vortex plasma dust-life

[drew hempel]

http://www.physorg.com/news105869123.html

Ah the "rainbow snake" at last -- quantum diffraction gradients in action.

[rzero]

That puts a dent in both natural selection and creationism

[Thirtyseven]

Drew, if you don't already have it, here's the article they're referring to in the story:

http://www.brainsturbator.com/pdf/InorganicLivingMatter.pdf

[drew hempel]

Hey 37 I noticed your research on Andrija Puharich -- nice! Nick Begich's new book "Controlling the Human Mind" states that Begich found a Puharich paper that was never published and never presented to the public before -- one of Puharich's final papers.

It doesn't seem too revelatory -- just more on Russia's Woodpecker mind control experiments and Puharich's attempt to duplicate results with ELF waves. I guess he worked with Robert O. Becker on this.

Begich's book is great except he comes out in favor of these neurobiofeedback technologies and thinks technology is neutral. I have to disagree.

The closest to this inorganic dust creating complex structures that I can think of, besides the sound experiments by Hans Jenny -- is

the "left-hand materials" research that some physicists states violates the conservation of energy principle and also violates the theory of relativity.

But then black holes violate the theory of relativity as well -- any secret faster-than-light quantum signalling does not use time causality even though it supposedly doesn't create useful information.

Charles Seife's new book on information theory is good on this. Black holes are ironically considered the most efficient "super computers" yet black holes also self-organize the universe through the supermassive black holes ejecting streams of cosmic dust....

The particle accelerators are now making sub-atomic black holes but since they claim that cosmic dust is more intense yet does not create any chain reaction of black holes then there's no threat....

But all these experiments to verify Nature are not the same as observations of Nature which of course already rely on the technology created in lab conditions.

The experiment is the contained conditions to verify theories created by previous experiments.

Science is a self-tautological scam.

Meanwhile real Nature -- ecology -- is being wiped out....

[drew hempel]

Just to prove my point -- there's my arch-nemesis (j/k) Michael Haye's new article on Alien DNA wherein he emphasizes Dawkin's pondering the left-handed molecules and symmetry of crystals....

http://www.michaelhayes.net/articles7.html

I'm really glad Hayes actually quotes Dawkins because I was citing the same source and raising the same point back on http://gnn.tv but I never typed out the quote nor saw anyone else do it.

Hayes is doing so great research! But Hayes' hasn't figured out that Dawkin's is relying on the nanotech revolution to "finish" evolution.

Hayes even cites QUEZACOATL or however you spell it....

Daniel anyone? haha

[bopes]

Drew this (http://www.realitysandwich.com/music_quantum_lattice#new) reminded me of your stuff.

From the link:

A theory called "Lattice Quantum Chromodynamics" is on the rise in high-energy physics, proposing an invisible, all-pervasive structure beneath all matter. Sharing amazing similarities with the mathematics of harmonics, Lattice QCD reveals the natural world – atoms, plants, animals and planetary orbits – as a kind of crystallized music, in perfect harmony.

you probably have explained all this already, somewhere.

[drew hempel]

That's a new one for me. I googled it for background corroboration and could find nothing so I don't know where he got those numbers from. QCD uses "bootstrap statistics" and it's no longer considered a primary theory, but as that link details -- the vertices are black holes which are governed by the Golden Ratio -- as per FREEMASONRY.

The problem with the link is that they are WRONG ABOUT PYTHAGORAS -- he wasn't "surprised" about the "comma" and I'm not sure where they got 27 intervals of 9/8 as the ratio for the comma. It's actually 12 fifths in overtones or 7 octaves -- the difference between those two creates the comma. It could be the same number but regardless the "comma" is from Archytas - not Pythagoras.

Pythagoras only used Yin and Yang or the Tetrad of 2:3 (the Fifth) and 3:4 the Fourth, as I detail in http://mothershiplanding.blogspot.com -- the Secret of the Greek Miracle chapter.

That's why Daniel has run to that fake spiritual-techno Freemason site! haha

[pepe3leches]

Hey drew --just finished your thesis, your blog and now the mothership landing. Well, first thing i must say is that I don't understand even the half of them, but the other half really blew my mind. Thanks!

Another text that blew my mind recently was "the starlarvae hypothesis" -- at http://www.starlarvae.org -- im which i found this quote interesting. Yes, is an argument again for the sake of technology. yes. So only wandering whay do you think about this:

A more fulfilling prospect was evisioned early in the twentieth century: free-floating cities built in orbit around the Earth. But not until the 1970s was this idea translated into a plan. In 1969 Princeton physicist Gerard O’Neill convened a freshman seminar to address the inspired question, as he later phrased it, "Is the surface of a planet really the right place for an expanding technological civilization?" The class researched the relevant facts and projections and calculated the answer, a resounding, "No." The research revealed crippling expenses associated with any form of big geology. Planets per se turn out to be uneconomical real estate for long-term development. O’Neill estimated, for example, that one-fourth of the energy consumed in the United States for transportation goes to fighting gravity and atmospheric drag.

In 1977 O’Neill published "The High Frontier" an exposition that laid out the technical and humanistic dimensions of space colonization. O’Neill went on to become chief spokesman for the merits of expanding humankind’s ecological range to include the orbital space around Earth. He imagined and developed detailed plans for autonomous encapsulated ecosystems, each a mile or so in diameter and housing communities of from one thousand to up to fifty thousand inhabitants. The space colonization movement that coalesced under O’Neill’s tutelage attracted unlikely cohorts, including conservative senator Barry Goldwater and counterculture impresario Timothy Leary. Despite the cheering of a handful of high-profile advocates, however, within a decade O'Neill’s vision came and went as a popular cause. Nonetheless, the central premise of "The High Frontier" remains cogent. It is the premise that the surface of a planet is not the most suitable facility to host a sprawling industrial civilization, let alone several of them. So far, few people of influence in the political arena or in the scientific community have been willing to pick up the torch and advance O'Neill's vision. But few endeavors could be more critical or timely. The bridge to space will have to be crossed, and better sooner, for the sake of everyone, than later.

[drew hempel]

Yeah Pepe -- the idea for space cities is dependent on G.E. bacteria. I talked to Professor Philip Regal, biologist at U of Minnesota, who co-taught a course with futurist Art Harkin on space colonies.

Regal's latest research is how this G.E. bacteria is inherently dangerous to ecology of Earth.

[pepe3leches]

Ok drew, ok, i know, it's just because i love technology, but, yeah, Prometheus is being controlled by the Rockefeller--freemason people, ok. Have you heard about Brasilia being the new empire's capital?

It's only that i try to apply the technology thing to the non-dual vision, and to me is very difficult to reject it completely. But the reasons you give are very well-developed.

Your stuff is great.

[drew hempel]

If you google "drew hempel" and "g. nimtz" or just "nimtz" you should find that I've been touting his science stuff online for several years. G. Nimtz is featured in the latest New Scientist as definitely breaking the "speed of light" limit set by Einstein.

He uses group wave transmission of information and Raymond Chiao is doing similar research that has been called "alchemy" -- Chiao relies on LONGITUDINAL waves to create a transduction of energy.

Sound familiar?

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20000610/fob7.asp

http://drewhempel.gnn.tv/blogs/8061/Beyond_the_Ehrenfest_Paradox_Superliminal_Shamanis m

[drew hempel]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19526173.500

http://mts.gnn.tv/blogs/8970/A_cheaper_Matrix

http://schneibster.gnn.tv/blogs/12832/Einstein_s_Folly_and_Aspect_s_Triumph

See the secret to G. Nimtz' trick is relying on PHASE-SHIFT for asymmetrical resonance -- the same goes for Chiao.

http://scienceblogs.com/loom/2006/09/28/let_evolution_be_your_guide.php

[drew hempel]

Let me clarify what "is" and "isn't" the Stargate Conspiracy. The Stargate Conspiracy projects irrational numbers back onto ancient Egypt as part of the Freemasonic ideology driving mathematics. Western mathematics is a product of ritual sacrifice and the technology of western mathematics is controlled structurally by the logarithmic-based phonetic gemetria or one-to-one correspondence set theories.

"Quantum chaos" is the cutting-edge of Freemasonic science as an attempt to create A.I. and self-organizing matter -- aka "complexity" studies. Quantum chaos works in conjunction with the Stargate Conspiracy (i.e. the Meru Foundation for example, with quantum chaos scientists focused on ancient gematria magic).

The study of divergence and resonance is at the heart of quantum chaos. For example the book called "Entering Complexity" by Prigogine and Nicolis focuses on the difference between rational and irrational numbers for studying complexity.

Rational numbers create "dangerous resonance" because the system diverges and such self-organizing rational-number systems are "sufficiently abundant."

"Thus, any, finite volume of phase space, however small, will contain an infinite number or representative points in which the resonance condition is satisfied." (p. 117)

This statement is prefaced by the following:

"The theory of numbers tells us that the irrationals constitute the vast majority of real numbers since, for one thing, they constitute a nondenumerable set (contrary to the rationals) and they carry the whole 'length' or 'measure' of any segment of the real line. Thus in most of the points of the phase sapce the action variables will be such that the frequencies realized by the system will be irrationally related and hence incommensurate. The difficulty of resonance will simply not arise, and as a rule the motion will take place on the nonresonanct tori generated by such sets of irrationally related frequencies. But things are not so simple."

This blogbook is about the "not so simple" consequences of rational, nonlinear, asymmetric resonance. The true alchemy which the Stargate Conspiracy hopes to hide.

[bopes]

Drew, even though I confess that at any given time I rarely understand more than say 20% of your posts (if that), elsewhere I keep bumping into words and phrases that seem to permeate your verbiage. "One-to-one correspondence", for example. So, in the spirit of, say, one's utterly clueless, more or less dim-witted relative who never understands what exactly it is one "does" for a living, no matter how often one explains it, I say to you, is this (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa029&articleID=DFCF15E5-E7F2-99DF-3EAAFAF2776CEFC5&pageNumber=1&catID=9) what you mean by one-to-one correspondence? From the link:

Take, for instance, the so-called natural numbers: 1, 2, 3 and so on. These numbers are unbounded, and so the collection, or set, of all the natural numbers is infinite in size. But just how infinite is it? Cantor used an elegant argument to show that the naturals, although infinitely numerous, are actually less numerous than another common family of numbers, the "reals." (This set comprises all numbers that can be represented as a decimal, even if that decimal representation is infinite in length. Hence, 27 is a real number, as is π, or 3.14159….)

In fact, Cantor showed, there are more real numbers packed in between zero and one than there are numbers in the entire range of naturals. He did this by contradiction, logically: He assumes that these infinite sets are the same size, then follows a series of logical steps to find a flaw that undermines that assumption. He reasons that the naturals and this zero-to-one subset of the reals having equally many members implies that the two sets can be put into a one-to-one correspondence. That is, the two sets can be paired so that every element in each set has one—and only one—"partner" in the other set.

. . .

Cantor thus assumes that the naturals and the reals from zero to one have been put into such a correspondence. Every natural number n thus has a real partner rn. The reals can then be listed in order of their corresponding naturals: r1, r2, r3, and so on.

Then Cantor's wily side begins to show. He creates a real number, called p, by the following rule: make the digit n places after the decimal point in p something other than the digit in that same decimal place in rn. A simple binary method would be: choose 0 when the digit in question is 1; otherwise, choose 1.

. . .

Continuing down the list, this mathematical method (called "diagonalization") generates a real number p between zero and one that, by its construction, differs from every real number on the list in at least one decimal place. Ergo, it cannot be on the list.

In other words, p is a real number without a natural number partner—an apple without an orange. Thus, the one-to-one correspondence between the reals and the naturals fails, as there are simply too many reals—they are "uncountably" numerous—making real infinity somehow larger than natural infinity.


Probably not. I would be slightly disappointed, but not surprised, to find that there is no meaningful correspondence, one-to-one or otherwise, between two thickets of text, each of which happen to contain the phrase "one-to-one correspondence" (But why do I keep noticing these things?)

[drew hempel]

Bopes you're right. There's more examples of course. Cantor proved that real numbers are a greater infinity as a series but he did not prove that real numbers are a closed set.

No one has improved on Cantor and then Godel proved that math is inherently dependent on creating a new level of "one-to-one correspondence" to prove the previous axiom.

If you read my latest comments on http://mothershiplanding.blogspot.com I typed an excerpt about how the rational numbers, in terms of set theory, actually create

DANGEROUS RESONANCE as per quantum chaos.

Physics now relies on antimatter to extend conservation of energy, all based on "one-to-one correspondence" or SYMMETRY of letter and number.

But the antimatter is created through asymmetry (there's more matter than antimatter in the universe).

The origin of asymmetry is "spontaneous symmetry breaking" from quantum chaos (which is inherently unpredictable and totally dependent on computer iterations to get a trajectory).

So symmetry is the Matrix -- it's machine logic from the get go but now the scientists are blatantly stating this is the case.

Science states that "Nature" is asymmetric -- yet the technology to prove this is destroying Nature! haha.

left-hand carbon-based molecules (ecology) are being replaced with right-hand silica-based a.i. technology.

[bopes]

Thanks for clearing that up.

[drew hempel]

See Bopes -- here's confirmation:

A really fascinating essay on quantum consciousness is Henry M. Stapp's recent article, readable at his website:

http://www-physics.lbl.gov/~stapp/stappfiles.html

Quantum Mechanical Theories of Consciousness (Entry in Blackwell A Companion to Consciousness, eds. Max Velmans and Susan Schneider, Blackwell Jan 2007)

Stapp focuses on philosophy of mathematics -- the difference between Number and Order (exactly the same emphasize I give in my blogbook).

The key issue again is that Heisenberg Uncertainty violates the equipartition principle -- the symmetry of all science, based on the commutative principle. But the matrix of Heisenberg is converted back to symmetry -- the logarithmic math of the Poisson Bracket.

There is a deeper, more radical problem with quantum consciousness -- namely that emotions arise from asymmetry itself and there never can be a proper conversion back to symmetry via science. So Stapp hones in on the real problem but doesn't provide the solution. Nevertheless it's a fascinating read.