New Science

[Zeshua]

Were there to be a New Science Discovered, what Form would it take?
Would this be some great Revolution at the Atomic Scale?
Will it Answer Questions of a Universal Nature?

Well Hate to cut this short Always Things to do.
Investigate Science, You will find Origins Universal in all human Resolve.
Philosophize, Understand, stay Resolute. Prepare yourselves, Open up to new ideas. Strength in numbers, Everyone remain calm.
<font color="floralwhite"> QRGBVTEFVGIODKBRONVSTROKDYOTVETP.SBTHCTVPSBDNBROSRQTPTSTC
QRKTPHMSBTVJJTVETP. [/COLOR]

 

[nitescott]

Has this have any thing to do with the "Telluride" thing?

<font color="white">
¯¾³¹· À¼±¸¿ °­¨®§ ©«²»º ´¶¬½ª µ±·ªf µ·»±´ ¯gSPS Pº±·» ·f³§¹ ·»f¯² ·f±¯² ¹fº§f ¬§²°f §´ºtS PSP±§ ¬f¯¾§ ´ºf¯f ³­´·&amp;#133; SPSP³ ±··²» rSP®¸ º·»³§ ººt
[/COLOR]

 

[Good_Scientist]

I don't really know what to make of this post. What are you trying to say? It is almost a poem.

Good Scientist

 

[Peter_Novak]

I noticed way back last year that Zeshua's original "New Science" post above contained secret text (
QRGBVTEFVGIODKBRONVSTROKDYOTVETP.SBTHCTVPSBDNBROSRQTPTSTC
QRKTPHMSBTVJJTVETP.) that seems to be encoded, but until now I hadn't noticed that nitescott's response also contained hidden text that also seems to be encoded (¯¾³¹· À¼±¸¿ °­¨®§ ©«²»º ´¶¬½ª µ±·ªf µ·»±´ ¯gSPS Pº±·» ·f³§¹ ·»f¯² ·f±¯² ¹fº§f ¬§²°f §´ºtS PSP±§ ¬f¯¾§ ´ºf¯f ³­´·&amp;#133; SPSP³ ±··²» rSP®¸ º·»³§ ººt)

Anyone know anything about this stuff?

Of course everyone has probably noticed by now that the capital letters in the second paragraph of Zeshua's post above spell out the message "WHAT IS YOUR PURPOSE". But the caps in the first do not spell out anything obvious. Any good cryptographers out there?

- Peter

 

[Peter_Novak]

Were there to be a New Science Discovered, what Form would it take?
Would this be some great Revolution at the Atomic Scale?
Will it Answer Questions of a Universal Nature?

Well Hate to cut this short Always Things to do.
Investigate Science, You will find Origins Universal in all human Resolve.
Philosophize, Understand, stay Resolute. Prepare yourselves, Open up to new ideas. Strength in numbers, Everyone remain calm.

Are the words in CAPS still more anagrams? If so, here are some possible resolutions :

“Were New Science Discovered Form” (28 letters) = ????????
“Would Revolution Atomic Scale” = OUR OWN EVIL TOO MISCALCULATED
"Will Answer Questions Universal Nature" (34 letters) = ????????
"Well Hate Always Things" = AWAIT GHASTLY NEW HELLS
“Investigate Science” = ANCIENT ICE VESTIGES
“You Origins Universal Resolve” = REVEAL GORE’S VISION RUINOUSLY
“Philosophize Understand Resolute” (30 letters) = ????????
“Prepare Open” = RARE POPE PEN
“Strength Everyone” = SHORT ENERGY EVENT


Is a "short energy event" the same thing as a "brief nuclear war"?

- Peter

 

[Packerbacker]

If you just list the CAPS, it reads:
WNSDF
WRAS
WAQUN

WHAT
IS
YOUR
PURPOS
E

The last group is clear. But the first group doesn't seem to make sense--or does it? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif

 

[Peter_Novak]

“Were New Science Discovered Form” = FEW WORD VERSES MERE COINCIDENCE
“Would Revolution Atomic Scale” = OUR OWN EVIL TOO MISCALCULATED
"Will Answer Questions Universal Nature" (34 letters) = ????????
"Well Hate Always Things" = AWAIT GHASTLY NEW HELLS
“Investigate Science” = ANCIENT ICE VESTIGES
“You Origins Universal Resolve” = REVEAL GORE’S VISION RUINOUSLY
“Philosophize Understand Resolute” (30 letters) = ????????
“Prepare Open” = RARE POPE PEN
“Strength Everyone” = SHORT ENERGY EVENT

 

[Packerbacker]

I Googled Zeshua and found the following quote from one of the forums which might be interesting (I'm quoting from my notes), "For those who wanted to know the burgeoning question of who Zeshua and...I'm more interested in the fact that he thinks that Zeshua was Javier..."

Quoting Charlie Brown, "Sigh..."

 

[origen2g]

BREAKFAST PHYSICS: Fundamental or Foundational

Please bro could you help a buddy out with his thought below?Thank a million

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________


This text arose from a simple mind quiz. It in fact is all about a quiz: Why not quiz yourself a little? Say, how about rigorously probing some stuff out- all by yourself and, attempt to customize your own version(s)?


PREAMBLE.

There are some things that are best DESCRIBED-DERIVED by QUALITATIVE APPROACH. OBSERVATION is a GREAT tool DELIVERED into the hands of man to use in his every day existence. Mathematics is derived from the OBSERVATION of nature and a NECESSARY brainchild of the probing minds of apt intellectuals. So in our quest we must note that it actually is an invaluable tool in our pursuit of CRUCIAL understanding of LIFE. However its PARENT- observation, must not be thrown into the SHADOWS.

Now there exist four generally recognized fundamental units (course, fact is, there are more). They are Length, Mass, Time and Charge. They are known as the CGS (actually cgs) Units. Course ‘c’ = ‘centimeter’ for length representation/ calibration/ measurements; ‘g’ = ‘grams’ for Mass representation/ calibration/ measurements and ‘s’ = ‘seconds’ for Time representation/ calibration/ measurements).Note also that other fundamental units are known; and the Charge has been used herein under the name ‘Energy’. In any case, we also could have used the Kelvin or even the Candela.

[Fundamental] Units are 'FUNDAMENTAL' in that they can-NOT be PERCEIVED to be DESCRIBABLE by [another] KNOWN FUNDAMENTAL QUALITY.

Now of these Units the most elusive has been… TIME.
However Time we must note EXISTS ONLY when there is MOTION. Now motion itself is fundamentally: CHANGE IN LENGTH.
SO it’s OK to say TIME IS DEPENDENT on LENGTH.

L &gt; T........... (1)


Note from (1) above that L (symbol for ‘Length’) == C (centimeter) and also T (symbol for ‘Time’) == s (seconds)

Now Mass is ALWAYS observed to be DEFINED within a form of COORDINATE BOUNDS .It has a SHAPE be it SOLID, LIQUID or GAS: they must have definite EXTENT of OCCUPATION IN SPACE - even if found though AMORPHOUS.

So WE MUST primarily adduce then that LENGTH is a FUNDAMENTAL PROPERTY of mass from the rationale above: Talking about its inherent property of volume (LXLXL)
Consequently:

L &gt; M.................... (2)


Note from (2) above that L (symbol for ‘Length’) == C (centimeter) and also M (symbol for ‘Mass’) == g (grams )

Now, mass should exist even in the absence of motion (events) so can be fundamentally independent of the TIME variable (since from (1), length &gt; (time and motion), motion &gt; time; and here mass &gt; motion). But time (our every day clock time) itself however needs to be RELATED to spatial coordinates (defined by length (X-Y-Z)) and anything with mass SHOULD have energy (revolving around inertia stemming from the formulating foundation of the corpuscular locking of energy coagulations and their flux (iwe!!)). Though note that this assumption is subject to SPECULATION for some forthcoming reasons. Nonetheless, bringing it more closer to home: ANYTHING having mass natively DEPENDS on ENERGY for meaning. (Course, energy causes force and force in turn causes motion).
Consequently we say, Energy gives mass MEANING (Or is mass not all about the atomic particle which in turn is also all about the [Electromagnetic] localized energies (charge et al) AND THE INTERSTITIAL ELECTRONIC BOND ENERGIES DEFINING THEM?).
So

E &gt; M.............................. (3)


Note from (3) above that E (symbol for ‘Energy’) == C (charge) and M (symbol for ‘Mass’) == g (grams)


But Energy itself MUST indeed possess a form and of necessity OCCUPY SPACE. Consequently should also possess BOUNDS: VOLUME- ultimately DEPENDING on LENGTH (Volume is a property of energy but volume is largely lengths) for MEANINGFULNESS (in our frame of existence). So:

L &gt; E................... (4)

But taking ANOTHER look at it, if there were no ENERGY there would be NO LENGTH simply because ‘length’ is STILL ‘something’. Nevertheless, one must admit that Length itself does not require ENERGY to be OPERATIONAL- besides, it is a complete abstraction in itself .

Subsequently, because of that last statement I will ELECT that (4) remains VALID. Also because Energy MUST as well EXIST in space (which we define in coordinates of lengths) and MUST have a FORM. That form is of needs also described by LENGTH QUALITIES.

Now, we must YET need to evolve additional LOGIC as to which SUPERSEDES which: LENGTH or ENERGY? However, WHICHEVER I believe really does not DETER this TREATISE at this point in time.
Now we can say (because some may say Energy supersedes Length in existential echelon and otherwise

L &gt; E &gt; M &gt; T......................................... (5)

OR
E &gt; L &gt; M &gt; T......................................... (6)



But for this Treatise (5) is elected VALID.

(Note that precedence in the deductions above start from the Left hand side. For instance, in (6) above, E supersedes L in Existential Precedence.)

Conclusion:

Now the preceding lines are still undergoing heavy-duty construction(s). So bro, common! Why don’t you contribute your own personalized quota? In any case the final point this text is assuming to pass across goes this way:

Final conclusion:
We can clearly say (based on the single ‘adoption’ of the veracity of this text) that there is ONLY ONE FOUNDATIONAL unit: length. It is indeed “foundational” because the others ALL are defined by it. Subsequently, the remaining units are easily ascribable as FUNDAMENTAL units: Energy, Mass, then, [Stochastic] Time.

 

[RainmanTime]

Re: BREAKFAST PHYSICS: Fundamental or Foundational

Greetings origen2g,

Just saw this post of yours. For what it is worth, here are my comments:

However Time we must note EXISTS ONLY when there is MOTION. Now motion itself is fundamentally: CHANGE IN LENGTH.
SO it’s OK to say TIME IS DEPENDENT on LENGTH.

This is a bit of a circular argument... and I know because I have been here. When you say motion is fundamentally "change in length" you are simply leacing out the implication of "change with respect to what?"...or in other words "how do you measure that change?" Of course, the answer is TIME! And this is why we must say (and it is technically correct) that MOTION is actually CHANGE IN LENGTH WITH RESPECT TO TIME. And we see the calculus supports this: Velocity = dx/dt. Acceleration = d2x/dt2. Jerk = d3x/dt3....etc. All of these are measures of MOTION.

So it is OK to say that TIME IS DEPENDENT on LENGTH, but can you say it is ONLY dependent on length? That is what leads to my next comment.

Now, mass should exist even in the absence of motion (events) so can be fundamentally independent of the TIME variable

This treats mass as a macroscopic, wholly static object. It is used quite well in classical mechanics, but when we examine atoms at the quantum level we see it is not true. All mass is IN MOTION. So what I am saying is that the concept of mass as a static, time-independent measure of energy is known to be a fallacy.

This is where I make the case for a composite definition that I call MATTER which is precisely analogous to the composite definition we agree to call MOTION. Where MOTION = dx/dt, I would define MATTER = dm/dt. This accounts for the known fact that what we call "mass" is not static and independent of TIME. Mathematically, this gives us quite an interesting solution when we consider exactly what we mean when we say that all human measures of TIME are based on MATTER IN MOTION. Mathematically, this would become:

TIME = MATTER/MOTION = (dm/dt)/(dx/dt) = dm/dx

I think it is also clear that all measures of ENERGY are triplex-composite metrics of mass, space, and time. Energy is therefore an integrated metric of our (defined) 3 FUNDAMENTAL MEASURES.

RMT

 

[Einstein]

Re: BREAKFAST PHYSICS: Fundamental or Foundational

RMT

This treats mass as a macroscopic, wholly static object. It is used quite well in classical mechanics, but when we examine atoms at the quantum level we see it is not true. All mass is IN MOTION. So what I am saying is that the concept of mass as a static, time-independent measure of energy is known to be a fallacy.

I give stuff like this lots of thought. The underlying assumption, "time is motion", could be in error. It may not be entirely independant but just covaries with motion. I treat time as a separate dominate reference frame. Mass, gravity, and space could be just different states of the same thing. I'm merely suggesting that mass covaries with time at the same rate. A sort of synchronization that takes place allowing the appearance of what seems to be a frozen or motionless state of length.

 

[origen2g]

Re: BREAKFAST PHYSICS: Fundamental or Foundational

Yep, thanks a milla!
This was not intended to be ‘long’ but here am I posting a lengthy one!!! Please could you kindly bear the ‘lengthiness’?

Kindly note that I have not indeed ‘proven anything’ here but mere presented a ‘quiz’ for the house to probe. Remember its still “under heavy construction”.
Now, ” For all its worth”: did you read the subject at all before attempting to ‘contribute’ or you decided to take a calculated detour to embellish your ‘knowledge’? Great tact there… However, fact is: you may be actually right with your statement (for I have not taken quality time to scrutinize them) -and I do not say that you are neither: because the reason for this post was not to treat… that.
Again, have you looked well as the basic reason for this post? Please do. Was actually expecting you to discuss “Fundamental Units” and their ‘relative existential precedence(s) ’ and not delve into the ‘esoterics’ of issues like “What is Time?”
And if you want to discuss “time” please navigate here :
http://www.timetravelinstitute.com/ttiforum/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ttclaims&amp;Number=44830&amp;page=0&amp;view=collapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;fpart=2
And help me out – and I would be profoundly grateful. Added the last comment because I like this beautiful statement of your:
********************************************************************
TIME = MATTER/MOTION = (dm/dt)/(dx/dt) = dm/dx
********************************************************************
However the portion:
********************************************************************
(dm/dt)/(dx/dt) = dm/dx
********************************************************************
Looks VERY common and lame….Or whad do you dhink?

Just saw this and pretty caught my interest as well:
********************************************************************
Think it is also clear that all measures of ENERGY are triplex-composite metrics of mass, space, and time. Energy is therefore an integrated metric of our (defined) 3 FUNDAMENTAL MEASURES.
********************************************************************

Please could you possibly back this statement up with some empirical facts? Perhaps your own?-and kindly try to differentiate ‘energy’ like Force* Distance from raw energy like that inherently found in the cores of active stars (Fortunately (or fortunately (?)) I have delved more into this below).
And peradventure you respond, please try to evolve your argument logically and please; you may not stumble upon this post as well.

********************************************************************
*********************************************************************
*************************INCLUDED SEGMENT*************************
This segment had been added while our ‘efficient’ electricity supply denied me electricity to power up my Pc

.

At this point, I will attempt to succinctly describe from scratch ‘new’ reason(s) for what I suggested in the other post . So here we go…


**************************** TOPIC TREATMENT ************************
Before there could be ‘anything’; at the very least there should of necessity be ‘nothingness’. If [this] ‘nothingness’ can be perceived: then it exists. And if it exists, then it of necessity must occupy location: Space-even if this is a singularity.
Now if space exists, then it surely must have a ‘here’ and a ‘there’. If that obtains, then we have in our hands a ‘space’ with an expanse. That expanse we know equates to a VOLUME
So, we can preliminarily conclude here,that SPACE has an inherent inseparable and native property: volume.

Now we may decide to ask:
“What is VOLUME in terms of our Derived Units?”:
(Length)*(Breath) * (Height) = = (L*L*L) --all LENGTHS!
Then what next…?:
Because we assumed we have a ‘here’ and a ‘there’ ALREADY then a DISTANCE by implication exists. (Even without motion or dynamics, this exists as is: STATIC (and also is allowed to be abstract))
Now if DYNAMICS sets in, a gradient (Length) had ALREADY set in BEFORE. This gradient is caused by POTENTIAL CONTRAST (Energy contrast). (May apply to latent energy contrast as well!).
So as you can see, energy must come in FIRST as (perhaps) a CONTRAST in POTENTIAL: Gradient; Location Difference; Length.
But this energy will NEVER be observed UNLESS it acts on ‘something’ that can show its EFFECTS [of existence].Now, that ‘something’ is an object we arbitrarily choose here to be “MASS”. Note that we have not incorporated the concept of TIME at all because INTELLIGENCE has not set in [amongst other things], neither is there even [Observable/measurable] MOTION or [Observable/measurable] EVENTS.
So to ever ‘observe’ MOTION, we require a POTENTIAL acting on a mass.
Subsequently, taking stock at this juncture:We have basic INGREDIENTS for a physical system such that existence has a precedence level:
L &gt;E &gt; M…..(1)

Where above, L = Length, E = Energy, M =Mass
So, the element of TIME may now be “factored into the equation” since we want (actually desire) to involve DYNAMICS (events).However note that the ingredients in (1) above exist without the existence of the parameter TIME …In essence they CAN EXIST alone outside the DEFINES and EFFECTS of Time: they are INDEPENDENT of it if necessary. They can even exist outside events/dynamics/change in this conceptualization.
If according to your treatise you must insist that MATTER =dm/dt, we don’t even have this parameter ‘TIME’ here at this point to start with.

Anyway, note also that even SPACE could be an object…
Consider this:
Is it impossible to conceptualize that mass (perhaps energy) pervades the entire known [and unknown] existence and that even ‘space’ itself is an OBJECT [comprised of ‘something’ like Energy?]
When I refer to ENERGY I am not talking about things like Force*Distance [i.e. “Work”]: which is an OBSERVED EFFECT of the EXISTENCE of Energy; or, is this WORK not an observed TRANSLATION of the EFFECT of energy to our spatial and cognitive recognition and understanding? This translation is NOT energy ITSELF (Please correct me).
I will use the following lines to make some points; therefore I consider the diversion necessary.

******************************************************************
********************** START DETOUR******************************
******************************************************************

(Please I will be typing exponential expressions in linear patterns in the following lines basically because I am not acquainted with using this forum’s interface to express mathematical elements using Exponential/Power notation)

[Then brings me back to your response/ttiforum/images/graemlins/devil.gif Maybe when you refer to ENERGY in your
post :
*******************************************************************
I think it is also clear that all measures of ENERGY are triplex-composite metrics of mass, space, and time. Energy is therefore an integrated metric of our (defined) 3 FUNDAMENTAL MEASURES.
********************************************************************
You refer to something like:
KINETIC ENERGY being mathematically:
1/2Mass*Velocity (Power) 2 ? …… (01)
That is; where:
Velocity = distance/ time = L/T …… (02)
So that placing (02) in (01) above we get
1/2MV (Power)2 = 1/2 M (L/T)Power(2) ……..(002)
Composed of the three fundamental [derived] units: Mass (M), Length (L) and Time (T)?

Or again perhaps; you used the parameter WORK [as equal to ENERGY] instead:

WORK = Force*Distance …..(03)
But

Force = Mass * Acceleration …. (04)
And

Acceleration = (Velocity/Time)…. (05)
In any case;

Velocity = Distance/Time …. (06)

Now, from (06); intending to break all down into Fundamental Units’ notation and doing some ‘few’ substitutions:

Velocity = Distance/Time = L/T ….(07)
Substituting (07) into ()5) we obtain:

Acceleration = (Velocity/Time) = ((L/T)/T) ………………….. (08)
Again, substituting (08) into (04) we obtain:

Force = Mass * Acceleration = Mass * ((L/T)/T) = M*(((L/T)/T) )…(09)

Now, finally putting (09) into (03)

Work = Force*Distance = M*(((L/T)/T) ) * Distance …(010)
Which equals:

Work = M*(((L/T)/T) ) * L….(011)

Now as we can see in (011) above (as well (002) that work (which like energy is also measured in joules) in Derived Units notation contain all the Fundamental Units.
[Again] is that why you have surmised:

******************************************************************
I think it is also clear that all measures of ENERGY are triplex-composite metrics of mass, space, and time. Energy is therefore an integrated metric of our (defined) 3 FUNDAMENTAL MEASURES.
******************************************************************

If that is the reason then I will have to become more convinced that it will HOLD TRUE in DESCRIBING the real nature of UNITS!
******************************************************************
**************** **********END DETOUR******************************
******************************************************************
In any case I will quickly continue with the evolution of my statements

Now Time:
Note that the concept of MEASUREMENT coupled with the requirement of TIME arises as soon as MOTION sets in: the need to quantize the RATE at which an object’s (Mass?) LOCATION COINCIDES with another KNOWN location. Note the word: KNOWN: There must needs be a KNOWN parameter BEFORE ‘time’ may be determined. OBSERVATION is required BEFORE the KNOWN can be called ’known’. In few words ‘Time’ is an ‘afterthought’ for convenience/meaning of intelligence.
So how do we evolve ‘time’? I expect it to be like follows:
1. We have a known CONSTANT object (MASS, ENERGY) with KNOWN CONSTANT LOCATION CHANGE (Motion).
2. You calculate the RATE of your own LOCAL CHANGE against that object’s own LOCATION (Length, motion) CHANGE(S).
So as you may already begin to see, Time depends ULTIMATELY ON ‘LOCATIONAL’ RATIOS, which in turn (i.e. the ratios) must as well be observable (MEASURABLE) .
In order for the ratios to be observable in turn, it must have a FORM (mass if you like).And for that MASS to be even variable in location, a gradient (Potential variation (Energy)) must exist inside a space [volume]: Volume= L*L*L
So
L&gt;E&gt;M&gt;T
I could probe a bit deeper if allowed but I must allow you to comment.

 

[satown]

Re: BREAKFAST PHYSICS: Fundamental or Foundational

i think you are trying to understand the affects of time in terms of distance and velocity with respect to time as a form of vector tensor field, look up my past posts they will help you.

 

[Modern_Einstein]

Hi I am a new member and i might need alittle help working this thing. I have really great ideas, but i am ( I can't tell you my real age but i am between the ages of 10 - 13) not being taking seriosly because of my age. So i thought i could join the Time Travel Institute.

Well seriosly I think that our new energy will come from perpetual motion. I have many ideas using rare-earth magnets but I can't get my hands on the right materials. If you are interested in what i have in mind reply to my message.

 

[recall15]

Spacetime May Have Fractal Properties on a Quantum

Quoted:
Spacetime May Have Fractal Properties on a Quantum Scale
March 25th, 2009 By Lisa Zyga Enlarge

-- Usually, we think of spacetime as being four-dimensional, with three dimensions of space and one dimension of time. However, this Euclidean perspective is just one of many possible multi-dimensional varieties of spacetime. For instance, string theory predicts the existence of extra dimensions - six, seven, even 20 or more. As physicists often explain, it’s impossible to visualize these extra dimensions; they exist primarily to satisfy mathematical equations.

As if extra dimensions weren’t strange enough, new research has probed an even more mind-bending possibility: that spacetime has dimensions that change depending on the scale, and the dimensions could have fractal properties on small scales. In a recent study, Dario Benedetti, a physicist at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Ontario, has investigated two possible examples of spacetime with scale-dependent dimensions deviating from classical values at short scales. More than being just an interesting idea, this phenomenon might provide insight into a quantum theory of relativity, which also has been suggested to have scale-dependent dimensions. Benedetti’s study is published in a recent issue of Physical Review Letters.

“It is an old idea in quantum gravity that at short scales spacetime might appear foamy, fuzzy, fractal or similar,” Benedetti told PhysOrg.com. “In my work, I suggest that quantum groups are a valid candidate for the description of such a quantum spacetime. Furthermore, computing the spectral dimension, I provide for the first time a link between quantum groups/noncommutative geometries and apparently unrelated approaches to quantum gravity, such as Causal Dynamical Triangulations and Exact Renormalization Group. And establishing links between different topics is often one of the best ways we have to understand such topics.”

In his study, Benedetti explains that a spacetime with quantum group symmetry has in general a scale-dependent dimension. Unlike classical groups, which act on commutative spaces, quantum groups act on nocommutative spaces (e.g. where xy doesn’t equal yx), which emerges through their unique curvature and quantum uncertainty. Here, Benedetti considers two types of spacetime with quantum group symmetry - a quantum sphere and k-Minkowski spacetime - and calculates their dimensions. In both spaces, the dimensions have fractal properties at small scales, and only reach classical values at large scales.


end quoted from:
http://www.physorg.com/

:oops: :oops:

 

[recall15]

at a meeting of the American Chemical Society...

Quoting Zeshua

<font color="red"> Were there to be a New Science Discovered, what Form would it take?
Would this be some great Revolution at the Atomic Scale?
Will it Answer Questions of a Universal Nature?

Well Hate to cut this short Always Things to do.
Investigate Science, You will find Origins Universal in all human Resolve.
Philosophize, Understand, stay Resolute. Prepare yourselves, Open up to new ideas. Strength in numbers, Everyone remain calm.
QRGBVTEFVGIODKBRONVSTROKDYOTVETP.SBTHCTVPSBDNBROSRQTPTSTC
QRKTPHMSBTVJJTVETP.


[/COLOR]

Quoting from:
www.eurekalert.org/

Note to journalists: Please report that this research was presented at a meeting of the American Chemical Society

<font color="blue"> SALT LAKE CITY, March 23, 2009 — Researchers are reporting compelling new scientific evidence for the existence of low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR), the process once called "cold fusion" that may promise a new source of energy. One group of scientists, for instance, describes what it terms the first clear visual evidence that LENR devices can produce neutrons, subatomic particles that scientists view as tell-tale signs that nuclear reactions are occurring.

Low-energy nuclear reactions could potentially provide 21st Century society a limitless and environmentally-clean energy source for generating electricity, researchers say. The report, which injects new life into this controversial field, will be presented here today at the American Chemical Society's 237th National Meeting. It is among 30 papers on the topic that will be presented during a four-day symposium, "New Energy Technology," March 22-25, in conjunction with the 20th anniversary of the first description of cold fusion.

"Our finding is very significant," says study co-author and analytical chemist Pamela Mosier-Boss, Ph.D., of the U.S. Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center (SPAWAR) in San Diego, Calif. "To our knowledge, this is the first scientific report of the production of highly energetic neutrons from an LENR device."

The first report on "cold fusion," presented in 1989 by Martin Fleishmann and Stanley Pons, was a global scientific sensation. Fusion is the energy source of the sun and the stars. Scientists had been striving for years to tap that power on Earth to produce electricity from an abundant fuel called deuterium that can be extracted from seawater. Everyone thought that it would require a sophisticated new genre of nuclear reactors able to withstand temperatures of tens of millions of degrees Fahrenheit.

Pons and Fleishmann, however, claimed achieving nuclear fusion at comparatively "cold" room temperatures — in a simple tabletop laboratory device termed an electrolytic cell.

But other scientists could not reproduce their results, and the whole field of research declined. A stalwart cadre of scientists persisted, however, seeking solid evidence that nuclear reactions can occur at low temperatures. One of their problems involved extreme difficulty in using conventional electronic instruments to detect the small number of neutrons produced in the process, researchers say.

In the new study, Mosier-Boss and colleagues inserted an electrode composed of nickel or gold wire into a solution of palladium chloride mixed with deuterium or "heavy water" in a process called co-deposition. A single atom of deuterium contains one neutron and one proton in its nucleus.

Researchers passed electric current through the solution, causing a reaction within seconds. The scientists then used a special plastic, CR-39, to capture and track any high-energy particles that may have been emitted during reactions, including any neutrons emitted during the fusion of deuterium atoms.

At the end of the experiment, they examined the plastic with a microscope and discovered patterns of "triple tracks," tiny-clusters of three adjacent pits that appear to split apart from a single point. The researchers say that the track marks were made by subatomic particles released when neutrons smashed into the plastic. Importantly, Mosier-Boss and colleagues believe that the neutrons originated in nuclear reactions, perhaps from the combining or fusing deuterium nuclei.

"People have always asked 'Where's the neutrons?'" Mosier-Boss says. "If you have fusion going on, then you have to have neutrons. We now have evidence that there are neutrons present in these LENR reactions."

They cited other evidence for nuclear reactions including X-rays, tritium (another form of hydrogen), and excess heat. Meanwhile, Mosier-Boss and colleagues are continuing to explore the phenomenon to get a better understanding of exactly how LENR works, which is key to being able to control it for practical purposes.

Mosier-Boss points out that the field currently gets very little funding and, despite its promise, researchers can't predict when, or if, LENR may emerge from the lab with practical applications. The U.S. Department of the Navy and JWK International Corporation in Annandale, Va., funded the study.

Other highlights in the symposium include:

Overview, update on LENR by editor of New Energy Times – Steve Krivit, editor of New Energy Times and author of "The Rebirth of Cold Fusion," will present an overview of the field of low energy nuclear reactions, formerly known as "cold fusion." A leading authority on the topic, Krivit will discuss the strengths, weaknesses, and implications of this controversial subject, including its brief history. (ENVR 002, Sunday, March 22, 8:55 a.m. Hilton, Alpine Ballroom West, during the symposium, "New Energy Technology)

Excess heat, gamma radiation production from an unconventional LENR device —Tadahiko Mizuno, Ph.D., of Hokkaido University in Japan, has reported the production of excess heat generation and gamma ray emissions from an unconventional LENR device that uses phenanthrene, a type of hydrocarbon, as a reactant. He is the author of the book "Nuclear Transmutation: The Reality of Cold Fusion." (ENVR 049, Monday, March 23, 3:35 p.m., Hilton, Alpine Ballroom West, during the symposium, "New Energy Technology.")

New evidence supporting production and control of low energy nuclear reactions — Antonella De Ninno, Ph.D., a scientist with New Technologies Energy and Environment in Italy, will describe evidence supporting the existence of low energy nuclear reactions. She conducted lab experiments demonstrating the simultaneous production of both excess heat and helium gas, tell-tale evidence supporting the nuclear nature of LENR. She also shows that scientists can control the phenomenon. (ENVR 064, Tuesday, March 24, 10:10 a.m., Hilton, Alpine Ballroom West, during the symposium, "New Energy Technology)

[/COLOR]

Right!
:oops: :oops: :oops:

 

[Peter_Novak]

Were there to be a New Science Discovered, what Form would it take?
Would this be some great Revolution at the Atomic Scale?
Will it Answer Questions of a Universal Nature?

Well Hate to cut this short Always Things to do.
Investigate Science, You will find Origins Universal in all human Resolve.
Philosophize, Understand, stay Resolute. Prepare yourselves, Open up to new ideas. Strength in numbers, Everyone remain calm.

QRGBVTEFVGIODKBRONVSTROKDYOTVETP.SBTHCTVPSBDNBROSRQTPTSTC
QRKTPHMSBTVJJTVETP.

The code at the bottom was cracked with a software utility back in 2005, but it was never posted here, although it was in other forums. The answer:

“Michael Jackson his fate is now sealed.
The breadth of his time determined by the appealed”.

 

[Peter_Novak]

"MICHAEL JACKSON HIS FATE IS NOW SEALED.
THE BREADTH OF HIS TIME DETERMINED BY THE<font color="red"> APPEALED" [/COLOR]

How about this : he died on the same day as Farrah Fawcett. The AP story of Fawcett's death that is running in headlines all over the world right now read :

Farrah Fawcett succumbs to cancer at 62

'Charlie's Angels' star <font color="red"> helped redefine sex appeal [/COLOR]in the 1970s

updated 1:10 p.m. CT, Thurs., June 25, 2009

Farrah Fawcett, the "Charlie's Angels" star whose feathered blond hair and dazzling smile made her one of the biggest sex symbols of the 1970s, died Thursday after battling cancer. She was 62.

Do you suppose it's just coincidence that Jackson died on the very same day as a woman whose name was once synonymous with the phrase "sex appeal" after Zeshua said that the breadth of Jackson's life would be determined by "the appealed"? His length of his life, as it turned out, was determined by the length of the life of the famously appealing Fawcett.

This is not the first time that Zeshua referred to the deaths of two people who died closely together; she also addressed the same theme when Pope JPII and Terri Schiavo died close together.

All I know is that, if I knew in advance that Jackson and Fawcett were going to die on the same day, any hints I might give about Jackson's death would probably reflect that coincidence. And here we see that such a connection does exist in Zeshua's statement about Jackson's death, using and even emphasizing the word "appeal' to point to a woman whose obituaries are already defining her with the exact same word.

When Zeshua wrote this, Jackson was in the middle of a court battle, and so we assumed the word "appealed" was in reference to a court procedure. But there is another valid meaning for this uncommon word. Who is the one with the scar? He is "the scarred". Who is the one with the injury? She is "the injured". Who are those with the talent? They are "the talented". Who is the girl with the sex appeal? She is "the appealed".

What was Fawcett best known for? It wasn't her acting, although she had a few pretty good roles. It wasn't her relationships. It was her sex appeal. That was her number one quality, what she was best known for. It was her defining characteristic. And Zeshua pointed to it by name.

The iconic 1976 poster of Farrah Fawcett was first published in Life magazine in 1976, and is the best-selling pin-up poster of all time, with more than 12 million copies sold.

Frankly, when Jackson died, I was surprised to discover any connection to this prediction at all. I wrestled with this prediction for four years with no insights into it at all.

The word "appeal", it seems to me, has two primary associations : a legal appeal, and sex appeal. Jackson dying on the same day as someone who was the number one "sex appeal" icon of her day cannot be a coincidence.

Do you recall how lusted after (not celebrated, not adored, but lusted after) Fawcett was in her heyday? When the obituaries report that she redefined the meaning of the phrase "sex appeal", they aren't kidding. I was a freshman in college when that poster came out, and it seemed that three out of every four guys I knew had her poster hanging in their dorm.

Fifteen years down the road from today, I imagine, history will define her by that one characteristic, even moreso perhaps than we do in our memories today. Hell, it's started already : the subhead for the AP story announcing her death didn't define her as an accomplished actress or even as a celebrity, but as a sex appeal icon of the 70's :

Charlie's Angels' star helped redefine sex appeal in the 1970's

The original prediction, "MICHAEL JACKSON HIS FATE IS NOW SEALED. THE BREADTH OF HIS TIME DETERMINED BY THE APPEALED", was posted during the middle of Jackson's famous trial. At the time, we thought the keyword "appealed" referred to a legal appeal, but Zeshua privately indicated otherwise to us even before the trial was over.

After it was clear that there would be no legal appeal, the meaning of the second half of the prediction seemed to come more into focus. If "the breadth of his time" wasn't referring to a legal sentence (time behind bars or on probation or something like that), that it seemed most likely to be referring to his time remaining on earth, i.e., a death prediction.

So we had a death prediction, we thought, and the timing of his death was supposed to somehow be "determined by the appealed". Well, that just didn't seem to make any damn sense at all, not for four long frustrating years. And the fact that Jackson's trial had come and gone and this prediction remained unfulfilled and unexplained was grievously troubling to me, and was, in fact, one of the cornerstones of my remaining doubts about Zeshua.

But now, today, as I find that the timing of Jackson's death indeed is closely linked to someone with a very strong connection to the phrase "sex appeal", I am satisfied that the prediction has been fulfilled.

Of course, you can dismiss the connection to this towering sex appeal icon if you wish, and call it just a coincidence. Add it to the list of such coincidences that trails behind Zeshua.

MICHAEL JACKSON HIS FATE IS NOW SEALED.
THE BREADTH OF HIS TIME DETERMINED BY THE APPEALED.

Let's go over this again. This prediction speaks of Jackson's "fate" being sealed and "the breadth of his time" being determined. The prediction was posted during Jackson's trial, when it seemed a real possibility that he would receive a prison sentence. At that time, there were three likely solutions to this prediction :

(1) The prediction was a phoney.
(2) The prediction referred to a prison sentence.
(3) The prediction was a death prediction.

But then his trial ended and he wasn't sentenced. At that point, there were only two likely solutions to this prediction:

(1) The prediction was a phoney.
(2) The prediction was a death prediction.

Now, at the time the prediction was posted, Jackson was only 46 years old, healthy, trim, and very very rich. He was not like the "old fat Elvis". Jackson's life expectancy had to have been way up there; he could have easily been expected to live to eighty, ninety, or even a hundred years old. He was in good physical health, wasn't fat or out of shape, and (I assume this) wasn't a smoker. He should have lived a good long time. Or at least he should have been expected to live a good long time. If Zeshua was just taking a wild stab in the dark in predicting Jackson's death, she was were taking a big risk, because Jackson looked like he would live a good long while. If she took that chance anyway, she came out looking really damn lucky, because Jackson very cooperatively died way ahead of his statistical probability. So far as I know, there was no one, no psychic, nor astrologer, nor doctor, nor family member, nor anyone anywhere, besides Zeshua, who predicted, guessed, or even hinted that Jackson would die so young.

If she instead wrote the prediction expecting it to be fulfilled by Jackson getting a prison sentence, she still came out looking real damn lucky when his premature death seemed to bring out a whole different meaning in the wording of her prediction. And she came out looking luckier still when he not only died on schedule, but even did so on the same day as a famous sex appeal icon, seeming to bring out even more meaning in the wording of her prediction.

Consider Zeshua's line of reasoning, assuming for the sake of argument that she is the real deal. She says that she lives in 2026, and if she predicted that Jackson would die, his death would have had to occur before 2026. But consider why she brought up Jackson's death in the first place. It was not to warn him or prevent his death, but instead to bolster her reputation with us as an accurate predictor. Why does she try to bolster her reputation with us? She has told us : to help us avoid the terrors that await between 2012 - 2015. But if this is her goal, and she was using a prediction of Jackson's death to help accomplish that goal, then Jackson would have had to die not merely before 2026, but indeed before 2012.

Which he did.

If this prediction was a phoney and she doesn't really know anything about the future at all, then consider all the many different ways Zeshua "lucked out"with how things worked out:

1. Although he wasn't sentenced at his trial, he later died a premature death that also seemed to fulfill the prediction's wording.

2. He died a premature death prior to 2012, which fits Zeshua's broader storyline.

3. He coincidentally died on the same day as a famous sex appeal icon, which also fits the wording of the prediction.

MICHAEL JACKSON HIS FATE IS NOW SEALED.
THE BREADTH OF HIS TIME DETERMINED BY THE APPEALED.

Consider again the wording of this prediction. Notice that all the words are pretty clear and obvious except the last one. Notice also that it seems to be a death sentence, and the timing of the death is determined by the last word. The last word, whatever it means, is the key to the whole prediction, and especially the key to the timing of the death.

Consider how unusual the word is. Note that it is not a word in normal use. It is an unusual form of a familiar word. Note also that it is not an adjective, or a verb, but a noun. By the way it is placed in the sentence, it is clearly a noun.

The whole prediction hinges on that one word, that noun, that person, place, or thing related to or associated with "appeal".

Then re-read all the online obits about Fawcett. Count how many of them define her (not just mention it in passing, but literally DEFINE her) with that very word "appeal", the same word that Zeshua's entire Michael Jackson Death Prediction hinges on.

PS. And finally, an insight from yeyeman. The only mystery left in the wording of the prediction was the odd choice of the word "breadth" instead of something more conventional like "length" or something. Well, ol' yeyeman saw thru that one right off -- it was a hint about Jackson's manner of death, "breadth" being so close to the word "breath". Jackson suffered a massive heart attack, and wasn't breathing when the paramedics arrived at his house, and still wasn't breathing when they arrived at the hospital, even after CPR was applied.

So let's add that to the list of all the ways Zeshua "lucked out"with how things worked out:

1. Although he wasn't sentenced at his trial, he later died a premature death that also seemed to fulfill the prediction's wording.

2. He died a premature death prior to 2012, which fits Zeshua's broader storyline.

3. He died on the same day as a famous sex appeal icon, which explains why the prediction tied the timing of Jackson's death to the irregular noun "appealed".

4. He wasn't breathing when the paramedics arrived, which seems to explain Zeshua's odd inclusion of the word "breadth" in her prediction.

5. Zeshua said that most of her predictions were about things that happen in 2008 - 2009. Her Michael Jackson prediction seems to have come true within that time window, even though he was a relatively young man who should have lived much longer.

 

[Peter_Novak]

Now the question becomes, if there was a prediction attached to this first post in this new thread she created, a thread she placed in the "New Science and Alternate Energies" column, which she titled "New Science", and which she started with the words "Were there to be a New Science Discovered, what Form would it take? Would this be some great Revolution at the Atomic Scale? Will it Answer Questions of a Universal Nature?", and that prediction just came true, is that a timing marker? Are we now to shortly expect a new science to be discovered?

 

[Angleochoas]

Were there to be a New Science Discovered, what Form would it take?
Would this be some great Revolution at the Atomic Scale?
Will it Answer Questions of a Universal Nature?

Well Hate to cut this short Always Things to do.
Investigate Science, You will find Origins Universal in all human Resolve.
Philosophize, Understand, stay Resolute. Prepare yourselves, Open up to new ideas. Strength in numbers, Everyone remain calm.

I suppose one could speculate in general terms that if QM is an investigation into the possible tangible 4th Dimension - the "new" science you speak of may well "waay" down the road be similar investigations into the 5th and so on.
Not sure what kind of scientific evolutionary acceleration chart you're dealing with here though lol.