Poincare's 3-Sphere in the echelons of the academia.

In particular, the 3-sphere of Volume V₄=½π²R⁴ has its surface derivative dV₄/dR=S₄=2π²R³ as its lower dimensional boundary V₃.
So the entire information content of a physical cosmology in a 3-dimensional volume space can be described as the Surface mapping of a 4-dimensional space in a top-down approach.
Alternatively in a bottom-up approach, the transformation of a spherical volume
V₃=(πR²)(2πR)=(Cross-Section of a Torus)(Perimeter of a Torus) can be considered mapped onto a 4-dimensional hypersurface manifesting in 3D as the surface manifold of a Black Hole.

In Quantum Relativity, it is the 'thickness dimension' of the Weyl-String in 2D, which defines the inside-out or top-down distinction  between the parent space of the R⁴ and the sondaughter space of the R³ in the case of the TIMELIKENESS of a time-evolving cosmology (ds>0).

In the SPACELIKENESS of the ds<0, the parent space is the R² for the daughterson space of the R³ and so the TIMELIKE mirrors the SPACELIKE in a supersymmetry between the metricated cosmology and the demetricated cosmology.

The overall topology of the higher dimensional string-membrane physics, so reduces in the simplicity of the cosmogony of Quantum Relativity.
The brane dimensions all reduce to a timeless Protoversal SEED manifested as a  'Quasi Steady State' higher-dimensional envelope around a timeevolving expanding universe cosmology.
The Line-dimensions manifest as the 3-sphere, where however the 4th time dimension becomes inverted as a fourth spacial dimension so allowing the entropy-directed time dimension (or arrow) to open up a 5th spacial dimension colocal, yet inverted with the 3-sphere as an additional potential space dimension supplementary to the extent of the Protoversal seedling.
The Minkowski metric so remains valid in description of the Einstein universe of Euclidean flatness (zero curvature as a whole), because the positive curvature of the Riemann hypersphere is mirrored or reflected in the self-extension of itself by and through the 5th dimension, both inverted in reflection of the 'inner space' and extroverted as say a refraction of the 'outer space'.

Relative to an observer within the Riemannian 3-sphere then, the overall curvature for the universe's topology appears to be negative (or hyperbolic), because the selfimage of the 3-sphere in R⁴ as positive must become negative in superspacial symmetry (convexity to a central observer to the left becomes concavity to this observer to the right say).
{This becomes detailed in the equivalence of an encompassing spherical geometry radius 2a and V_3Sphere=32πa³/3 for an inscribed Torus Volume radius a for V_3Torus=2π²a³ =(3π/16)V_3Sphere.
There are so precisely 8 spheres radius a in the encompassing sphere radius 2a for an quasi-toroidal encompassing multiconnected R³ space as the R⁴ boundary, so 1.697652726..times bigger than the singularly connected R³ space.
An observer placed at the center of this geometry now will simultaneously experience the positive curvature of the encompassing sphere radius 2a and the negative hyperbolic curvature of the torus radius a}.

The tangent 'point' at the observer coordinate of the toroidal derivative in the description above so becomes the Weyl-String singularity in Quantum Relativity and so allows physicalisation of the 'tangent space'.
The Platonic Idealisation of the Self-Intersection so becomes the 'smeared out' singularity, say as the Kerr Ring in the Planck-Length being the cross-sectional radius of the torus and the Weyl wavelength becoming the magnified perimeter of the Kerr Ring in an idealised rotating Black Hole.

The thickness of the 3rd dimension of the cosmogenesis so similarly becomes the idealised (or metaphysical) 'point of singularity selfintersection' and so can become modeled in the mathematical descriptions of the Möbius strip and the Klein-Bottle.
Here the Möbius strip CAN be embedded as a 2D surface within a 3D volumar, but the Klein-Bottle cannot; the latter requires 4D space with the twosidedness of both geometrical constructs becoming onesided by the doubling of the surface areas of the twosidedness.

In Quantum Relativity, The Linespacetime of the 4D then assigns the toroidal geometries of the simple 2D space to the 'higher enfolded dimensions'.
The area dimensions of Linespace, Hyperspace, Quantumspace and Omnispace are so preceded by their metric linesegments and followed by the volumars or branes in such a Klein-Bottle Branes or quasi volumars in say a 2-Torus of Linespace R³, a 5-Torus of Hyperspace R⁵, a 8-Torus of Quantumspace R⁸ and a 11-Torus of Omnispace R¹¹ = 2-Torus of Linespace R³.

The 11th dimension becomes identical to the 2nd dimension as the Manifold for the Data inscription; just as the 2D surface area of a Black Hole is physically equivalent as a 4D hyperspace manifold to cumulate the information of any 3D volumar space embedding the Black Hole.
It is the 'doubling of the surface area' of the boundary space, which enables the dimensional subtraction/addition for the root-extension of the complex plane in 2D into physical reality in 3D mirrored in the root-reduction of the complex plane in 11D into physical reality in 10D of the Witten membrane space (as the original 9D string space).

Time, as described before, is rendered a Connector-Dimension in say 3 degrees of freedom of the Translation of LineSpace; the Rotation of HyperSpace; the Vibration of QuantumSpace and the Holofractalization of OmniSpace.
Then the 4th Minkowski Time dimension of Linespace connects Linespace to Hyperspace in say the TwistorSpace of Penrose as an inverted Space dimension being an extroverted Time dimension.
Similarly the 7th Penrose Time dimension of an enfolded space dimension becomes descriptive of vibrational string patterns and modes also acting as an external time dimension in a 7-brane spacetime and a 10th Witten Time dimension is both enfolded as a space dimension and externalised as a string time dimension of 10-branes.

The 10-dimensional string cosmology in Quantum Relativity so represents the Riemannian 3-sphere cosmology with translational metric modes described by local physical theories such as General Relativity with superpositioned rotational gauge quantum symmetries defined by the quantum spin of the massless bosonic precursors for the fermionic inertia carriers; as well as the vibrational patterns of the energy configurations of those 'bosonic-fermionic' templates as the transformed bosonic strings into fermions of the spin bifurcations.
The OmniSpace becomes the MirrorSpace, with the 11th dimension constituting the 'Inside' of the Möbian Dragon topology of the 11-Torus=2-Torus and the 12th dimension forming the 'Outside' in the twosidedness of the cosmological observer.
This 'Outside' however also becomes the Image of the 10D-QuantumSpace as the holistic Universe AND the 'refractive' expansion of the protoversal seedling itself.


'Consciousness' as a primordial label for the prespacetime creation energy selfstate can be descibed to  be either a higherD/ZPE wormhole energy quantum of 0.002 Joules (1,240 TeV) or to depict the concept of a 'primordial supercharge' (as a gluon-colour-magnetocharge say).
The 'superenergy' aka collective consciousness represents a purely metaphysical or mathematical abstraction, which however becomes 'materially physical' in the emergence of the metrics of space and time as a 11D membrane based dimension 'nesting'.
The spacetime (Inflationary String epoch in 26D followed by a Quantum Big Bang) creation occurred from the Void-Infinitum selfstate of the holographically collective 'Consciousness' without any metrication or Unification was possible (because there was no space or time).
The Quantum Big Bang; so was not the 'collision' of higherD branes from  'infinity space'; but rather the emergence of a quantum spin bifurcation of what is commonly termed the Bosonic Superstring in 26 dimensions.

A Onesided manifold emerging from the Nulldimension (of the 'geometrical' Void=Eternity) as a selfmapped point will so 'create' the 1st Dimension in a separation of this selfmapped mathematical 'point' or singularity and then allow both a linear and a curved manifold (or complex plane) to define the nonlinear metric of three such then noncollinear separated 'singularities'.
Assigning quantum spin, independent on radial extent as a function of angular displacement then; will render the onesided manifold as twosided in the creation of the 3rd dimension, namely the 'thickness' of the previously onesided manifold as a twosidedness. The boundary of spacetime so is rendered as the 'connectedness' of two surfaces or manifolds in the 26D bosonic stringspace not as then physically manifest in a metric background describable by geometries.
So the 26D bosonic superstring of say counterclockwise quantum spin becomes bounded in a 13D bifurcation with three 'mirror dimensions' say 11-12-13-14-15-16 separating a clockwise 10D superstring basis from its anticlockwise shadowed string 'universe'.
The 11th dimension for the physicalised spacetime so will become an asymptotic boundary independent on this physicalisation but allowing electromagnetic oscillation as a noninertial reference frame for the inertia parameters of the lower 10D spacetime and as the invariance of the lightspeed in the scenarios of ther Einsteinian relativities.
The 10D string cosmology so becomes an information mapping onto the 11th Mother-Dimension of the 2+9=11 rootextended higherD manifold.

This is 'mirrored' in the collapse of the 16th dimensional shadow string universe onto the 'outside' of the 11D mother membrane spacetime.
The 11th dimension so manifests the prior onesidedness in the bifurcated twosidedness in the 'collapse/conifoldment' of the counterclockwise spinning quantum mirror of the original 26D bosonic superstring.
The above description has been rigorously mathematically defined in the string-membrane -brane theories of contemporary string cosmologists (Witten, Greene, Aspinwall, Morrison, Steinhardt, Albrecht, Maldacena, Kaku, Susskind, Ashketar and many more).
This twosidedness of the physicalized 11D universe so allows the 12th Father-Vafa dimension as the 'outside' of the M-space to 'fold onto itself' in a Möbian-Klein-Bottled (8-Torus) topological transformation to render the 'Shadow Universe' as colocal with its 'Physical Image' of the asymptotic 10D-string universe bounded in its 11D-asymptotical expansion.
This scenario is extensively discussed in the omni-science forum of  http://www.cosmosdawn.com/.  

It blends the right circle half of the Left Infinity Symbol with the left circle half of the Right Infinity Symbol in:
∞|∞ =  Lissajous Curve OOO and as seen in graphic representation above and in the reference below.
The space encompassed by the Lissajous Curve   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lissajous_curve    then defines the 'consciousness' space defined in the 'source energy equation of creation'  E*.e*=1.

The significance of the Iron is the Binding Energy in nuclear and atomic physics as described below in the hyperphysics link from Georgia State University. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/nucbin.html

Ferrum, atomic number 26 as Isotopes Fe56 and Fe58 with Nickel62 define the IRON LIMIT; where the energy of the NUCLEAR FUSION (which is additive in construction) becomes maximized in the transition to the process of NUCLEAR FISSION, which is inherently subtractive and so destructive, as say in atomic weaponry.
In simplistic terms, energy must be added to the nucleus, (ENDOTHERMIC ACTION) say in a star to cause an EXOTHERMIC REACTION as the output of energy from the star.

The IRON LIMIT so manifests physically in the nuclear physics of stars and the genesis of the elements in Nucleosynthesis, leading to the creation and configuration of the Periodic Table of the elements in chemistry.
Metaphysically however, the 26-tiered Bosonic Superstring of 10 clockwise and 16 anticlockwise chirality patterns reduces to the 10D superstring in the string epoch (between Planck Time (10^-44 seconds) and Weyl-Time (10^-31 seconds).
Before Planck Time at the Null-Time of the 0D, this became defined as a 26-tiered Alpha-Omega structure as is exemplified in a 26 letter alphabet where A=1=Alpha then allows recircularistaion of a basically binary digital code of open and closed 10D superstrings in Z=26=Omega and resetting A*=27;B*=28;... in Z=A*;A=B*;...

This becomes the Isaac Code of the ABC in the Lissajous Curve after which the 'Starseed of Abraham and Sarah' would be called by ISAAC=IS AAC=IS AB*C=IS ABC

Shiloh, October 5th, 2013

Excerpt Quote:

Why is it so hard to break supersymmetry in string theory?

Well, if I knew the answer, if I knew how Nature has done supersymmetry breaking, then I could tell you why humans had such trouble figuring it out. But I can say one thing about it. When supersymmetry is not broken, it's easy to get a zero cosmological constant in string theory. And although a zero cosmological constant might not be the truth, it's incredibly close to the truth. If you break supersymmetry, if you do it the wrong way, you're going to get a cosmological constant that's much too big, and then you may well get associated problems, such as instabilities, runaways and so on. So it's easy to find ways that string theory could break supersymmetry, but they all have bad consequences. So I assume we're missing something, which is the answer to your question.

How can the cosmological constant be so close to zero but not zero?

I really don't know. It's very perplexing that astronomical observations seem to show that there is a cosmological constant. It's definitely the most troublesome, for my interests, definitely the most troublesome, observation in physics in my lifetime. In my career that is." End of Quote.

Ed Witten on M theory, supersymmetry and appreciating calculus

Ed Witten, who is currently visiting Caltech, is a professor at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey (the place where Einstein used to work.) Witten was not one of the creators of string theory, but since he joined "Team String" in the mid-eighties, he's been a leading visionary, pausing here and there to make revolutionary observations and discoveries in mathematics using observations gleaned from high energy theoretical physics. He recently spent two years at Caltech, a development that had East Coast string theorists fearing that the United States was tilting to the West. We interviewed him in John Schwarz's office at Caltech, which also happened to Richard Feynman's office when he was alive.

What's the current answer to the question, "What is string theory?"

Well, we've understood somehow that there's a more unified picture that mixes up quantum mechanical effects controlled by hbar and string effects controlled by alpha prime. So, there's this M theory story where different string theories are mixed up by dualities. I can't claim that we've gotten to the bottom of it, though.

What is M theory?

M theory is a name for a more unified theory that has the different string theories, as we know them, as limits, and which also can reduce, under appropriate conditions, to eleven-dimensional supergravity. There's this picture that we all have to draw where different string theories are limits of this M theory, where M stands for Magic, Mystery or Matrix, but it also sometimes is seen as standing for Murky, because the truth about M theory is Murky. And the different limits, where the main parameter simplifies, give the different string theories -- Type IIA, Type IIB, Type I, and there's eleven-dimensional supergravity, which turns out to be an important limit even though it isn't part of the systematic perturbation expansion, then there's the E8XE8 heterotic string, and there's SO(32) heterotic string.

So M-theory is a name for this picture, this more general picture that will generate the different limits through the different string theories. The parameters in this picture we can think of being roughly hbar, which is Planck's constant, and that determines how important the quantum effects are, and the other parameter is alpha prime, which is the tension, related to the tension of the string, that determines how important stringy effects are. So traditionally, a physicist looking at Type IIA, for example, by traditional weak coupling methods, explores this little region, and if asked how his theory is related to Type I theory, the answer would have to be, "Well I don't know, that's something else."
And likewise, if you ask this observer what happens for strong coupling, the traditional answer was, "Well I don't know." In graduate courses, you learn that you can do more or less anything for weak coupling, but you can't do anything for strong coupling. What happened in the 90s was that we learned how to do a little bit for strong coupling, and it turned out that the answer is Type IIA at strong coupling turns out to be Type I in a slightly different limit, SO(32) heterotic, and so on. So we built up this more unified picture, but we still don't understand what it means

What is K theory and what does it mean for string theory?

K theory is a mathematical theory that studies topology using matrices, using operators that don't commute with each another. What topology is, first of all, is the branch of mathematics where you don't care about the shape, so for example, a lumpy ball is equivalent to a round ball. But if there are holes, you do care about that, so a donut is different from either of these two. So, mathematicians learned, around 1960, that there was a very powerful tool in topology based on matrices, and that tool was K theory. And since quantum mechanics is about non-commuting operators, or matrices, there has always been a kind of naive analogy between K theory and quantum mechanics. An analogy that seemed naive to most physicists, but was often drawn by mathematicians such as Michael Atiyah.
However, we learned in the last few years that some questions about string theory, but slightly specialized questions usually, are usefully addressed using K theory. What K theory really addresses is a little bit subtle to explain. If you want to understand the charges carried by the D-branes, that's a question that leads to K theory. Or I might say at an even more basic level, D-branes are these strange objects whose positions are measured by matrices, and studying those matrices leads to K theory.
So K theory is the sort of topological underpinning of D-brane theory. But as physicists we're interested very much in whether the ball is round or lumpy, as are different things in physics. We wouldn't want to play baseball with a lumpy ball. So, the topology is just one side of the story..

What is noncommutative geometry and why is it important in string theory?

Well, one thing which we know about for sure in string theory is that the ordinary classical ideas about geometry are approximations, and don't really work precisely. But what you should really replace them with is not clear. However, there's a naive ideas about strings which really only works for open strings. Open strings are strings with endpoints, like in the original Type I superstring, where a particle was represented by a piece of string with charges at the ends. I've labeled the charges as q and q-bar for quark and antiquark, but that's modern terminology that might not have been present in the early says of string theory.
Once you've got open strings, they can join together, I'm going to call my open strings A or B, and they join end to end. But there are two ways of joining them. I could join them with A on the left and B on the right, or I could join them with B on the left and A on the right, and I get two different outputs. And it's very much like taking two matrices A and B and multiplying them together. So there's some noncommutativity in the interactions.
And when you take account of the fact that string theory is all about geometry, somehow this is geometry where noncommutative objects are built in. In fact I've mentioned now a couple portions of it. There's the noncommutativity of joining strings, and there's the matrices that don't commute, which are related to K theory and also to the D-brane positions and so on.
Anyway, coming back here, you can try to systematically describe open string physics at least in terms of noncommutative ideas introduced in geometry,and you can get a general answer of some kind, but it's rather abstract and very hard to use. However, in the last couple of years, it was discovered that there's a certain limit with a very strong background magnetic field in which things simplify, and you can actually say something simple and useful based on the noncommutative geometry. That's a case where the rather abstract and hard to use noncommutative geometrical concepts actually come down to Earth and become useful.

Why is it so hard to break supersymmetry in string theory?

Well, if I knew the answer, if I knew how Nature has done supersymmetry breaking, then I could tell you why humans had such trouble figuring it out. But I can say one thing about it. When supersymmetry is not broken, it's easy to get a zero cosmological constant in string theory. And although a zero cosmological constant might not be the truth, it's incredibly close to the truth. If you break supersymmetry, if you do it the wrong way, you're going to get a cosmological constant that's much too big, and then you may well get associated problems, such as instabilities, runaways and so on. So it's easy to find ways that string theory could break supersymmetry, but they all have bad consequences. So I assume we're missing something, which is the answer to your question.

How can the cosmological constant be so close to zero but not zero?

I really don't know. It's very perplexing that astronomical observations seem to show that there is a cosmological constant. It's definitely the most troublesome, for my interests, definitely the most troublesome, observation in physics in my lifetime. In my career that is.

What has been the most surprising or interesting thing that you have learned in physics?

I'm going to interpret the question to be what's the most interesting thing I've learned in my career, whether I discovered it or not. It's something I've learned, perhaps through the work of other people or from textbooks. So in that sense, the most surprising thing I've learned, even though I had nothing to do with discovering it, is that strings can describe quantum gravity.

What has been the most surprising or interesting thing that you have learned in science outside of physics?

Well it's not that amazing that to me, a lot of science is physics. So, for example, I can't give you an answer in terms of chemistry, because physics underlies chemistry. I could give you an answer in biology. Biologists have learned lots of wonderful things. But it's hard to properly maintain one's sense of wonder about them, for some things that were known so long that we all remember so little that we take them for granted. But there's the theory of evolution, which is an amazing insight. And there's the understanding of the genetic code, that's a marvelous insight.
Of course, if we move on to math, which you might think isn't physics, but which is much closer to what I know, then there are lot's of fun and exciting things there. I hardly know what to tell you because, again, there are lots of things that are really wonderful but which we take for granted because it's all known. Like there's calculus. Calculus is pretty amazing.
But... it's not the first thing that comes to mind in answering such a question, because such a question tends to make you think of more recent discoveries. But... if I just have to ask , of everything I've ever learned in math, what's the most amazing and surprising -- it might by that calculus should win the prize, even though it's not so new any more.

End of Interview

Hi David and all!

I have stumbled across Juan Maldacena's 'The Illusion of Gravity' paper from SciAm; November 2005 and found the following statement at the end of the paper p.63.

The link is below.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/78911693/Juan-Maldacena-The-Illusion-of-Gravity

"A test of this prediction comes from the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at Brookhaven National Laboratory, which has been colliding gold nuclei at very high energies. A preliminary analysis of these experiments indicates the collisions are creating a fluid with very low viscosity. Even though Son and his co-workers studied a simplified version of chromodynamics, they seem to have come up with a property that is shared by the real world. Does this mean that RHIC is creating small five-dimensional black holes? It is really too early to tell, both experimentally and theoretically. (Even if so, there is nothing to fear from these tiny black holes-they evaporate almost as fast as they are formed, and they "live" in five dimensions, not in our own four-dimensional world.)

Many questions about the holographic theories remain to be answered.

In particular, does anything similar hold for a universe like ours in place of the anti-de Sitter space?

A crucial aspect of anti-de Sitter space is that it has a boundary where time is well defined.

The boundary has existed and will exist forever. An expanding universe, like ours, that comes from a big bang does not have such a well-behaved boundary.

Consequently, it is not clear how to define a holographic theory for our universe; there is no convenient place to put the hologram.

An important lesson that one can draw from the holographic conjecture, however, is that quantum gravity, which has perplexed some of the best minds on the planet for decades, can be very simple when viewed in terms of the right variables. Let's hope we will soon find a simple description for the big bang!"

Wow, David as one who kind of understands what I have posted over the years; can you see that the de Broglie Inflaton I am writing about SOLVES the Maldacena problem highlighted above.

This hypersphere HAS the FIXED hologramic Hubble Horizon from the de Broglie Inflaton.

It IS a MASSLESS Mother-Black Hole in the AdS-CFT Kaluza-Klein space and it HAS the negative curvature due to the 'missing mass' as described as the 0.01405 deceleration parameter, which is the ACCELERATION gradient (of the false vacuum) between the Einstein Lambda and the de Broglie hyperacceleration and so also the density ratio.

And the paper you got a little exited about just describes such colourcharge interactions on the 5(+6 Calabi Yau)D=11D Boundary.

This could get even bigger. I would suggest to now send the edited Genesis Genesis paper to Michio, as now Maldacena's work can be thoroughly translated into a new cosmology and the proper formalisation of the quantum gravity (I'm to dumb to do it, as my university days are long in the past).
John Shadow

Dear friends; I'll send this now and hope that at least one of you will FINALLY understand that this description and whilst termed the 'Theory of Quantum Relativity'; is NOT 'my work'.
It belongs to ALL of Us and is and has always been a collective effort.
I am not clever enough by FAR to have 'made up', 'dreamt' or invented this description above.

All of the 'passed over' great scientists have 'channeled' this information, say from the 'collective subconscious' or the 'Noosphere' (of Teilhard de Chardin and Velikovsky) or the 'Akashic Records' or what have you to me to share.

So when the 'time is right' (it is not before 2011), THEN this 'stuff' will become 'mainstream'.
But for some purpose (which I can only partially fathom); the agenda is to publish this 'stuff' on relatively obscure forums and on an equally obscure website.
This is as is should be for the present time.
But remember, all of this data is yours, for free to do as you wold like to. But without understanding most of it, it has remained practically useless for all but my interdimensional familiars (they DO have a lot of use for it - that is why I am publishing it).

I have been given the information that perhaps some of you can use the above cosmogony to finally remember THIS as one of your 'Cosmic Keys' and let the 'pennies drop' and the 'lights of eureka' switch on.

I'll edit and resend shortly.

It is time for a few of you to RETRACE your incarnational steps into this place and space and time upon Gaia-Serpentina of the planet earth.
All of you were there 19.11 billion years ago, when the Quantum Big Bang occurred. You may allow yourselves, reading the above, to remember IT.

In Science and Gnosis
John Shadow

JS: You are 'missing' the time factor in this Allen.
The Graviton emerges, yes, but not in spacetime. It emerges as the gauge for the entire notion of gravitation to be able to couple to the other gauges.
The Graviton is a supersymmetrising 'particle' not as some particle in space, but as a Principle of Identity.
This emergence is BEFORE there exists any spacetime. It is the CIRCULAR distance independent 'PointCircle' aka singularity or whatever.
The universe EXISTS in QUANTUM SPIN BEFORE it exists in Inertia.
This is Jim's 'famous Action' (I agree with him on this, but not on his querks and whatever which are fundamentally 'flawed').
Finally, today it can and has been 'proven' that no gamma ray of sufficient mass energy can Particle-Produce the matter-antimatter coupling of an electron-positron pair UNLESS there is a 'nucleus' say a proton present.
Why is this?
Because the NOT colourcharged gamma photon must EXCHANGE colourcharges with the colourcharged gauge photon (termed virtual) of the electromagnetic interaction.
This is basic standard nuclear physics Allen (not the colourcharge interaction, but the phenomenon).
The entire interaction then ABSORBS the colourless gamma photon in virtulity and the Colourcharges of BOTH the Graviton and the gauge photon become transferred to the resulting electron-positron pair.
This is very beautiful interaction gauge physics and will in a few years be the standard model.
So without the colourcharge of the graviton from the proton's inertia say; the phenomenon of pair-production (wiki it) would not occur.
Hope this helps.
JS

(R136a1 is a blue hypergiant star, currently on record as the most massive star known, at an estimated 265 solar masses.^[2] The star also holds the record for the most luminous at 8,700,000 times the luminosity of the Sun.^[2] It is a member of R136, a super star cluster near the center of the 30 Doradus complex (also known as the Tarantula Nebula ), in the Large Magellanic Cloud . The mass of the star was determined by astronomers at the University of Sheffield.

http://www.astronomy.com/asy/default.aspx?c=a&id=5016
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_massive_stars
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_known_stars

Sterile neutrino back from the dead
22 June 2010 by David Shiga
http://www.newscientist.com/issue/2766

A ghostly particle given up for dead is showing signs of life.

Not only could this "sterile" neutrino be the stuff of dark matter, thought to make up the bulk of our universe, it might also help to explain how an excess of matter over antimatter arose in our universe.
Neutrinos are subatomic particles that rarely interact with ordinary matter. They are known to come in three flavours – electron, muon and tau – with each able to spontaneously transform into another.
In the 1990s, results from the Liquid Scintillator Neutrino Detector (LSND) at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico suggested there might be a fourth flavour: a "sterile" neutrino that is even less inclined to interact with ordinary matter than the others.

Hasty dismissal

Sterile neutrinos would be big news because the only way to detect them would be by their gravitational influence – just the sort of feature needed to explain dark matter.
Then in 2007 came the disheartening news that the Mini Booster Neutrino Experiment (MiniBooNE, pictured) at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois, had failed to find evidence of them.
But perhaps sterile neutrinos were dismissed too soon. While MiniBooNE used neutrinos to look for the sterile neutrino,
LSND used antineutrinos – the antimatter equivalent. Although antineutrinos should behave exactly the same as neutrinos, just to be safe, the MiniBooNE team decided to repeat the experiment – this time with antineutrinos.

Weird excess

Lo and behold, the team saw muon antineutrinos turning into electron antineutrinos at a higher rate than expected – just like at LSND. MiniBooNE member Richard Van de Water reported the result at a neutrino conference in Athens, Greece, on 14 June.
The excess could be because muon antineutrinos turn into sterile neutrinos before becoming electron antineutrinos, says Fermilab physicist Dan Hooper, who is not part of MiniBooNE. "This is very, very weird," he adds.
Although it could be a statistical fluke, Hooper suggests that both MiniBooNE results could be explained if antineutrinos can change into sterile neutrinos but neutrinos cannot – an unexpected difference in behaviour.
The finding would fit nicely with research from the Main Injector Neutrino Oscillation Search, or MINOS, also at Fermilab, which, the same day, announced subtle differences in the oscillation behaviour of neutrinos and antineutrinos.
Antimatter and matter are supposed to behave like mirror versions of each other, but flaws in this symmetry could explain how our universe ended up with more matter.

bobhard wrote:

So what does this mean?

It seems you have gone to great detail to say something but I'm not sure what. Whatever it is it must be important to have put as much work into this document.

If you don't mind, try one more time and keep it short and simple.
Thanks.
Bob H.

Jorgelito -posted 40 Hours Ago


Thank you, Shiloh. I'll start off with the Science Nova videos and save the rest for bedtime reading.
Wow, what a treat!!


Seeing through movies

Shiloh, that's an interesting way of seeing -- through contemporary film and movies.
It makes me think that very strong, numinous images (of any media -- art, nature, language, history) can be used to illustrate just about anything because they have intrinsic power. They pull everything to them. We can arrange them and shape them or just give them absolute free rein altogether and be surprised.
I suspect this is how we create in every case. This is curious. It's finding a few words or a phrase, then writing the book to illustrate it afterwards. You'd think it would be the other way around. It has the feeling of another dimension paying a visit. And it looks like this.

Re: The Thuban material, what is it?  - #32000  March 28th, 2011

- Discussions that involve drugs and other intoxicating substances, pornography, foul language, racial / sexual / national intolerance, hate speech, politically subversive acts or planning, will obviously not be tolerated.
TraLaLa wrote:
Debradenslow wrote:
Three birds with one stone! Outed!
Eh? Care to explain or just blowing smoke out your ass?

TraLaLa wrote:
Debradenslow wrote:
We are "the forum"... colors are fine! But you cannot hide who you truly are! Your posts speak volumes about you... from beginning to end...over 1600 for you which by the way I have no desire to delve into!

WHOOO HOOO 1700!!!

#32176  March 28th, 2011
plumber wrote:
Tbone wrote:
Deborah wrote:
Had to run out. I bring up that subject because these people , Manson included were members of a satanic cult that embraced the dark side as you suggest. The cult started in England ( of course ) and was called the Process Church. Their belief system was similar to the Thuban material and stated that there is dark and kight and all is equal. etc. etc. It leads to no good so that was what I had in mind when I was posting before but had to go. I must go again on a no-heat call be back tomorrow.

Watch it with that pie SC its loaded.

Are you relating to the above post?
If you are, your perceptions are skewed. Manson was only brought up by you - no-one else. What was stated was that god is both dark and light. It's up to the individual to decide how they use their energy. Healing ourselves will in fact help heal the earth by raising her immune system. Judging dark or light is actually falling into the act of dualism. Understanding what is going on is important. It's only when fear is feared that more problems occur. Understanding our own psychology is important if we are to make it through this next phase.

#32177  March 28th, 2011
plumber wrote:

We'll see. In the meantime why don't you run over there and tell them.

#32179  March 28th, 2011
Deborah wrote:
First of all I think there is some confusion here.. Run over where and tell who? I don't even know anything about Thuban material other than what I have read about them on this forum. Nothing needs to be told to them if they have the ability to html these sites.

#32181  March 28th, 2011
plumber wrote:
This whole light and dark thing is just a promulgation of Aleister Crowley's " Do as thou wilt ". You can dress up a pig but its still a pig.

Quote: Judging dark or light is actually falling into the act of dualism.
Now you're opposed to dualism? Your whole premise of balancing light and dark is dualism.

This balancing act that you propose is impossible. You can't live your life on a fulcrum, its too confining. Pick a side and be honest with yourself. Stop using this psycho-babble as a hiding place.

#32182  March 28th, 2011
plumber wrote:
Debradenslow wrote:
First of all I think there is some confusion here.. Run over where and tell who? I don't even know anything about Thuban material other than what I have read about them on this forum. Nothing needs to be told to them if they have the ability to html these sites.

That was for arctourist.

#32183  March 28th, 2011
Deborah wrote:
plumr2007 wrote:
This whole light and dark thing is just a promulgation of Aleister Crowley's " Do as thou wilt ". You can dress up a pig but its still a pig.

Quote: Judging dark or light is actually falling into the act of dualism.
Now you're opposed to dualism? Your whole premise of balancing light and dark is dualism.

This balancing act that you propose is impossible. You can't live your life on a fulcrum, its too confining. Pick a side and be honest with yourself. Stop using this psycho-babble as a hiding place.

You use the words impossible in your comments... I quote you "This balancing act that you propose is impossible"...(maybe for you). "Pick a side". No more needs to be said here. Look within and "Know Thyself".

#32728 March 30th, 2011
Deedee wrote:
arctourist wrote:
the whole thread huh? you think that's cool?
well i didn't start the thread,but that's not the way you deal with something like that...that's like punishing everyone for one person's bad behavior-collective punishment....like i said on the thread that's gone,no one is compelled to participate or even read a thread,and one person shouldn't be allowed to ruin a thread like that,just because they used to be a moderator...
the thread wasn't the problem,in fact there was no problem outside of the mind of one person who set out to ruin the thread for everyone else...it just seems wrong to me...
what's next,right?

Arctourist seriously, the only one who is being punished is you! Because that is your belief system. The mods are doing their jobs fantastically... remember the signature disclaimer by the OP that created the original post... Glad she now has no control huh?.... Bigger picture here than just you buddy! Hundreds of people read these things and that is what is taken into consideration... All of us - not just you as an individual! Not only that but the original OP had the disclaimer to post it "wherever".... Read before you post anything that can be carried into the wind!

#32729 March 30th, 2011
Tangy wrote:
DD wrote:
OP doesn't have any power to remove anything that is written here! Remember, we are also under control by the ones we subscribe to.. but at least we trust the ones that we subscribe to and they are doing their job.. Thanks again guys!

Okay DD, even though it seems like you haven't really been up to speed on what all has happened here in the last few weeks -- let's say you're right. Because I agree with your stance.

Mods: Chaska, Chakra, SG, Triggs, Tommy -- did you guys delete MaryIshtar's thread?
ETA: Just saw Chaska's response. So it seems the Mod Squad is on duty again. All righty.

#32730 March 30th, 2011
kamicad wrote:
arctourist wrote:
the offenders-if there were attacks,should be dealt with on an individual basis,as their posts,but to close and hide a whole thread is just not cool-i wasn't attacking anyone,i was even polite-what do you mean 'nothing but attacks'?

who was not polite-well i guess now we aren't allowed to see what really happened,yeah good job guys!

My nothing but attacks statement was not directed at you arctourist. You conducted yourself admirably. IF anything you were attacked not an attacker.

#32731 March 30th, 2011
Deedee wrote:
Tangent wrote:
DD wrote:
OP doesn't have any power to remove anything that is written here! Remember, we are also under control by the ones we subscribe to.. but at least we trust the ones that we subscribe to and they are doing their job.. Thanks again guys!

Okay DD, even though it seems like you haven't really been up to speed on what all has happened here in the last few weeks -- let's say you're right. Because I agree with your stance.

Mods: Chaska, Chakra, SG, Triggs, Tommy -- did you guys delete MaryIshtar's thread?
ETA: Just saw Chaska's response. So it seems the Mod Squad is on duty again. All righty.

Well Tangent actually I have.. PM me and I'll tell you who I am!

#32736 March 30th, 2011
kamicad wrote:
DD wrote:
Tangent wrote:
DD wrote:
OP doesn't have any power to remove anything that is written here! Remember, we are also under control by the ones we subscribe to.. but at least we trust the ones that we subscribe to and they are doing their job.. Thanks again guys!

Okay DD, even though it seems like you haven't really been up to speed on what all has happened here in the last few weeks -- let's say you're right. Because I agree with your stance.

Mods: Chaska, Chakra, SG, Triggs, Tommy -- did you guys delete MaryIshtar's thread?
ETA: Just saw Chaska's response. So it seems the Mod Squad is on duty again. All righty.

Well Tangent actually I have.. PM me and I'll tell you who I am!

DD hope you read this. Wow just wow. I can not believe you blocked me just because I accepted someone else as a friend. Like I discussed with you and others I wanted to gather information about the rift in the forums. If you want to heal the rift you have to get to know everyone involved. I am a positive person who will be friends with anyone who acts in good faith. Still thank you for the kind words before you blocked me. I really do appreciate them. It is just sad that you let something trivial get in the way of being friends. I sincerely hope that you are forever happy and healthy. Instead of blocking me you could of explained your position. Au Revoir.

#32737 March 30th, 2011
Deedee wrote:

Arctourist what world are you living in? This had nothing to do with Lita... this post was alive after her fact... CrystalChi was the reason! Stop whining and say something important.. Do you know anything "real important"?..... If so - say so!

#32738 March 30th, 2011
Deedee wrote:
Well for the record! I blocked you because you are not even aware of the friends you are choosing!... This is the only message for you.. Not that I am better.. but I am "careful" and not "willy nilly"... You are new remember? I am not!

#32739 March 30th, 2011
kamicad wrote:
Exactly I am not aware. I am new. But that is ok. I do not hold grudges. I still have nothing but respect for you. And willy nilly. This is a forum. I am not letting them house sit for me lol. Like I said before I wish nothing but the best for you and everyone.........PEACE

#32740 March 30th, 2011
Deedee wrote:
karmicacid wrote:
Exactly I am not aware. I am new. But that is ok. I do not hold grudges. I still have nothing but respect for you. And willy nilly. This is a forum. I am not letting them house sit for me lol. Like I said before I wish nothing but the best for you and everyone.........PEACE

That's fine... but know who you invite in "before you invite them in"... Integrity is my motto... and I will not have tin cans dragging behind me... that is why "I choose my friends wisely" and have none thusfar! I stand alone... walking this mountain alone!!!!!! Friends are fine... if they are truly "authentic".. TBoneyandSteak is one thus far I can highly recommend! Check out his posts if you want to... or not! Up to you!

#32741 March 30th, 2011
Deedee wrote:
Tbonyandsteak


#32747 March 30th, 2011
Deedee wrote:
And clicking a button is just as powerful as saying "you are my friend"... By that statement alone is telling me volumes about you! When you click your online banking statement to pay a bill it is equally the same as saying "I do"!

#32749 March 30th, 2011
kamicad wrote:
DD wrote:
karmicacid wrote:
DD wrote:
karmicacid wrote:
Exactly I am not aware. I am new. But that is ok. I do not hold grudges. I still have nothing but respect for you. And willy nilly. This is a forum. I am not letting them house sit for me lol. Like I said before I wish nothing but the best for you and everyone.........PEACE

That's fine... but know who you invite in "before you invite them in"... Integrity is my motto... and I will not have tin cans dragging behind me... that is why "I choose my friends wisely" and have none thusfar! I stand alone... walking this mountain alone!!!!!! Friends are fine... if they are truly "authentic".. TBoneyandSteak is one thus far I can highly recommend! Check out his posts if you want to... or not! Up to you!

Ok I can respect your argument. I was just confused. You said you were a peacemaker. I thought you would understand how to go about doing that. I will check out the poster that you recommended. I also consider myself an army of 1. I guess the crux of our disagreement is the fact that you put supreme importance on the act of clicking a digital button to make someone your friend. Thinking that the very act of doing so some how taints ones soul. But like I said I respect your argument. I understand. This will be all I say on this matter. I do not want to be one of those posters. Causing further rifts. The universe does not need more drama lol....................PEACE AND LOVE FOREVER!

I do not "disagree". I just made a choice. There is a difference! Your challenge, I can see early on is picking your "friends" carefully! Look at those in your life! Are there any you would like to "move on from"... This is my point! I choose them for their authenticity! This is my motto!

RRRRRRRRRRRRR I said I would not post on this again. This is the last. If I do not hold true mods ban me lol. I do pick my friends extremely carefully. This is a forum. Not real life. In real life I only have a hand full of really good friends. More like family. In chicago we say we do not have friends. Only family associates and enemies. I reiterate this is a forum. You seemed cool. I thought we could chat some. The only way to chat privatly on this forum is through the private messages. I did not know you placed so much importance on clicking the friend button. And now I can not chat with you privately because you banned me. Its the real life friends that are important to me. And now I will never know if you could of been one of them. Oh well. Live and learn. This is my very last message on this. I do not like airing my dirty laundry in public for all to see lol. I am embarrasing myself again lol. So please do not pretend to know me based on something I said in a forum. I do not to presume to know you. People are extremely complex creatures.

#32756 March 30th, 2011
MaryIshtarCreiddylad wrote:
Tangent wrote:
DD wrote:
OP doesn't have any power to remove anything that is written here! Remember, we are also under control by the ones we subscribe to.. but at least we trust the ones that we subscribe to and they are doing their job.. Thanks again guys!

Okay DD, even though it seems like you haven't really been up to speed on what all has happened here in the last few weeks -- let's say you're right. Because I agree with your stance.

Mods: Chaska, Chakra, SG, Triggs, Tommy -- did you guys delete MaryIshtar's thread?
ETA: Just saw Chaska's response. So it seems the Mod Squad is on duty again. All righty.

In response, yet not directed at any particular individual.
I am actually O.K. with that as It had already served it's purpose in bringin to Tommy's attention what was said, and it was dealt with by Tommy appropriately. I was going to message Tommy to see if he would remove it because it became clear the the ones who started that situation were not realizing they made fools of themselves, and it just kept getting uglier.

And since Steve is apparently really still quite active here I would not have expected the thread to stay up for long. Because it does not do Camelot justice to see grown adults sink so low. I am glad it was removed. Lol. This forum is for information sharing, and discussion.

You can call me whatever you want. I chose the name I chose because I do NOT accept the establishment brainwashed view of that being, OR many others. You know why? Gnosis. It (the established stories)is a political ploy, and I will leave it at that. Everyone knows that anyway. Plus I guess you could really call a person a whore who is celibate right? Name or no name... the name just exposed how people are sooner. I like the name, as it is but a human label. I am actually a born again Christian and have been for ten years. But I do not accept the politically controlled version of it because I know the story personally quite well. So you all can see I really really really do not care at all what any person has to say about me. There is much more out ther to see in Creation than human ugliness. Though we'd have to look beyond the plastic and oil filled oceans and toxic dump landfills and ravaged forests, etc. etc. etc... To see it.

Basically I did it because I wanted to let you expose your collective false love and light crap, and hipocracy after seeing how the Thuban people were ganged up on. It is not O.K. to treat other people like crap. and you can play your little take things out of context games and do whatever. It does not effect me as I know better and so do others.

Good day all you all knowers.
"If your relationship or your work is empowered by a myth, then it will have extra energy and inspiration. But do you know what that myth is and what it is saying?" ~ The Tree of Life Oracle

#32763 March 30th, 2011
karmicacid wrote:
Tangent wrote:
karmicacid wrote:
DD wrote:
karmicacid wrote:
RRRRRRRRRRRRR I said I would not post on this again. This is the last. If I do not hold true mods ban me lol.
I am embarrasing myself again lol.

Don't feel bad, karmic, it's all good. And don't worry, the mods wouldn't ban you even if you wanted them to.
(Unless you did something illegal, like posting copyrighted material repeatedly after being asked not to do so, something like that.)

Uh oh I did post a part of a copywrited song in one of the songs I posted. I will not do it again. Mods can delete that one titled outro ( it only has like a verse on it) if they want to...........PEACE
And of course if that was not a subtle warning just ignore what I said lol. As I walk away non chalantly whistling a tune know one knows.

Karmicacid... You are way too honest! We would never have known! Trust yourself... Stop being so honest! Or is it Naive? Hmmm.. We are all naive you know!... You are learning.

I am just honest. I am not naive trust me. I grew up in a very tough neighborhood in Chicago. I grew up extremely fast. I just do not believe in lying. In grade school i saw someone get his head caved in with a brick and die while my mother tried to help him. I have seen people get shot. It is a big part of why i spout so much peace and love now. I know the evil men can do. I have not seen my mother in years she just up and left and my father is a drug addict. I strive to live my life right.


#32765 March 30th, 2011
kamicad wrote:
DD wrote:
Okay... I know we are all naive. That is okay though because we are learning! No-one can tell you what to do I know... but since you speak these words I can only share with you my insight... Take it for what it's worth. Have you tried to find your mother?... I would expend some energy on that part of your life... This is part of the healing work and we all have healing work to do! Even if you never find her you can always say "I set my intentions to heal this part of my life".... You are not alone! Love You.

I know where she is. She is married to some guy in north carolina now. I also know she has had another child. A daughter. So I have a sister I have never seen. Sometimes I want so much to see my mom again. Other times I am just filled with hate for her. I know she is a big block in my mental make up that I have to heal. I just do not know what to do. And I am not brave enough to face her. I consider myself a tough bastard. But whenever I think of my mother I cry. She is the only person I have ever shed tears over. I do not even know why I am telling people this. I guess you are right I am too honest. Probably too honest for my own good.

Oh and right now I just want to say sorry for hijacking this thread on the Thuban material. I still dont even know what it is lol.

#32983 March 30th, 2011
Deedee wrote:
MaryIshtarCreiddylad wrote:
CrystalChi wrote:
karmicacid I can understand why you want to end the conflict, but with due respect not sure that is your job.

We didn't have this kind of thing before, now we do... happy reading, so if you want to research to create peace... then good... you can start with MaryIshtar and Arctourist, I just don't wish to read anymore bad mouthing about myself on this and other forums where they take it..hey maybe you can stop them doing that for a start.
OK out of here.

So is this the reason why My thread was deleted? Not that I mind, because I have copies.


#33430 April 1st, 2011
Deedee wrote:
And Arachne, in case you missed my version here it is and there are no in between the lines.

Sorry, used the plural here (Smurf = frums)

see the link: web.mit.edu/21w765j/Spring_97/StudentWor..._SP97/drew-project1/

#33431 April 1st, 2011
Deedee wrote:
web.mit.edu/21w765j/Spring_97/StudentWor..._SP97/drew-project1/

#33446 April 1st, 2011
Arachne wrote:

DD wrote:
web.mit.edu/21w765j/Spring_97/StudentWor..._SP97/drew-project1/


Aye DD; there are many Gremlins of the sorts; rather cute really - if you dont feed them after midnight!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gremlins



Phoenix

Replies to this message; if on an OP thread started by me; might appear as context feedback on other forums without links to profile ID on Camelot.
The Presence of the Mosaic implies the will of Unity=God=Starhumanity and not the will of Humanity=Man=Separation!
I Am One in Many and Many in One!
Exe*=1

#33450 April 1st, 2011
Deedee wrote:
Arachne wrote:
DD wrote:
web.mit.edu/21w765j/Spring_97/StudentWor..._SP97/drew-project1/

Aye DD; there are many Gremlins of the sorts; rather cute really - if you dont feed them after midnight!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gremlins

Phoenix

Actually feeding them after midnight makes them better "servants".. Don't you know that?

#33454 April 1st, 2011
Arachne wrote:

SpaceCowboy wrote:
Arachne wrote:
Tangent wrote:
Arachne wrote:

Think about it tangent. Or ask smurfette, she knows.
tonyblue


All right Tony, so no simple, honest answer on the question re: what "smurfs" and "smurfette" mean in your references to them to Siriusblue, and their relationship to the Thuban material.

Good enough. My original interpretation of the usage wasn't too far off after all, it seems.


Dear tangent!
You may wish to read your own words on the Smurf thread.
Also here is the truth about Smurfette, if you can read between lines.

camelotforum.com/index.php?option=com_ku...amp;Itemid=164#33417

Phoenix-Arachne

Hey Phoenix, thanks for the invite to your forum. I went in, looked around, posted. WTF? What a ghost forum. It's laughable. How many fuc11ing dragons are there, 6?

Oh you did - yes I checked indeed you have become one of us?!
Welcome to the 6 dragons SpaceCowboy. Yes indeed, we are like ghosts and your expertise is most appreciated as our new Public Relations Officer. Hitherto your work has been truly exceptional.

In the honnour of the dragonheart we salute you as one of us now; if not by name then by associations.

Thank You
Abraxasinas

Replies to this message; if on an OP thread started by me; might appear as context feedback on other forums without links to profile ID on Camelot.
The Presence of the Mosaic implies the will of Unity=God=Starhumanity and not the will of Humanity=Man=Separation!
I Am One in Many and Many in One!
Exe*=1

#33458 April 1st, 2011
Deedee wrote:
Arachne, You are losing steam! You are losing steam! You stoop so low now to think that SC is one of you because he checked out a ghostly website... Wow... that is telling me much about your psyche. After all your fancy long long extra long posts of well can't remember cos they were too long (and I didn't read them).. but you know the posts I'm talking about! Dragons are losing their fire power!


#33465 April 1st, 2011
Deedee wrote:
arctourist wrote:
DD wrote:
Arachne, You are losing steam! You are losing steam! You stoop so low now to think that SC is one of you because he checked out a ghostly website... Wow... that is telling me much about your psyche. After all your fancy long long extra long posts of well can't remember cos they were too long (and I didn't read them).. but you know the posts I'm talking about! Dragons are losing their fire power!


sorry,none of my business maybe,but what's with that?
to me it shows they're the better,more tolerant and open-minded people-allowing even the,uh,well as you said lowest onto their platform,with no hesitation or what-have-you

Stop talking in riddles Arc and become clear! I can't understand a word you just said.

#3468 April 1st, 2011
arctourist wrote:


sorry....i guess what i meant was,these thubans,even after you attack,insult and smear them,still would invite such people onto their forum,they're rather jesus-like in a sense

#33469 April 1st, 2011
Spacecake wrote:
arctourist wrote:
sorry....i guess what i meant was,these thubans,even after you attack,insult and smear them,still would invite such people onto their forum,they're rather jesus-like in a sense

Can you un-riddle that response for us?

#33470 April 1st, 2011
Deedee wrote:
They don't care who enters their "lonely cave".. It's all about numbers. Don't ya know that!

#33472 April 1st, 2011
Arachne wrote:

arctourist wrote:]
sorry....i guess what i meant was,these thubans,even after you attack,insult and smear them,still would invite such people onto their forum,they're rather jesus-like in a sense

Well arc, heshe is our masterdragon and the only guide we can accept.
There is another forum anyone can visit and it is the artistic one.

www.flightoftheraven.com

This one is the easiest to read and maintened by more artistically inclinded dragons, than myself.

Phoenix

Replies to this message; if on an OP thread started by me; might appear as context feedback on other forums without links to profile ID on Camelot.
The Presence of the Mosaic implies the will of Unity=God=Starhumanity and not the will of Humanity=Man=Separation!
I Am One in Many and Many in One!
Exe*=1
 

#33474 April 1st, 2011
Deedee wrote:
oooh.. The dragons are now showing us their gems! Should we feel priviliged. Or is it that we are taking the gems from you!!!!!!!!!!


#33475 April 1st, 2011
arctourist wrote:

in a sense,i guess everything is about numbers,or can be maybe expressed that way
for example,today i might be about 56% benevolent but after a few bad days in a row,i might need to really work hard to get back to the other side,as it were
yeah,sorry,you will only 'get' what you are allowed to get,or what your numbers,your karma ,will allow
well that's one way of looking at things anyways
personally i always hated math and physics-it still makes little or no sense to me

#33478 April 1st, 2011
Deedee wrote:
Understood. You are not there yet...

#33526 April 1st, 2011
Deedee wrote:
karmicacid wrote:
arctourist wrote:
yeah,what's with smurfs...except being blue,i don't know what else they are-

Well you see it is very simple. When you get to the top of the illuminati pyramid who do you find sitting on the throne. Papa Smurf thats who holding a chain that is attached to Smurfette like jabba the hutt and princess leia in return of the jedi. Case closed. Spread this info far and wide. Everyone needs to know who the true enemy of humanity is lol.

Karmicacid... What can I say? Nothing to you today? You see life thru llusory eyes... You wonder who God is and why he creates your pain? Read your poetry... If it is actually yours... Get over being a victim. Take your power back and create something "new" including your writing! God hasn't abandoned you, doesn't have a plan for you... only you do!


A man of true authenticity.

Thanks for sharing.

#33531 April 1st, 2011
kamicad wrote:
DD you are a very perplexing person. But so is everyone. The smurf thing was a joke. The poems are mine. How am i being a victim. Please explain. Oh and just so you know I am spacecowboy arctourist and everyone else to lol. That was just a joke but you will probably get mad at me for it lol. I do enjoy reading your posts though. I really am sorry I am not as sure as you on everything. I wish I was.

#33533 April 1st, 2011
Deedee wrote:
That's why I could never have accepted you as my friend? You are not Authentic! Conduit closed! You know what that means right? I will not respond to you anymore... My choice!

#33662 April 1st, 2011
Deedee wrote:
Sorry for confusing you guys last night but it was past midnight... APRIL FOOLS!!!!!!!! That's what happens when you stay up past midnight on APRIL FOOLS DAY! Okay, from now on I'm only telling the truth.... (you know who you are...)

Re: Attacks on PC with the goal it may destroy itself
#43691   May 16th, 2011
smurfette wrote as adminqueenbee:
 
You're right bannedbycamelot. That case of wine I bought for the 22nd? Well, I've opened it and I'm tucking in. With regards to avatars that come and go, people have to register to post some info. I'm really pleased they post and I've chatted to many. All of them charming, some very friendly. Dunno where you get spooky from Huancaina - but if you have a name, I'll follow it up.
 The mods here keep an eye on all the posts, I don't know how they do it. But then I'm busy doing other things and the only creepy people we've had have been the ones that left. We had to give them the right to free speech, they had to cross a serious line to be banned. That is the case for everyone. The tolerance level here is very high. So where is this creepy coming from?
 I'm sorry about the forum shutdowns. For the amount of attacks we've had - at least four yesterday and four today, Friday was constant until about 9pm, Saturday was strangely quiet - this forum has really not been down much - there might have been more attacks but I'm preempting them. Sometimes I can't preempt them. I've got other things to do - I might even be reading an interesting post and I'm not checking the response times.
 As far as I can tell it's organized by a bunch of jealous people who can't feed their own forum with enough life so they think it's fun to go spoil someone elses. IF it's them. I'm still working on why it's happening and Tommy is moving it all to new servers at some point which might solve the problem. I can only do so much and it's far from an ideal solution at the moment. I can assure you that if I could just tweak the firewall or ban a few ips to solve it, I would. As it is, there are a number of ips, all relating to You-Know-Who who can no longer access our forum and play merry havoc each time we mention their crappy unbathed name.

I am a child of the Light and a physical manifestation of the Light energy. By me.
Chatroom: Project_Camelot_Portal
Chatroom: Whistleblower Radio

Re: The theme that David Icke has been banging out for more than two decades

#37703   April 19th, 2011
Deborah wrote:

Great material Bernansader... Keep it coming!

#37707   April 19th, 2011
shiloh wrote:

Deedee wrote:
Great material Bernansader... Keep it coming!



For one Purple Darling!

Tonyblue
Replies to this message; if on an OP thread started by me; might appear as context feedback on other forums without links to profile ID on Camelot.
The Presence of the Mosaic implies the will of Unity=God=Starhumanity and not the will of Humanity=Man=Separation!
I Am One in Many and Many in One!
Exe*=1

#37708   April 19th, 2011
Deborah wrote: 


Purple is my favorite color.. Looks like some of the threads are being deleted.... wonder why? Thought this was about free speech and gaining new ideas/concepts...

#37715   April 19th, 2011
Deborah wrote:


Yes.. Did you get to see Lita's response to your thread before it was Removed! She said that you and I were hijacking this Forum! Wow.. how right was she?

#37715   April 19th, 2011
Deborah wrote:


Yes.. Did you get to see Lita's response to your thread before it was Removed! She said that you and I were hijacking this Forum! Wow.. how right was she?

Re: *To Tommy RE: "harrassement"*
#37464 April 18th, 2011
Lighter wrote:


My reply here Tommy
I never did say I was using black magic, that was implied by Tony in the Thuban thread when he saw my new avatar. He put that label of black magic on it not me...I just didn't answer his post on it, left it hanging, didn't want o get into it any more..yes I told her in that post of mine to ask her fiends.
This is what it means
Saturn's Seal of Protection Amulet.
This talisman is meant to protect against all forms of evil: hexing, curses, bad fortune and black magic.
Do a search on it.

I use it for protection for all that has gone down here. Each time I say something on this forum the post I made that was taken off and never put back has been continually posted again and again..I posted it once, after that other people mainly Mary posted it numerous times.. today at least 3 times in 1 short thread.. DeeDee posted it once telling Mary it was for her, I call that harassment. I did what you are supposed to do here.. I did a 'report to mod' on each of them as you should be able to see.

The baiting that has gone on is ridiculous, it is as it Mary and DeeDee are running the forum .. continual put downs that I/we try very hard to ignore. It has become almost impossible to say anything here any more without being picked up on it. They call that free speech..

If you think I am evil, I do not nor have I even used magic of any kind that is not where my spirituality is.. that is not what is going on here, this is the exact same post above that happened when the Thuban material was taken off, the pleading of innocence the turning around of what was actually happening .. did either of these people work their butts off for this forum daily until recently..no.. but they will not be happy until they have me gone and a few of the other members as well I didn't think that was the way the forum worked. If memory serves Mary had already had a warning by you a short time ago.

Can you please tell me have the rules changed. Are the rules now that anything goes and 1 post written out of pure frustration is continually posted, is it going to be used against me forever on this forum, that is the question I guess...but I will not have then accuse me of black magic when there is no truth to that.
Lita
Know that you are Love...Know that you are Loved & be at Peace on your journey

Re: *WARNING - This Information May Shift Your Paradigm
#37713   April 19th, 2011
Deborah wrote:


Stay tuned for more... More to come soon on the Dracos.... and much much more!
 

#37717   April 19th, 2011
Deborah wrote:


A VID to start you on your day...




#37721   April 19th, 2011
shiloh wrote:
 

Deedee wrote:
A VID to start you on your day...



The 'missing' thread of sianellen about David Icke in its related latter parts can be accessed and continued here:


www.thuban.spruz.com/forums/?page=post&a...57-8614-8D7F00FF99C7

shiloh
Replies to this message; if on an OP thread started by me; might appear as context feedback on other forums without links to profile ID on Camelot.
The Presence of the Mosaic implies the will of Unity=God=Starhumanity and not the will of Humanity=Man=Separation!
I Am One in Many and Many in One!
Exe*=1

#37722    April 19th, 2011
Deborah wrote:


Thanks..

#337723   April 19th, 2011
shiloh wrote:
 
Deedee wrote:

Thanks..

I was in the process of answering your last query as to reasons about the removal of Lita's reply as the thread was removed. I could not save your original post. Should you recall your original post, please post it on the link as a reference if you choose to do so and would like this as an item of evidence. I would then reply again to your post.

Thank you
Tonyblue
Replies to this message; if on an OP thread started by me; might appear as context feedback on other forums without links to profile ID on Camelot.
The Presence of the Mosaic implies the will of Unity=God=Starhumanity and not the will of Humanity=Man=Separation!
I Am One in Many and Many in One!
Exe*=1

#37724 April 19th, 2011
Deborah wrote:


I do not remember, sorry... That's probably another topic altogether

Re: Letter from a Thuban Insider...

#37732   April 19th, 2011
Deborah wrote:


Quite bizarre... I know I had earlier posts on this thread... I don't know why they are getting deleted but if it's such a problem why not just delete this whole thread.. like they have other threads? Are we being "screened" now on what we can or cannot say... Just curious?
 
#37738   April 19th, 2011
Arachne wrote:
 

Dear Deborah!

Unless there are more 'silly' games than I perceive atm; you may care to check your membership.
I know that about 3 or 4 Thubans (and Mary?) were banned after the stargate templates were published and this taliban issue raised its head again. I was able to place the 'missing reply' onto your thread on the paradigm.

Be well
Arachne


337739   April 19th, 2011
Deborah wrote:


What do you mean by check my membership?... I am confused?

#37740   April 19th, 2011
Arachne wrote:

Deedee wrote:

What do you mean by check my membership?... I am confused?

Perhaps a browser issue or a queue of some sorts.
I get this message about your profile.

"I am sorry, but either we cannot find the requested profile or this account is no longer active. Please contact the site administrator if you believe this is an error."

The same for the banned dragons and also for Mary.
Not so for say sianellen.
As said perhaps sandpit games; but i dont know.

Arachne
Replies to this message; if on an OP thread started by me; might appear as context feedback on other forums without links to profile ID on Camelot.

Bluey Dracs
The Presence of the Mosaic implies the will of Unity=God=Starhumanity and not the will of Humanity=Man=Separation!
I Am One in Many and Many in One!
Exe*=1

#37741   April 19th, 2011
Deborah wrote:


Show me the proof of what I'm supposed to be accused of! I have better things to do than play silly mind confusing games! I intend to get my information out (as we all do) and I'm not going to take anymore bickering, whining and complaining from a bandy of 5... so if you are "confused yet".... ask yourselves if the silly little mind games isn't the reason for the confusion! I will remain in my integrity and can only intend the the rest of you do too!
 
#37742   April 19th, 2011
Deborah wrote:


Don't know! I'm still online!
 
Post last edited Apr 19th 2011

THEeXchanger wrote:Who Wrote the Bible?
Archaeology does not support the OT...
1.5hrs



https://youtu.be/SCXlFWBcxBo

An academic perspective from Yale -Thuban aligned with a sprinkling of OABS interpretations - Highly Recommended


An academic perspective from Yale -Thuban aligned with a sprinkling of OABS interpretations


The synergy between the Gospels of Thomas and John - Highly Recommended

Thuban aligned - Highly Recommended

http://www.gospelofthomasfullyinterpreted.com/
http://www.gospelofthomasfullyinterpreted.com/introduction-and-index

Nabs Disinformation - Shared as means of Comparison only

Shiloh, October 16th, 2013

Alienne Laval wrote:What "we" are experiencing at the moment is the shift from the King*s chamber to the Queen*s chamber, as signified in the architecture of the great pyramid of Gizah:



This is connected to certain sacrifices - and coincides with this year*s Eid ul Adha festivities (Islamic moon calendar) - where traditionally rams - as symbols of a culture and psyche endangering overmasculinization and suppression - are slaughtered and ritually eaten.

The mytho-history of the Nile island of Elephantine (originally known as Abu or Yebu), the old south pole of the ancient Egyptian Empire, still shows how the ram increasingly intruded a preceding mythology of a virgin bee-hive mother-daughter-matrigenesis.

In fact Polaris (or "Cynosura", the dog*s tail...) becomes the pole star every approx. 26.000 years; the last time this was the case around 23600 BC, it is now the case, and it will be in 27800 AD again.

The sacrifices indicate the final shift from Draco, Ursa Maior and Osiris (Orion) to Ashera (Sirius) and Ursa Minor with Polaris as the pole star.



The Dendera Zodiacus shows two circles of entwined figures, with the above depicted sacrificial rite in the middle:

"The zodiac (of Denderah) is a circle at the centre of which is our north pole... our north pole is correctly located in the constellation of the jackal, or Little Bear (Ursa Minor), as it was at the time the zodiac was carved, sometime about the first century BC. But the zodiac also shows the pole of the ecliptic, located in the breast of the hippopotamus, or constellation of Draco. To Schwaller this explains the spiral formation of the constellations. The mythological figures are entwined in two circles --one around the north pole and one around the pole of the ecliptic. Where these two circles intersect marks the point of the equinox, or due east. The zodiac thus becomes a calendar going back to remote antiquity," Peter Tompkins, Secrets of the Pyramid

Job (38:31) Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?



Drogo = Draco


surat ya-seen (36:34-36) And We placed gardens of date palms and grapes in it, and We caused springs of water to gush forth in it. So that they may eat of its fruit - while their hands did not make it. Will they not then give thanks Glory be to Him Who created all the pairs of that which the earth produces, as well as their own (human) kind (male and female), and of that which they know not.

surat l-naḥl (The Bees) (16:68-69) And your Rabbi inspired the bee, saying: "Take you habitations in the mountains and in the trees and in what they (humans) erect. Then, eat of all fruits, and follow the routes that your Rabbi made easy (for you).'' There comes forth from their bellies, a drink of varying colors, in which there is a cure for men. There is indeed a sign in that for people who reflect.

What 'we' are experiencing at the moment is the shift from the King*s chamber to the Queen*s chamber, as signified in the architecture of the great pyramid of Gizah:

Job 38:31-33

King James Version (KJV)


31 Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
32 Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?
33 Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?