Hyper Dimensional Design

[Dutch]

Still no luck showing you're doing anything involving more than one dimension or even that you understand what constitutes a dimension Dutch?


Continuing to simply spam this thread from you own forum while not actually engaging in a discussion of the points raised will accomplish nothing Dutch, other than to simply get this thread closed.

This is about indications in our reality about the existence or even connection with other diemsnsions.

The scientific description of dimensions is irrelevant in relation to this 'research', this is about the indications of hidden underlying Intelligent design only. I have given that answer already so who's spamming?

You want this thread closed right?

You should debunk it unmistakenly in order to achieve that. You prove it wrong and it stops.

 

[Dutch]

Dutch,

Don't you think calendar dates are arbitrary? I mean, we made them up. They don't mean anything. We could have split the year up into 4 long months, or no months at all, just 365 days. (ignoring the leap year correction)

Then 9/11 wouldn't mean 911 to you anymore. It would mean the 254th day, if you started counting at jan.1, 2001. (which is also completely arbitrary)

Do you understand this?

Those numbers are meaningless further due to the fact that we use the decimal system (again, completely arbitrary for all intents and purposes).

If we cycled numbers at 8 instead of 10, or if we used binary, none of the dates that you think mean something, would mean anything to you anymore.

Do you understand what I mean?

I do understand what you mean, but I don't think you understand what I mean.

I talk about orbital positions, that could correspond to any random calendar if you like. 911 days still connects 2 dots of the Hyper Dimensional Tetrahedron as explained in this thread, no matter which calender you use.

When the Golden Mean is applied for instance, it has nothing to do with numbers or calenders. Its about the orbital positions, that's something else than a calendar

 

[Dutch]

After the above post with all the 'Deep Impact' related issues, I decided to give this possible terrorist attack attempt on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit a look, which has happened on December 25, 2009.
I didn't had the time yet because I'm still working and I had other things on my mind when I could do the 'HDDesign research'.
First thought was Richard Reid, who failed to destroy a Boeing 767 on American Airlines Flight 63, a flight from Paris, Charles De Gaulle International Airport to Miami International Airport, USA, by igniting explosives hidden in his shoes. This has happened on December 22, 2001
I decided to calculate the Phi point in between and guess what?
The synchronicity is 'in the face':
Phi point is January 12, 2005
on that day spaceship Deep Impact/ Epoxi was launched from Earth into space!!!!!!!
Which in turn should be connected to 9/11, at least that's what I thought
From Deep Impact launch date January 12, 2005 through 9/11 at Phipoint gives August 18, 1999: the Grand Cross planetary alignment!! ( see previous post about the Pope)

 

[kevinquinnyo]

After the above post with all the 'Deep Impact' related issues, I decided to give this possible terrorist attack attempt on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit a look, which has happened on December 25, 2009.
I didn't had the time yet because I'm still working and I had other things on my mind when I could do the 'HDDesign research'.
First thought was Richard Reid, who failed to destroy a Boeing 767 on American Airlines Flight 63, a flight from Paris, Charles De Gaulle International Airport to Miami International Airport, USA, by igniting explosives hidden in his shoes. This has happened on December 22, 2001
I decided to calculate the Phi point in between and guess what?
The synchronicity is 'in the face':
Phi point is January 12, 2005
on that day spaceship Deep Impact/ Epoxi was launched from Earth into space!!!!!!!
Which in turn should be connected to 9/11, at least that's what I thought
From Deep Impact launch date January 12, 2005 through 9/11 at Phipoint gives August 18, 1999: the Grand Cross planetary alignment!! ( see previous post about the Pope)

Did you factor in the sweater that I got from my mom on December 25th, 2009?

Because that's another thing that happened on that day. Isn't that as equally arbitrary as the failed terrorist attack?

 

[Dutch]

Was it a bomb sweater? and did you plan to blow up a plane?

How could I know?

 

[Sideroxylon]

Was it a bomb sweater? and did you plan to blow up a plane?

How could I know?

Why is it that only things that you are aware of (or deem significant) can have an effect in the grand scheme of things?

 

[The Man]

This is about indications in our reality about the existence or even connection with other diemsnsions.

How do you define “dimensions” or even other “other dimensions”

The scientific description of dimensions is irrelevant in relation to this 'research', this is about the indications of hidden underlying Intelligent design only.

Since this is the math and science sub forum the “The scientific description of dimensions” is quite relevant. Perhaps this thread would be better placed in religion and philosophy since you consider the actual mathematical and scientific definition of dimension to be irrelevant to your assertions?

I have given that answer already so who's spamming?

You, every time you post some wall of text about your “correlations” instead of actually addressing the issues raised.

You want this thread closed right?

No I simply want you to show that you actually work in more than one dimension and even understand what constitutes a dimension or stop claiming that you do.

You should debunk it unmistakenly in order to achieve that.

Already done, your interpretations of your “correlations” and “communications” hold no more validity than any other, it is simply your opinion and involves only one dimensional math.

You prove it wrong and it stops.

So are you going to stop claiming it as hyper-dimensional or show you actually work with more than one dimension?

 

[kevinquinnyo]

Why is it that only things that you are aware of (or deem significant) can have an effect in the grand scheme of things?

Dutch,

Do you see what this poster has asked?

Address this.

What makes an attempted assassination, or bomb threat, or terrorist attack, more or less arbitrary, in a truly objective sense, than me losing my car keys, or my cat peeing on the carpet?

Hint: Nothing. It's all subjective.

Every thing about your theory is sadly, flawed from the very beginning, because you are arbitrarily assigning a higher value to events you deem significant.

Consider this. Any time anything happens, ( a terrorist attack, or my cat peeing on the carpet) matter is simply being moved around and arranged. The molecules of the terrorist's body are moving, as well as the molecules in the airplane that he's hijacking say. Likewise, the molecules in the urine from my cat's body are being moved from my cat, to the carpet.

In each case, we see that molecules are simply being moved from one place to another place.

What makes one of these events, where matter is shifted from one place to another, at any given time, more objectively important or more objectively significant than another?

So, even were there some mechanism at play that we don't yet understand, that was affecting events on earth, why would the events have specific subjective significance to you, me, or the entire planet even? Why would the mechanism that is affecting, or causing certain events, be discriminating toward things that human beings deem to be subjectively significant or "newsworthy" events?

You need to consider the fact that assigning subjective value to some events over others, makes your entire argument rest on a false premise.

 

[sirfiroth]

Welcome aboard, Dutch.

1) What are your credentials? Please provide earned degrees, date of completion, majors and minors, and universities attended. Please do NOT just say "I'm a professional/scientist/professor/whatever" and expect us to fill in the blanks, as this is a Red Flag of Woo.

2) What have you published? Please provide publication names, dates of publication, titles of articles, names of collaborators, and the names of members on your peer-group review boards. Please do NOT just give vague references to classified governmental, military, commercial, or private documents, as this is a Red Flag of Woo.

3) Why are you persuing this line of research? Is it in line with any of your previous research? How do your credentials (see #1) support this line of inquiry? Please do not just say "I am curious," as this is a Red Flag of Woo.

4) How are you persuing this line of inquiry? Please describe the laboratory you are using, and include the types of equipment you use in your research. If your research is currently theoretical only, then please site the reference materials, as well. Please do not merely give a vague and general description, as this is a Red Flag of Woo.

5) Finally, who is financing your research? Please list the names of the financial resource agencies. If your research is out of your own pocket, then please say so and explain why. Please do not just say "Donors who wish to remain anonymous," as this is a Red Flag of Woo.

Raise one or more of the aforementioned "Red Flags" and you may as well admit to being a mere dreamer involved in pseudo-science, rather than a professional involved in real scientific research. Good Luck.

-Fnord of Dyscordia-

I wonder how Albert Einstein would have responded to your demands in 1905? A pseudo-scientist for sure by your standards.

 

[Paul]

I wonder how Albert Einstein would have responded to your demands in 1905? A pseudo-scientist for sure by your standards.

I'm feeling unnaturally generous today, so I'll assume that you are making idle speculation.

If that is not the case, what makes you take anything posted by Dutch seriously?

 

[sirfiroth]

I'm feeling unnaturally generous today, so I'll assume that you are making idle speculation.

If that is not the case, what makes you take anything posted by Dutch seriously?

I do not know Dutch, so I cannot yet comment on anything he posts.

In the early 1900's, were it not for the Astronomers interest, Einstein's Theory of Relativity would have died because of so called Scientist with attitude like your buddy. You might want to read up on the above if you are unfamiliar with the story.

I post to protest the unscientific practice of attempted censorship because the information does not fit within the currently accepted theories of the censor. I can comment on the apparent close minded attitude of some self appointed agent who feels it their duty to protect others from Woo-Woo pseudo-science!

Thanks for the warning!

Regards,

 

[Blue Mountain]

I do not know Dutch, so I cannot yet comment on anything he posts.

In the early 1900's, were it not for the Astronomers interest, Einstein's Theory of Relativity would have died because of so called Scientist with attitude like your buddy.

Wrong. By the end of 1905 Einstein had published four papers that basically re-wrote the textbooks on physics. He backed up his claims with excellent mathematics, which is why his ideas were so quickly accepted.

You might want to read up on the above if you are unfamiliar with the story.

What's "above", that we should read?

I post to protest the unscientific practice of attempted censorship because the information does not fit within the currently accepted theories of the censor. I can comment on the apparent close minded attitude of some self appointed agent who feels it their duty to protect others from Woo-Woo pseudo-science!

What censorship? Do you see any on this thread?

 

[The Man]

I do not know Dutch, so I cannot yet comment on anything he posts.

In the early 1900's, were it not for the Astronomers interest, Einstein's Theory of Relativity would have died because of so called Scientist with attitude like your buddy. You might want to read up on the above if you are unfamiliar with the story.

I am familiar with the story, are you? Some of that interest, as any scientific interest should be, is to prove a theory wrong and Einstein had initially gotten the calculation of the curvature of light by gravity wrong (by about half the correct amount). If not for other circumstances preventing the first ecliptic photographic attempts to confirm or disprove the bending of light by gravity, as calculated by general relativity. Einstein and general relativity might have been considered wrong and faded into anonymity. Until the correct divergence and formulization was found. That is the best thing about science it censors itself by what the evidence supports.

I post to protest the unscientific practice of attempted censorship because the information does not fit within the currently accepted theories of the censor. I can comment on the apparent close minded attitude of some self appointed agent who feels it their duty to protect others from Woo-Woo pseudo-science!

Thanks for the warning!

Regards,

By all means post and protest what you want, even “comment on the apparent close minded attitude of some self appointed agent who feels it their duty to protect others from Woo-Woo pseudo-science!”, but at least try to open your mind in the process.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2009/07/22/gravity-and-light/

We have a habit in science of simplifying the historical progression. Einstein’s initial 1911 prediction was off by a factor of two (giving hope to us mere mortals). Over the next few years a number of expeditions were mounted to test his prediction, but all of them failed (e.g., bad weather, World War I). This gave Einstein time to discover his error, and in 1915 he fixed his result, arriving at the equation above. The definitive (though subsequently controversial) measurement was performed by Sir Arthur Eddington in 1919. He observed the positions of stars during a total eclipse, claimed to confirm Einstein’s prediction, and vaulted Einstein to fame. In one of the best newspaper headlines ever, the New York Times page 17 announced: “LIGHTS ALL ASKEW IN THE HEAVENS; Men of Science More or Less Agog Over Results of Eclipse Observations.

 

[Paul]

Thank you gentlemen, today I am not feeling too generous so the knowledgeable but polite responses are appreciated, as usual.

 

[kevinquinnyo]

I do not know Dutch, so I cannot yet comment on anything he posts.

In the early 1900's, were it not for the Astronomers interest, Einstein's Theory of Relativity would have died because of so called Scientist with attitude like your buddy. You might want to read up on the above if you are unfamiliar with the story.

I post to protest the unscientific practice of attempted censorship because the information does not fit within the currently accepted theories of the censor. I can comment on the apparent close minded attitude of some self appointed agent who feels it their duty to protect others from Woo-Woo pseudo-science!

Thanks for the warning!

Regards,

Here's how this usually works. When someone posts a new thread with an outrageous, extraordinary, or otherwise contrarian claim to mainstream and accepted scientific findings, the responses go as follows:

Half the people make a joke about it, at the poster's expense. (presumably because they're just completely burned out by hearing the same pseudoscience and manipulation over and over, repackaged as something "new")

The other half (quite possibly as burned out as the former), very politely ask for evidence of the claim.

The amount of patience and persistence from the latter is sometimes absolutely astounding to me.

So, it's not like you think. Every opportunity for Dutch to provide some sort of evidence of his claim has been given to him, but he fails to provide an answer to the questions asked of him.

In Dutch's defense, he's been very polite, it seems, which is why there has been more of the patient and persistent requests for evidence in this forum, than the sarcastic proclamations of 'woo.'

 

[dafydd]

After the above post with all the 'Deep Impact' related issues, I decided to give this possible terrorist attack attempt on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit a look, which has happened on December 25, 2009.
I didn't had the time yet because I'm still working and I had other things on my mind when I could do the 'HDDesign research'.
First thought was Richard Reid, who failed to destroy a Boeing 767 on American Airlines Flight 63, a flight from Paris, Charles De Gaulle International Airport to Miami International Airport, USA, by igniting explosives hidden in his shoes. This has happened on December 22, 2001
I decided to calculate the Phi point in between and guess what?
The synchronicity is 'in the face':
Phi point is January 12, 2005
on that day spaceship Deep Impact/ Epoxi was launched from Earth into space!!!!!!!
Which in turn should be connected to 9/11, at least that's what I thought
From Deep Impact launch date January 12, 2005 through 9/11 at Phipoint gives August 18, 1999: the Grand Cross planetary alignment!! ( see previous post about the Pope)

Another old news bulletin.

 

[Dutch]

January 10 + a few days could be interesting. keep an eye on the timeline, updates will follow here later
timeline:
http://hddesign.forumup.nl/about409-hddesign.html

I will respond to Kev tomorrow

 

[Dutch]

Why is it that only things that you are aware of (or deem significant) can have an effect in the grand scheme of things?

I don't think its about having an effect, its about identifying the underlying themes. The elements of HDdesign can be applied by anyone, at least if they are 'assisted' by their own intuition and by synchronicities the way I am experiencing it while working with this material.

 

[Dutch]

Dutch,

Do you see what this poster has asked?

Address this.

What makes an attempted assassination, or bomb threat, or terrorist attack, more or less arbitrary, in a truly objective sense, than me losing my car keys, or my cat peeing on the carpet?

Hint: Nothing. It's all subjective.

Every thing about your theory is sadly, flawed from the very beginning, because you are arbitrarily assigning a higher value to events you deem significant.

Consider this. Any time anything happens, ( a terrorist attack, or my cat peeing on the carpet) matter is simply being moved around and arranged. The molecules of the terrorist's body are moving, as well as the molecules in the airplane that he's hijacking say. Likewise, the molecules in the urine from my cat's body are being moved from my cat, to the carpet.

In each case, we see that molecules are simply being moved from one place to another place.

What makes one of these events, where matter is shifted from one place to another, at any given time, more objectively important or more objectively significant than another?

So, even were there some mechanism at play that we don't yet understand, that was affecting events on earth, why would the events have specific subjective significance to you, me, or the entire planet even? Why would the mechanism that is affecting, or causing certain events, be discriminating toward things that human beings deem to be subjectively significant or "newsworthy" events?

You need to consider the fact that assigning subjective value to some events over others, makes your entire argument rest on a false premise.

because of the 'coincidences' that show up all the time

it should make you think. Most people are dismissing it

 

[Dutch]

I want to share this little annecdote:

When I was single, I used to live above a pub in the centre of the city of Utrecht. On Saturdays I liked to visit the pub to read the papers, have a drink and to chat with friends. I was sitting at the bar when a man stood next to me. He wanted to pay for his coffee. I had never seen the man before but suddenly I said out of the blue to him: ‘ even Einstein thought he was wrong in the beginning and he added the cosmological constant to his theories because he thought that would fit better. Later he admitted he was wrong doing that and his original theory was valid.’

The man didn’t say a word to me, he just stood there and looked at me. After a while he said to me:
‘ Why did you say that to me?’ I answered that I didn’t knew and I asked him why he was so amazed.
It appeared that he had spent 30 years of his life already on research regarding the Grand Unification Theory. His research had led him way off the accepted mainstream science and part of his theories was dealing with consciousness and how we humans are interacting at invisible levels. The fact that I said to him what I said was for him an important confirmation of his theories.

The man was not from Utrecht, he came from the South of the country and had never visited the city before.
A coincidence occurred that perplexed him again. A friend of mine was also a regular visitor of the pub. He had no job and lived from what the streets had to offer to him. He played the guitar and called himself the city troubadour. With me being an accountant back then and he being some sort of a wanderer, we were like 2 opposites, but good friends nevertheless. It appeared that the man had met the troubadour a few hours earlier ( they didn’t knew each other either). They had met in a shop, the man wanted to buy cigars and the troubadour was there too. He advised the man which cigars to buy and they had a nice conversation. When the troubadour entered the pub and came to me to greet me, the man really was amazed that we knew each other. He saw it as another confirmation, it couldn’t just be a coincidence.

The man was with his sister and he went to her to tell her what had happened. Later the sister came to me and said: ‘ that was awesome to say to him, nobody is listening to him and scientists think he’s a fool but he’s working very hard on his research. He always said that once they will know he’s right and today you made his day, it’s very important to him to get confirmation.’

The man and his sister went home but he returned a few weeks later to see me. We talked the whole day about his view on our universe and the related scientific theories and how his theories would fit better.
It was very interesting and really influenced my view on the matter. He wrote a book which has been published in Dutch.. In the book he mentions our coincidental meeting as a supportive example of his theories.