Einstein and all of Science is precisely backward.

More
20 years 5 months ago #9948 by Larry Burford
"How do you expect anyone to know what in the world you mean ..."

Three guesses, Jeremy. But watch out - the first two don't count.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 years 5 months ago #9950 by Meta
Replied by Meta on topic Reply from Robert Grace
Ok,

Lets begin with defining what I mean by non dimension or 0D.

Science begins with the point. They say it is zero. I say the zero (0)is the same dimension as the 4th...why? We usually count dimension, 1,2,3 and 4. Very few people understand what the heck the 4th dimension is, as you know. Is there a 5th or more....I say no....my introspective brain works backwards from the rational brain. I seem backwards to the rational thinkers but, I will show you how my brain works.

I say that there is no more than a 4th dimension that controls our 3 dimensional world. However, if we begin counting dimensions at 0 rather than 1, we arrive at 0,1,2 and 3...then the logical 4th dimension is 0 dimension again, only this time around the spiral, the 0th dimension or the 4th dimension is more advanced as the last one.

One more twist...I now arrive at the 0th dimension equalling the 4th. However the 0 represents, not a non dimensional point, but it is, in reality a torus, and a torus looks like a 0, but it is a 4th dimensional object, called an Anu, in Antiquity...the root of Anu.nnaki...so we now understand that Anunnaki is actually the smallest building block of universe.

So this leads us to believe that if we begin with 4 dimensions of the Anu and it rotates thru 4 more dimensions of our world, then we live in 8 dimensions....an octave of dimensions..however, we have to double these to account for the invisible half so we wind up with 16 or two octaves, demonstrated by the ambidexterous musical scales of the ancients.

These 8 dimension continue to rotate thru "higher" densities, always advancing, but the basic 4, or my 16 in reality (4 sets of 4 called quaternion), always remain intact, as what we experience.

So 0 dimension is certainly not no.thing.

www.rgrace.org/126/143invisibleuni.html

Meta
rgrace@rgrace.org

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 years 5 months ago #9951 by Astrodelugeologist
Replied by Astrodelugeologist on topic Reply from
Dimensions of spacetime:

1. The null set has been traditionally regarded as a -1-dimensional entity.
2. A point is a 0-dimensional entity.
3. Lines, line segments, and rays are 1-dimensional entities.
4. Angles and all plane figures are 2-dimensional.
5. Solids and shells are 3-dimensional.
6. Time is the 4th dimension.
7. In the Meta Model, scale is the 5th dimension.

--Astro

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 years 5 months ago #9960 by north
Replied by north on topic Reply from

<i>Originally posted by Meta</i>
<br />Ok,

Lets begin with defining what I mean by non dimension or 0D.

Science begins with the point. They say it is zero. I say the zero (0)is the same dimension as the 4th...why? We usually count dimension, 1,2,3 and 4. Very few people understand what the heck the 4th dimension is, as you know. Is there a 5th or more....I say no....my introspective brain works backwards from the rational brain. I seem backwards to the rational thinkers but, I will show you how my brain works.

I say that there is no more than a 4th dimension that controls our 3 dimensional world. However, if we begin counting dimensions at 0 rather than 1, we arrive at 0,1,2 and 3...then the logical 4th dimension is 0 dimension again, only this time around the spiral, the 0th dimension or the 4th dimension is more advanced as the last one.

One more twist...I now arrive at the 0th dimension equalling the 4th. However the 0 represents, not a non dimensional point, but it is, in reality a torus, and a torus looks like a 0, but it is a 4th dimensional object, called an Anu, in Antiquity...the root of Anu.nnaki...so we now understand that Anunnaki is actually the smallest building block of universe.

So this leads us to believe that if we begin with 4 dimensions of the Anu and it rotates thru 4 more dimensions of our world, then we live in 8 dimensions....an octave of dimensions..however, we have to double these to account for the invisible half so we wind up with 16 or two octaves, demonstrated by the ambidexterous musical scales of the ancients.

These 8 dimension continue to rotate thru "higher" densities, always advancing, but the basic 4, or my 16 in reality (4 sets of 4 called quaternion), always remain intact, as what we experience.

So 0 dimension is certainly not no.thing.

www.rgrace.org/126/143invisibleuni.html

Meta
rgrace@rgrace.org
_____________________________________________________________________

Meta

but your point is based on math,lets say that we don't base our starting point on math and we don't start at (0),we start at least at three(dimensions) now what happens?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 years 5 months ago #10247 by Meta
Replied by Meta on topic Reply from Robert Grace
Dimensions of spacetime:

1. The null set has been traditionally regarded as a -1-dimensional entity.
2. A point is a 0-dimensional entity.
3. Lines, line segments, and rays are 1-dimensional entities.
4. Angles and all plane figures are 2-dimensional.
5. Solids and shells are 3-dimensional.
6. Time is the 4th dimension.
7. In the Meta Model, scale is the 5th dimension.

--Astro

______________________________________________________________


Astro,

I would answer that 5th dimension postulate of Toms Meta Model with this?

If you and he accepts a 5th dimension, according to my introverted thinking, the 5th is a repeat of the 1st, since 4=0, 5 must be 1, 6 must be the 2nd and 7th must be the 3rd again, so when you bring up a 5th dimension called scale, I would put the 5th, 6th and 7th together to be a higher world of three more dimensions plus the 8th which is the 4th, again.

In other words, these 3 dimension repeat at higher frequency on the spiral of life, always evolving, since the theory only recognizes a basic 4 and no more.

To North,

Your statement is a little easier to handle.
See the above statement to Astro.....

And I am the Author of Impossible Correspondence and I do have a Forum in the Password Area.

Meta
rgrace@rgrace.org

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 years 4 months ago #10131 by Meta
Replied by Meta on topic Reply from Robert Grace
Why can you not readily grasp the simpliest concepts of space?

Meta
rgrace@rgrace.org

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.287 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum