Yep, this all just a ruse, to cover for the psychotics, to expand into the NWO regime. With monetary system looted, and being bankrupted many moon's ago, the perfect cover of a possible war is a lie.Perceval said:All of that is true, but I doubt there is any intention on starting WW3. I think all of this is just maneuvering by different interests in the 'world government' to secure positions of strength (as they see it) to deal with the expected major social issues that are likely to result from 'climate change' and the increasing risk of from space rocks.
https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,26591.msg319786.html#msg319786
Q: Okay, I am done. (A) I was trying to put together things related to research on UFT, and the questions I have asked recently. After a time of being quite desperate, because I could not put these things together, I could finally see some dim light. So, I would like to ask. But, please do not reassure me if what I think is wrong... just tell me it is wrong, and I will look for something else. I came up with the idea that we should model our space time on a kind of a surface embedded in a higher dimensional flat space. This would account for several things that you have told us. At some point you said the following: 'Old makes new again,' which suggested that we should come back to what Einstein was thinking, and then you said 'equilateral versus hypotenuse.' I didn't have a clue, but then I got an idea that it is related to different kinds of tensors with three indices, rather than to geometrical features. Is this guess correct?
A: Partly, but geometric figures provide a third density guide for visualizations of field concepts.
Q: (A) Hmmm....
A: Pyramids inverted upon one another.
Q: (A) Where to put these pyramids?
A: Hexagonal representation of flat plane...
Q: (A) What is hexagonal representation?
A: What does a hexagon look like when converted to three dimensional representation?
Q: (L) Well, a 'flat pyramid' is a triangle, and a triangle has three points, and two triangles inverted becomes a sort of Star of David, and that has six points and is a sort of hexagon... (L) Well, this hexagon business... two dimensional inverted pyramids make a Star of David. But, what if these pyramids were reallyThey LOOK like a hexagon in a plane, but in 3 dimensions... (A) They are octohedrons... Octonions... hmmmm....
A: Vortices... this is what your "wormhole" would look like.
Q: (A) Now, we have a problem here, because you speak in terms of features, geometrical features, and I would like to convert this to equations which...
A: Okay, what is the problem?
Q: (A) I want to describe gravity, and to describe gravity I must have some geometrical quantity which describes this gravity, so my idea is that gravitational field is described by the bending of our space time in a higher dimensional flat space... A: Yes...
Q: And that this bending would describe both gravity and electromagnetism.
A: Yes...
Q: (A) In all this I do not see a place at all for tetrahedrons. What do they have to do with a bent surface?
A: Maybe you do not see yet.
Q: (A) But, still I want to understand what was all this talk about tetrahedrons. So, I thought about tetrahedrons that I have worked with and met in my research. There were several occasions. First, there are tetrahedrons which we need if you build a continuous theory of completely discrete elements. Then we do the triangulation of the surface, or we need tetrahedrons to triangulate space, so let me call it Place One. Place Two: tetrahedrons I understood as symbols because tetrahedrons have three edges from each vertex, so I thought this three should represent third order differential equations. Place Three: I use tetrahedrons for describing magnetic monopoles, but they were not necessary, and I have no other way to put tetrahedrons into the idea to bend geometry. If things are fluffy, what are tetrahedrons doing there? I have no clue at all! So, I want to ask about a possibility of describing different densities. It came to my mind that perhaps Einstein, when you spoke about variable physicality, that Einstein was afraid when he understood that in his work. I thought about this and I think that Einstein determined that the future must be determined from the past and present, and when he found that he had a theory where the future was open, he dismissed it and was afraid. Is this a good guess that variable physicality, mathematically, means a theory where there is a freedom of choosing the future when past and present are given?
A: Yes.
Q: (A) Is it related to the fact that we should use higher order differential equations, not second order?
A: Yes. Einstein found that not only is the future open, but also the present and the past. Talk about scary!!
Q: (A) All you have said so far points to an idea by a Swiss guy named Armand Wyler. This Wyler found a way to compute from geometry so-called Fine Structure Constant, which is a number and can be found experimentally. Then, of course, he was invited to Princeton to explain how he did it, and apparently he failed to explain himself, and he ended in an asylum for the mentally deranged. The question is: if I follow his way of thinking, can I succeed in deriving and understanding the nature of this Fine Structure Constant?
A: Yes.
Q: (A) Well, if I do it, should I keep it a secret so that I won't end up in an asylum?
A: The problem with Wyler was with the audience, not the speaker.
Q: (A) What does that mean? (L) I guess it means that the people he was talking to couldn't grasp it, not that he couldn't explain it. Did he really lose his mind, or was he sort of 'helped' to go crazy?
A: He suffered a "breakdown."
Q: (A) Now, let's change a little bit. BRH sent me an e-mail where there was a discussion between Sarfatti and a Russian physicist who was working with Sakharov by the name of Ryazanov, at Moscow University. He says he can do derivation of quantum mechanics from electro dynamics with two signs of time. He is speaking about possible reversing of causality. On the other hand, he is saying that it is the sin of physicists that they believe in the power of mathematics. Part of what this Ryazanov is saying seems to correspond to what I think also. Does he really have a theory which explains quantum mechanics?
A: Yes, but he made an omission.
Q: (A) What omission?
A: Calculating the frequency constant.
Q: (A) Okay, I will try to get his paper. In looking for this Ryazanov on the web, I have found the pages of a Polish Medical Doctor who is making all kinds of funny experiments, including parapsychological, being, at the same time, director of the University Clinic. I had the idea that I should get in contact with him. Who is he? Can I have a clue?
A: Who is he?
Q: (A) His name is Brodziak. He is in contact with Sarfatti, Pitkannen, Deautsche, and so on. Should I become more active in these discussions, these mailing lists?
A: Sure, but you will need to separate the "wheat from the chaff."
a mathematical entity with components that change in a particular way in a transformation from one coordinate system to another.
Any of the wide range of phenomena associated with the behavior and interaction of electric charges and electric and magnetic fields, such as electricity, magnetism, chemical bonds, and all forms of electromagnetic radiation, including light.
A single-step reaction can also be written as
\frac{d[C]}{dt} = Ae^\frac{-E_a}{RT}[A]^m^n
Ea is the activation energy and R is the Gas constant. Since at temperature T the molecules have energies according to a Boltzmann distribution, one can expect the proportion of collisions with energy greater than Ea to vary with e-Ea/RT. A is the pre-exponential factor or frequency factor.
Tomek said:By the way, do they even need oil, for real ?
Reminds me of what the Cs said about the shooting down of the Columbia shuttle on on February 1, 2003, that it was warning to the Bush govt. who the real masters were and to stick to the plan.
Only to the extent that long ago it was chosen as the grease to oil modern civilization and they can present it as a limited commodity that they need to control and thereby enrich themselves, launch wars to secure it and control the world, to some extent.
luke wilson said:Somehow, I think these psychos are about to go completely psycho.
A: Roths child will have triple bad day...
Perceval said:Seems to me they're about to do the same thing they've been doing for the last 10 years, bomb another country and kill thousands of civilians and claim they are 'fighting terrorism'.
1984 said:Perceval said:Seems to me they're about to do the same thing they've been doing for the last 10 years, bomb another country and kill thousands of civilians and claim they are 'fighting terrorism'.
All I can say is....yep.
H-KQGE said:The other being cosmic disturbances affecting their timetable. Which would be why they'll just press on despite the growing transparency in all corners of the world of how recent history is repeating itself, again with the same antagonists.
"We do not need the celestial threat to disguise Cold War intentions; rather we need the Cold War to disguise celestial intentions!"
Perceval said:H-KQGE said:The other being cosmic disturbances affecting their timetable. Which would be why they'll just press on despite the growing transparency in all corners of the world of how recent history is repeating itself, again with the same antagonists.
The cosmic factor is always there in the background when considering what is currently going on on the planet. If we assume for a moment that the PTB are aware of something "incoming" in the next say, 6 months, that is, they have a window of say 6 months when they expect a bunch of space rocks to fall on our heads, and if we assume that their main objective is to prevent the public becoming aware that this is the real threat, even up to and after such space rocks actually hit or explode overhead, it seems to me that perhaps the only way to try to achieve this objective would be under cover of "war".
Consider the fact that the mainstream media has been talking about the idea of North Korea or Iran detonating a nuke above the US and using the EMP to wipe out the electric grid. Consider the news reports over the past few years of "rocket trails" in the sky, when these trails could really have been meteorite trails.
Consider the fact that, there are no, and never have been any, "terrorists" who attacked the US, because the leaders of other countries are not so stupid that they don't understand that the US has FABRICATED the whole terrorism thing as a way to justify the invasion of other countries, (THEIR countries) and that for those other countries to attack the US with "terrorist bombings" would do nothing to hurt the US and instead simply provide them with more justification for their "war on terror" which is really just naked imperial expansion.
So, the scenario I am positing, as bizarre as it may seem, is that the planned attack on Syria is designed as a cover for expected meteorite/comet fragment in the next 6-12 months. If a meteorite hits the US or detonates over the land, there is already a preprepared narrative to explain the evidence, i.e. the trail in the sky, the EMP effects or the direct destruction of a US city, as Syria or Iran or North Korea firing missiles or detonating a 'nuke' above the US, and such an explanation would be all the more plausible in the context of the US being, at the time, involved in a 'war' with Syria, Iran, and maybe even Russia. Note that, a few months ago, the Russian foreign minister warned that an attack on Syria could lead to a conflagration where nuclear weapons could be used.
"We do not need the celestial threat to disguise Cold War intentions; rather we need the Cold War to disguise celestial intentions!"
~ British astronomer Victor Clube, author of The Cosmic Serpent and The Cosmic Winter, in a report commissioned by the U.S. Air Force
Updated to today
"We do not need the celestial threat to disguise War on Terror intentions; rather we need the War on Terror to disguise celestial intentions!"
H-KQGE said:Perceval said:H-KQGE said:The other being cosmic disturbances affecting their timetable. Which would be why they'll just press on despite the growing transparency in all corners of the world of how recent history is repeating itself, again with the same antagonists.
The cosmic factor is always there in the background when considering what is currently going on on the planet. If we assume for a moment that the PTB are aware of something "incoming" in the next say, 6 months, that is, they have a window of say 6 months when they expect a bunch of space rocks to fall on our heads, and if we assume that their main objective is to prevent the public becoming aware that this is the real threat, even up to and after such space rocks actually hit or explode overhead, it seems to me that perhaps the only way to try to achieve this objective would be under cover of "war".
Consider the fact that the mainstream media has been talking about the idea of North Korea or Iran detonating a nuke above the US and using the EMP to wipe out the electric grid. Consider the news reports over the past few years of "rocket trails" in the sky, when these trails could really have been meteorite trails.
Consider the fact that, there are no, and never have been any, "terrorists" who attacked the US, because the leaders of other countries are not so stupid that they don't understand that the US has FABRICATED the whole terrorism thing as a way to justify the invasion of other countries, (THEIR countries) and that for those other countries to attack the US with "terrorist bombings" would do nothing to hurt the US and instead simply provide them with more justification for their "war on terror" which is really just naked imperial expansion.
So, the scenario I am positing, as bizarre as it may seem, is that the planned attack on Syria is designed as a cover for expected meteorite/comet fragment in the next 6-12 months. If a meteorite hits the US or detonates over the land, there is already a preprepared narrative to explain the evidence, i.e. the trail in the sky, the EMP effects or the direct destruction of a US city, as Syria or Iran or North Korea firing missiles or detonating a 'nuke' above the US, and such an explanation would be all the more plausible in the context of the US being, at the time, involved in a 'war' with Syria, Iran, and maybe even Russia. Note that, a few months ago, the Russian foreign minister warned that an attack on Syria could lead to a conflagration where nuclear weapons could be used.
"We do not need the celestial threat to disguise Cold War intentions; rather we need the Cold War to disguise celestial intentions!"
~ British astronomer Victor Clube, author of The Cosmic Serpent and The Cosmic Winter, in a report commissioned by the U.S. Air Force
Updated to today
"We do not need the celestial threat to disguise War on Terror intentions; rather we need the War on Terror to disguise celestial intentions!"
Dot connecting or what?! I had completely forgotten about North Korea & their antics. Your scenario isn't at all bizarre to me, the expansion would allow for raw materials grabbing & their minds being so warped, they'll still/are still committed to the idea of fiat currency after the sky starts "falling."
The preprepared narrative needs to be kept in mind (& who knows what's going to happen if they pull off the internet censorwall blocking of forums "esoterica" etc) at all times in light of the "allies" being engaged in "saving the world from moral & obscene atrocities."
And from what i can tell, countries to these people, are an outdated model like contemporary morals, (homosexuality "being wrong" for example) instead they are companies/corporations (aren't multinationals & conglomerates a symbol for new world order?) such is the economic game theory mindset.
Perceval said:H-KQGE said:The other being cosmic disturbances affecting their timetable. Which would be why they'll just press on despite the growing transparency in all corners of the world of how recent history is repeating itself, again with the same antagonists.
The cosmic factor is always there in the background when considering what is currently going on on the planet. If we assume for a moment that the PTB are aware of something "incoming" in the next say, 6 months, that is, they have a window of say 6 months when they expect a bunch of space rocks to fall on our heads, and if we assume that their main objective is to prevent the public becoming aware that this is the real threat, even up to and after such space rocks actually hit or explode overhead, it seems to me that perhaps the only way to try to achieve this objective would be under cover of "war".
Consider the fact that the mainstream media has been talking about the idea of North Korea or Iran detonating a nuke above the US and using the EMP to wipe out the electric grid. Consider the news reports over the past few years of "rocket trails" in the sky, when these trails could really have been meteorite trails.
Consider the fact that, there are no, and never have been any, "terrorists" who attacked the US, because the leaders of other countries are not so stupid that they don't understand that the US has FABRICATED the whole terrorism thing as a way to justify the invasion of other countries, (THEIR countries) and that for those other countries to attack the US with "terrorist bombings" would do nothing to hurt the US and instead simply provide them with more justification for their "war on terror" which is really just naked imperial expansion.
So, the scenario I am positing, as bizarre as it may seem, is that the planned attack on Syria is designed as a cover for expected meteorite/comet fragment in the next 6-12 months. If a meteorite hits the US or detonates over the land, there is already a preprepared narrative to explain the evidence, i.e. the trail in the sky, the EMP effects or the direct destruction of a US city, as Syria or Iran or North Korea firing missiles or detonating a 'nuke' above the US, and such an explanation would be all the more plausible in the context of the US being, at the time, involved in a 'war' with Syria, Iran, and maybe even Russia. Note that, a few months ago, the Russian foreign minister warned that an attack on Syria could lead to a conflagration where nuclear weapons could be used.
"We do not need the celestial threat to disguise Cold War intentions; rather we need the Cold War to disguise celestial intentions!"
~ British astronomer Victor Clube, author of The Cosmic Serpent and The Cosmic Winter, in a report commissioned by the U.S. Air Force
Updated to today
"We do not need the celestial threat to disguise War on Terror intentions; rather we need the War on Terror to disguise celestial intentions!"