Hyper Dimensional Design

[Dutch]

Except when asked to review it you say there's too much information that you haven't bothered to organise in any meaningful way.

That's a very poor excuse; you have a computer and an internet connection, you therefore have access to free software that will allow you to do almost anything with your data.

Too much data, not important enough or not enough time all illustrate the generally haphazard and incoherent approach you take.

We talk about understanding of what is goining on, identifying patterns, anticipations and expectations on future keydates, ongoing developping of these theories, monitoring reality, posting it realtime, crossposting it for communications and that all is taking place in between my normal daily activities. I ám looking ahead, try to understand history and have to keep an eye on reality. There's a limit to what 1 man can cope with. I could write a book on several specific issues only of this HDDesign, if I would have the time. Its not an excuse, this 'research'needs to proceed on a daily basis, that's the first priority

 

[Dutch]

Paulhoff,

your comments really are selfexplanatory

 

[Dutch]

• The presentation is horrible. Formatted at 80 characters/line, it's over 500 lines of text. But paragraphs are not correctly delineated, nor are the sections that originate as quotes from other posts properly separated from sections that are original to the post itself. These make for very difficult reading and parsing of your argument. Your poor presentation is the major reason most people here just skim over these walls of text.

That's the consequence of posting 'realtime' , its inherent to this HDDesign 'research'

• The post contains several factual errors, such as the date on which it was decided to use the nuclear bomb against Japan

says who? Its not an error

, and your comment that people on flight 522 froze to death

it makes no sense to argue about this, flight 522 crash is a fact. The F-16 pilots didn't see any signs of life in the cockpit after a while, the plane flew for hours on autopilot before it crashed, that's the real issue here. The pilots were death in the plane

• A critical point in your argument is that "Tunguska happened at THE moment in order to mark the Phi point between Tunguska and Deep Impact. This phipoint marks the moment that it was decided to uses nuclear arms on Japan." But that is factually incorrect, because the decision was taken prior to August 2, 1945.

again you are showing that you can't read, I have said here repeatedly that the decission was taken on July 20, 1945. That's the Phi point as posted repestedly.

The mission orders on August 2, 1945 were at Phi pont between Tunguska and the August 6, 2005 'Hirhoshima crash' as posted several times in this thread

What's the problem with you?

• [*]
  [*]The issuing of the military orders is pro forma; that is, it is is a minor and expected part of the sequence of events between the important dates: the decision to use the bomb and the actual use of it.
  [*]

pro forma?

HDDesign descrides the decission, the mission order and the detonation of Hirhoshima-Nagasaki as outlines in previous posts

 

[Paul]

in your limited and rigid perspective of reality your right

No, reality is, as it's name suggests, the state or quality of being real and something that constitutes a real or actual thing, as distinguished from something that is merely apparent.

By your own standards, using special pleading, what you do has nothing to do with reality.

 

[AWPrime]

in your limited and rigid perspective of reality your right

You know what is great about good science? It produces useful systematic methods that filter out delusions. Such as apophenia, confirmation bias, etc.

There is no system in HDD, only what you feel is considered. In the end its an useless delusion. Also I think you don't want to cured, as HDD strokes your ego.

That's the consequence of posting 'realtime' , its inherent to this HDDesign 'research'

Like speaking in tongues?

 

[Paul]

We talk about understanding of what is goining on, identifying patterns, anticipations and expectations on future keydates, ongoing developping of these theories, monitoring reality, posting it realtime, crossposting it for communications

And then failing to keep any useful records of this supposedly important data, a generous person might see that as merely incompetent.

I ám looking ahead, try to understand history and have to keep an eye on reality.

How can you do all that without reliable data to correlate?

There's a limit to what 1 man can cope with.

Then do proper work on a more limited scale.

Its not an excuse, this 'research'needs to proceed on a daily basis, that's the first priority

It is an excuse; you try to excuse your abysmal lack of data with I'm too busy and then proceed to spread the net wider and wider.

 

[Paul]

Paulhoff,

your comments really are selfexplanatory

No you do



Honestly, I thought you were supposed to be an adult.

 

[Paul]

That's the consequence of posting 'realtime' , its inherent to this HDDesign 'research' says who? Its not an error

If it's deliberate, that is even worse; posting incomprehensible word-salad where editorial is indistinguishable from uncredited quotation is simply bad communication.

it makes no sense to argue about this, flight 522 crash is a fact.

I agree that Helios Airways Flight 522 crashed approximately 25 miles from Athens on 14^th August 2005.

The F-16 pilots didn't see any signs of life in the cockpit after a while, the plane flew for hours on autopilot before it crashed,

Let's try some facts shall we:

522 was located by Greek F-16s at 1120 local
at 1125 the fighters saw the apparently unconscious co-pilot and the deployed cabin oxygen
at 1141 an individual, later identified as flight attendant and trainee pilot Andreas Prodromou, entered the cabin and attempted to regain control
at 1150 and 1200 the left and right engines stopped working
and at 1205 the aircraft crashed

​

that's the real issue here

Since when is 21 minutes at least two hours?

The pilots were death in the plane again you are showing that you can't read,

I've explained this before but apparently you can't read; everyone on the 'plane was alive when it crashed, what part of that are you having trouble with?

I have said here repeatedly that the decission was taken on July 20, 1945. That's the Phi point as posted repestedly.

What evidence do you have for this assertion?

What's the problem with you? pro forma?

If you don't understand something, look it up, don't whine like a petulant child. Or you could read the whole sentence which contains an explanation.

 

[Blue Mountain]

That's the consequence of posting 'realtime' , its inherent to this HDDesign 'research'

Then you are not doing research; it's more like you are playing a game. (And I'd like to point out in important games, such as chess championships, records are kept.)

says who? Its not an error

It has been pointed out to you that Truman was not aware of the results of the bomb test until July 21. A bit of research on my part has failed to turn up the exact date on which Truman decided that he would use the bomb against Japan. You state that date is July 20. What source do you have to back up that assertion?

it makes no sense to argue about this, flight 522 crash is a fact. The F-16 pilots didn't see any signs of life in the cockpit after a while, the plane flew for hours on autopilot before it crashed, that's the real issue here. The pilots were death in the plane

I'm not sure if you mean "the pilots were dead already" or if you mean "the pilots were as good as dead because there was no way they could have survived." If the former, that is probably not true; they were likely unconscious due to a lack of oxygen. If the latter, yes, things probably would not have ended differently once the engines failed.

again you are showing that you can't read, I have said here repeatedly that the decission was taken on July 20, 1945. That's the Phi point as posted repestedly.

The mission orders on August 2, 1945 were at Phi pont between Tunguska and the August 6, 2005 'Hirhoshima crash' as posted several times in this thread

What's the problem with you?

Several things:

• I'm not doing this as a full-time job. Your walls-of-text posts would take several hours, if not days, to track down all the facts you have presented, correlate them with timelines that you have failed to document adequately, and list one-by-one the logical fallacies that you have committed in coming to the conclusions you do. So I do it piecemeal and without the attention to detail a good analysis would deserve, because I simply don't want to invest too much time in a useless endeavour.
• Your lack of coherent documentation means it's really difficult to keep track of everything. Making a slip-up like I did (a two week difference in a phi date on one timeline) is to be expected because not even you have that documented adequately. And for sure I'm not going to do that work for you.
• I'm getting to an age where it's more difficult for me to keep track of a bunch of material at once. If I really have to, I'll set up a file and try to put all relevant information in there. Even then I can make mistakes, so I accept the assistance of others in keeping me on track.

HDDesign descrides the decission, the mission order and the detonation of Hirhoshima-Nagasaki as outlines in previous posts

Our contention is HDD doesn't decide anything at all. No more than do all the ant colonies on the planet, a supernova in galaxy NGC 1566, or the machinations of the gods in Valhalla.

HDD isn't going anywhere. In this forum we're really hoping you'll come to that conclusion yourself, and save you the waste of many good years of your life chasing a chimera.

 

[Blue Mountain]

Since when is our scientific knowledge providing answers to the meaning or intelligent correlations in our reality?

Science is all about understanding our reality! Intelligent correlations are made every day by scientists working on physics, astronomy, biology, evolution, chemistry, and a whole host of theoretical and applied fields.

However, one of the conclusions that science has come to is that there is no intelligence behind our universe. Random events are just that: random. Read up on chaos theory.

 

[Blue Mountain]

We talk about understanding of what is goining on, identifying patterns, anticipations and expectations on future keydates, ongoing developping of these theories, monitoring reality, posting it realtime, crossposting it for communications and that all is taking place in between my normal daily activities. I am looking ahead, try to understand history and have to keep an eye on reality. There's a limit to what 1 man can cope with. I could write a book on several specific issues only of this HDDesign, if I would have the time. Its not an excuse, this 'research' needs to proceed on a daily basis, that's the first priority

Charles Darwin wrote and published 26 books between 1835 and 1881, all the while fathering ten children (eight survived infancy, and sadly a daughter died at 10) and holding down a job.

I guess it depends on what your priorities are. If you want to demonstrate that HDD is a viable system, you're doing it all wrong. Your work would never be accepted for publication in printed format given the mess it's in right now.

If you want to start a religion or philosophical society, you should try to boil down HDD to a core set of principles that people can understand and follow. The mass of material you have now, coupled with its poor presentation, must surely drive away all but the most determined would-be acolyte.

 

[Dutch]

reality is, as it's name suggests, the state or quality of being real and something that constitutes a real or actual thing, as distinguished from something that is merely apparent.

Still based on limited and rigid 3D ( or 4 if you like) perspective.

 

[Paul]

Still based on limited and rigid 3D ( or 4 if you like) perspective.

What type of higher dimensional spaces are you using?

 

[Dutch]

Random events are just that: random.

That's what they look like, doesn't mean that it is true

 

[Dutch]

What type of higher dimensional spaces are you using?

none,

I only look at the indirect indications in our familiar 3(4) D reality.

 

[Paul]

none,

I only look at the indirect indications in our familiar 3(4) D reality.

Have you ever heard the phrase eating your cake and having it too?

Your system is called hyper dimensional design and allegedly uses hyper dimensional platonic solids but now you claim to not use any higher dimensional space.

You try and criticise us for being limited to only 3 spacial dimensions and then claim your work is entirely based on 3 spacial dimensions.


Do you even see why these positions are untenable?

 

[Paul]

That's what they look like, doesn't mean that it is true

It also doesn't mean that they aren't random, something you have failed to demonstrate.

 

[Paulhoff]

You are not doing science Dutch. You have already determined that there are patterns, but you haven’t shown any patterns, you have only shown what you think are patterns. You have already determined what you think establishes those nonexistent patterns by posting anything that fits your dates which again is not doing science.

You are dogmatic; you are not open to new input that shows that you are not right, so once again you’re not doing science. You don’t show why you HDD may not be right, so once again you’re not doing science. When challenge you do not show how you come to you conclusions, you only say we don’t understand, you don’t seem to understand that it is your job, not ours, to make it understandable, so once again you fail at doing science.

Paul

 

[Dutch]

Have you ever heard the phrase eating your cake and having it too?

Your system is called hyper dimensional design and allegedly uses hyper dimensional platonic solids but now you claim to not use any higher dimensional space.

You try and criticise us for being limited to only 3 spacial dimensions and then claim your work is entirely based on 3 spacial dimensions.


Do you even see why these positions are untenable?

Sigh...

I don't use them in a sense that I don't calculate in 4+ dimensions, I only look at the geometrical correlations in our familiar dimensions.

Our reality is part of a multi dimensional reality. This point of view should be clear enough because I've emphasized that numerous times

I don't know what untenable means, so I can't answer it

 

[Paulhoff]

Sigh...

I don't use them in a sense that I don't calculate in 4+ dimensions, I only look at the geometrical correlations in our familiar dimensions.

Our reality is part of a multi dimensional reality. This point of view should be clear enough because I've emphasized that numerous times

I don't know what untenable means, so I can't answer it

SO............ stop telling us about it.

Paul