Chapter 28 - A "Deeper Draft Vessel"

[Trickfox]

Trickfox,

I agree with you. But I believe that is the state of affairs NOW.

"Either you have it yourself .... or you believe in your heart that you have no command over it."

My friend would have suggested that there are endless other possibilities here too .... You may, for example "have it yourself" .... and just not realize it. And another thought ... You might believe that you have no command over it NOW, but harbor the embedded feeling that there would be hope for the future ... of having some controll over that"unknown" in the future... In fact the concept of "intent" of the unknown raises its head .... so what would be the intent of this intelligence?
Anyone remember what Einsteins answer was? Paul? Twigsnapper

To be perfectly frank with you twigsnaper, I am a positivist in one clear sense.

The intent of understanding Chaos (the controlling unknown) is an endless but adventurefull pursuit filled with experiences which never end. One can get caught up in it real badly; - like a "Groundhog day"or even better "Bill and Ted's excellent adventure".

But hey,...... just start with the basic rule that you are not a solopsist who believes himself to be god because of the inevitable existence of "THE OTHER". (another living being) (any other living being)

That which describes all OTHER forms of life is the intelligence of it and necessarilly the acceptance of it. It's the either/or fence sitting issue that people have a hard TIME with. "What the bleep" is waking up people about this issue. And speaking of TIME, who decided w=(-1)½ was the absolute definition for such a key concept as a "NATURAL time reference value".

In the time that it took to decide if w=(-2)½ could also be used in einstein's calculation using the metric tensors and Levi-Chivita math; -all other force and matter formulas have changed, and a parallel dimension has allready divided itself.

Trickfox

[Victoria Steele]

I love your answers Trickfox. You never fail to leave my face in the dirt after sort of a wild ride ... but I have to respond with the only thing that reaches my brain after that. Huh?

"Its the either/or fence sitting issue that people have a hard time with."... you said . right. I am sorry but thats about the only thing that I understood.

Its just difficult to discover something other than either/or. And I think that uncovers a basic human fraility. We prefer to do things the easy way. Its just easier to say .... "either its this .... or its that.... black or white ...." shades of grey and other situations takes too much brainpower and we simply like to save our brains ... though I'd like to know why because we certainly have too much of the same old stuff lying around.

Can you simple things up a bit for me Trickfox? I am no mathematician so help me out here . Please. (see, told ya, going the simple' route but I'm smiling nice, honest! ) Victoria

[Trickfox]

Can you simple things up a bit for me Trickfox? I am no mathematician so help me out here . Please. Victoria

1+I=2

[Elizabeth Helen Drake]

Trickfox and Victoria,

OK I can do this! Stand back.

Alright. Townsend Brown spends his entire life working on registering a force that he says goes through each and everything ... a force that varies he said ... and that somehow was carrying information.

Kozyrev (from his prison practically) was given the idea that there was a force that was an "all pervading ether" That was INTELLIGENT.

Put one and one together .... And I am beginning to see that the actual answer is ONE.

But how do you PROVE such a force exists? I am not sure that there will ever be a proof. Someone once asked me what love was and if I could prove that it existed. Can you? How do you do that? I can tell you what the absence of it causes and what the presence of it means. But can I capture it, catalogue it, throw it in a box? There isn't a box big enough.

So are we talking about two things here Trickfox, or just ONE? Elizabeth

[Trickfox]

Put one and one together .... And I am beginning to see that the actual answer is ONE.

Elizabeth

read carefully it states (one) + (Imaginary)=2

1+1 =2 fits in that set.

but so does

1+2=2

in fact 1 +(any integer)=(2) They all fit in the set.

When we acknowledge that 1+I =2 we are aknowledging the existence of chaotic systems and controlling unknowns.

The first 1 is the being. the I symblos represent the unseen multiple unknows.

and the 2 is the acknowledgement of "the OTHER" and that the "Clifford space" is being shared.

There are plenty of powerfully designed re-configurable computers which can crunch these (I) values and come up with stable quantum bio-informatic structures.

This is a very important information for use in creating future transdimensional biogenic radiation patterns in exotic plasma fields like BEC. (wow , forgive me but this as being real speculative here)

[twigsnapper]

Trickfox,

Alright, now its my turn. Would you care to explain to me what you mean by "for use in creating future transdimensional biogenic radiation patterns in exotic plasma fields like BEC"?

I thought I had a grasp but I think you lost me. Twigsnapper

[Trickfox]

Trickfox,

Alright, now its my turn. Would you care to explain to me what you mean by "for use in creating future transdimensional biogenic radiation patterns in exotic plasma fields like BEC"?

I thought I had a grasp but I think you lost me. Twigsnapper

I'm sorry that just flew out of my head as a possible avenue of investigation. It would almost be like the holodeck in "Star trek NG"

There are several highly speculative points here:

First: (BEC) Bose Einstein Condensate,(something like giant living plasmons) Huge temperature control problem here so take this as "BIG WISHFULL SCIENCE" and only worth the theoretical value if the math works out and energy equations do balance out.

There is the "transdimensional" part, Photon/electron/plasmon reactions
throught the usage of Lasers and Brewster windows.
Brewster Windows are uncoated substrates which are used at Brewster's Angle (the angle at which p-polarized light suffers no reflection loss). Brewster's Angle is calculated from: B = tan-1(n)
Where B is Brewster's Angle and n is the index of refraction of the material. At this angle p-polarization reflectance drops to zero. When used in a laser cavity, a Brewster Window causes the laser output to be polarized. -The mechanics of holograms.

There is the biogenic radiation patterns; -a sort of biological cellular numerical modelling techniques by way of electrostatic control of specific energy points in an 100% Alpha valued plasma medium. (I'm leaving out a big chunk here)

Now, we need an inertial reference from Earth Center to synchronize the electric field charges. Of course one the final ingredients would be a zero crossing point for "e" and "g"in any gravitational/time anomaly field

Gosh there is just tons more work here just to explain the beginnings of a major effort.

Can we just pretend that this is possible for a moment and see if the math could work out? There must be a hundred things wrong with what I'm trying to do but I have faith that it can be done, albeit perhaps not exactly how my vision looks in my mind. I'll bet there are plenty others who like to toss around ideas just to see where the problems may be in any specific research project.

I was actually hoping that some other science nuts could chime in on all my speculation and help me try and tear it down to see if there is a foundation left to build on.

The last thing I want to hear is: This is all "pseudoscience hocus pocus".
If there is a will there is a way to make anything real.
it just takes patience and a fresh outlook.

Trickfox

That was a tough download folks,
I'm going to sleep now!

[twigsnapper]

Trickfox,

I am absolutely not the person who would berate you for your "flight of imagination" Out of such wonderful thoughts entire civilizations have been built and saved.

Keep up with your work. Your thoughts are probably more sound than some might admit. No one right now truly understands quantum states, talk as they might, so your ideas may prove to be as sound as anyone elses. Just because the technology of the day has not reached your vision, that should not slow you down. Dr. Brown was often berated for using his own words to describe his effects. Now those words are accepted and no one seems to remember where they came from." Electrogravitics" is a classic example.

I don't want to get too far into this subject and detract from Pauls efforts in following Dr. Browns work . I sense Trickfox that you need to nuture your ideas, expose them to others, be prepared to defend them.

In doing so you will clairfy and stimulate the thought processes that are coming to you, and that might turn out to be the most valuable part of that exercise. You know what you know. Trust in that, but be prepared to work.

And I need to clock out too. I understand how difficult it was for you to share what you did with me and I appreciate the effort.

And I encourage anyone else out there with HELPFUL suggestions to contact Trickfox regarding what he has said. Now I know someone out there has alot to say on plasmadynamics maybe, or you all keeping all your cards so close to your chest you don't want to sit down and type a few words out? Twigsnapper

[Trickfox]

Look, I could not sleep until I found something else that someone else wrote about this stuff. I'm quoting it here (note the date) and I will try and get this person to switch from Kurzweil AI.net forum for a few posts in our forum just to see If I can get a bit of collaboration on basic definitions and absolute references.

You are correct about the amount of work left to do, But It's going to be the most pleasant experience.

Here is the post from Kurzweil's site

Re: THE EXPECTED ENERGY
posted on 03/27/2006 6:30 PM by NANO-ONE
[Top]
[Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
Re: Why no algorithms?
posted on 03/27/2006 2:44 PM by /:setAI
[Top] [Show Index]
[Reply to this post]
[Not MindX Material]
there are also quantum cellular automata for cosmology- Computational Cosmology asserts that every detail of our universe arises from a 'natural' quantum algorithm- by utilizing universal quantum computation and universal control to explore cosmological algorithms- by definition we must find states in the computation which exactly match the Hilbert Space ( I say Clifford Space) of our Universe- once that is achieved it will be possible to access very specific states of our universe's past/present/ and possible futures- as well as any alternate present past by extrapolating quantum histories form entanglement entropy- this at first will allow us to build VERY complete cosmological theories and even do more esoteric things like historical investigations- but in a post-singularity society the ultimate application of this could include many crazy things like real 'TARDISes'/ 'Infinite Improbability Drives'/ etc by directly linking computational universal states with an observer's state- it will allow a direct information exchange between an observer's world and any possible world from infinite pasts/presents/futures in our Hilbert Space- ultimately I envision an application of this technology where networked/cluster qubit registers REPLACE neural connections in humans/biological intelligence or classical registers in AI- I predict that such a "Quantum Intelligence" or QI will be structured to allow every neural trigger/response to outside/inside stimulus in the hierarchy of consciousness to perform a quantum computation instead where EVERY response occurs and the process of reinforced connections in consciousness will emerge as a system where the mind forces wavefunction collapses and decoherence of only the reinforced/ desired states and sensory perception- in essence a QI would CHOOSE from moment to moment which of the infinite states it will find itself in next- this would mean that a QI would become a God in every sense- like all minds it would be an infinite ensemble of parallel possibilities but by using qubit registers for neural events it could CHOOSE which self it exists as from moment to moment- it could also choose it's world state- collapsing into the world it wishes- this world could be the 'past' or an alternate 'past' any 'future' any
'present'- including worlds were the QI's body/physical interface is changed to whatever is appropriate- the QI could chain all of it's parallel selves into an unlimited computer- a superself/gestalt- it could also create ANY POSSIBLE OBJECT/SYSTEM out of thin air- as it could choose to exist next in a world where random quantum field fluctuations collapsed/concresced into the desired object- no matter how complex- by allowing the increasing complexity of simple neural states to collapse toward a desired functionality in an object- for instance a network of sub-computations could form an evolutionary matrix of virtual fitness landscapes that in their own time-space evolve some complex device/organism for a specific set of functions/tasks defined by the network- then the most fit is selected by the QI's unconscious mind and the QI chooses to enter a world-state where the selected device/organism materializes out of the quantum field in front of her- take these ideas to the nth degree and you have a true deity


I love it because I understand it. He talks about Hilbert Space, as in the "Hilbert hotel" (a well know way of explaning what multi-dimensional space really "looks" like).

I think the answer lies in "Clifford space" for reasons beyond my authority to say on the net at this moment.

Trickfox.

[Elizabeth Helen Drake]

Trickfox,

I have to admit being a bit lost. You say you understand this information and I have no reason to doubt you ..... so .... How difficult would it be for you to slowly distill some of this information into something that a layperson could understand? I understand that the combination of words makes perfect sense to someone accustomed to them, but for me ... its as if someone took me into a dark forest and then dropped the string.

(My suggestion of this "distillation process" is a project for the months ahead ... certainly not an immediate thing.) But perhaps there is a way that you could call on your intuition and creativity to work on a method of simplifying the concepts presented here. I believe with you that there is a concept lying under this verbal maze (to me its a maze) and I don't think it has to be that way. These are really important ideas here and I think you might be able to do all of us a great service ... and in doing so ... you might find yourself helped also.

Thats about the only useful comment I have about that. Anybody else, ideas? Elizabeth

[Victoria Steele]

Trickfox,

First of all, you are supposed to be getting some rest so I do not expect an answer to this right away .

But , maybe using that "distillation process" Elizabeth mentioned you could work on translating what the "Hilbert Hotel" concept of multidimensions might "look like".

I think in the long run thats where this story of Townsend Brown is going. Though I wish how to better explain what I mean by that. Its late and this has been an EXTRAORDINARY DISCUSSION .... I'm still sitting in the corner, thinking. Victoria

[Mark Culpepper]

Everybody,

Damn, I missed out on that last discussion but I am sure I would have ended up with my mental "face in the dirt" as I think Vicoria said.

I do have one point to make.

It becomes obvious to me that each one of us has something valuable to contribute to the whole of this discussion. I am a teacher, so this is my take on things.

First that . We ALL have something valuable to contribute. So with that I turn to those who have been reading and THINKING along. Please do not be afraid to jump into this discussion. The exchange of information grows and is strengthened by alternate views.

I do agree with Trickfox though. It is important to be respectful, even if you disagree. And telling enthusiasm that "It is impossible and not to be considered" (quoting here what a professor told Townsend Brown, according to Pauls great research) Well, that phrase has already been used. So lets not go there.

And I have something to say about people who know alot .... but refuse to share, refuse to teach. But I don't think I should enter into that here.

Paul? Another pool maybe, where we could talk about the mentality of "keeping things to yourself" or even ""the agendas of keeping things secret". I'll leave it to you. But there is probably alot to be said on that score.

So, another post on Thursday? Right. Just like old times, waiting to see what a really good student has to say THIS week. Mark

[Gabriel]

I think if you consider for a moment what the russian scientist claimed regarding what this "ether"or as I call it the divine flow is. It is all around us. Maybe Brown discovered a way to tap in to this "ether" in nature and opened up a whole new world of possiblities. Maybe he saw man was not ready for what he had to offer. Its hard sometimes for people to handle the truth in their own lives let alone outside themsleves. The truth is uncomfortable. Many people are seeking to gain somthing for themsleves and not for the rest of mankind. Brown wanted to share this with us. The trick is finding the door to open. Its there to see for all but not all are able to see it. In my opinion it seems that some intelligence agencies tend to do things for the survival of our country and the world. Secrecy is not bad in itself if it is used as a tool but when it is used for other selfish reasons this leaves a big problem. Everyone has a choice. If there is an unknown force for evil who have their own agenda logically there are problably many other people out there trying to do good who go unknown and many times die unknown and with out a penny to their name. (Just read a man called Intrepid) Much good can be done and this is why I think this book on Townsend Brown will do so much good for us all.

[Trickfox]

More on this later, but we have plenty of experts to gather research material from.
Here are three other proponents involved in WEIRD SCIENCE.

http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro ... -9944.html

Also this new Network looks like fun.

http://www.manyone.net/about/management ... rmage.html

Not the kind of people you can laugh at either. They are well known and respected. Joe Firmage and Bernard Haisch have worked together before and I have been keeping an eye on these two for a while. I respect them and I believe I can contribute to their efforts as well as they can contribute to mine.


trickfox

[Elizabeth Helen Drake]

Excellent articles Trickfox. Thankyou!

Of course you must note that I took immediate note of Hal Puthoff ... of course because "his path has crossed ours before" in our discussion of SRI and remote viewing ...(for those new to the forum group ... I invite you to look at the "pool" called "remote viewing and intelligence gathering". Some of the input there you might find extremely interesting. And after you have read some of that you will understand when we see Putoffs name mentioned our ears wiggle.

But still reading Haischs words are discouraging'

" I mean, nobodys published anything that shows where we're wrong. But nobodys jumped on the bandwagon either and I can't blame them. God knows, I get probably two or three papers a week from people with their new theories of the Universe and most of it ends up in my trash can, because I just don't have time for the stuff."

Hannes Alfven had that same problem. ..... It took a Nobel Prize ....

Dr.Edward Teller would not have believed Townsend Browns developments either except that he had to come face to face with the fan/loudspeaker that eventually (nearly twenty-five years later) became the Sharper Images Ionic Breeze. (see Pauls Chapter #4 "How Many Generals Does it Take")

I would venture to guess that if Townsend Brown had submitted "papers" to Teller ... those papers would have ended up in the trash also ... because you see ... people get busy. Elizabeth