Ether model

Maybe Alex Jones could post his weird-assed shit here, too?

Michael, you need help.
 
Alex Jones is a conspiracy theorist who was recently banned from almost every "social media" platform on the same day, in a coordinated strike.

The upshot is that Michael Anteski is as batshit crazy as Alex Jones, except that Michael doesn't sell vitamins in between rants.
 
Michael Anteski said:
The historical Doc is the Declaration of Independence. ... how to arrange the text with the correct number of letters to each line, in "blocks" of lines, and intuit correct "key" word(s) in order to set up a cipher text properly, [t]hen you would be ready to derive decoded messages, which appear, many of them in tic-tac-toe fashion ... my belief is that the encoded messages were purposely done this way, and used special "ether" computers. - I have yet to derive any messages that were internally inconsistent (inconsistent with the rest of the messages) even after deriving a few thousand message-lines.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I can't see this as any more than a variation on the Bible Code, or the Da Vinci Code, both of which hinge on observer bias.

In any given corpus of size 'N' characters, it is only a matter of time, with the freedoms you specify that some number 'n' of characters, divided into 'b' blocks, starts to exhibit 'c' coherence. If said degrees of freedom are applied experimentally to 'N' it is only a matter of iterations before 'c'' begins to approach c-sub-b, or rather your desired "correct 'key' word(s)" which you can then assemble (& I'm betting it isn't serially) into your 'decoded messages."

You demonstrate your predilection to this sort of bias with your statement ["intuit correct "key" word(s)"] which is nothing but fanciful speculation. It is then no mystery that you arrive at ["I have yet to derive any messages that were internally inconsistent"] a perceived infallibility to your process. So tell us, have you applied the exact same process to another corpus, like a Dr. Seuss book? Do you get the same (or any) messages? The answer is probably no, violating the replicability requirement for the Scientific Method.
 
Last edited:
Dr_Toad said:
Alex Jones is a conspiracy theorist who was recently banned from almost every "social media" platform on the same day, in a coordinated strike.

The upshot is that Michael Anteski is as batshit crazy as Alex Jones, except that Michael doesn't sell vitamins in between rants.
Click to expand...
This made me laugh, (now that I have been introduced to Alex Jones, by Beer w/Straw).
 
You're welcome. He is very laughable, but he's eerily right about 10% of the time. Better than a broken clock, I guess, 'cause you can't really laugh at a broken clock..
 
RADII said:
So tell us, have you applied the exact same process to another corpus, like a Dr. Seuss book?
Click to expand...

I applied the process to the

INSTRUCTION Manual for a Three Day Start Up of CERN

Applying some Bolien logic and guesses I could produce

LOCK HER UP

OR

IMPEACH TRUMP

Can anybody help decipher where I might have gone wrong?

:)
 
In quantum indeterminacy, we could have both. Does that mean Pence becomes President? I think I'd rather have Trey Gowdy than either of the other alternatives, but he's smart enough to not want the job.

But let's get back to pseudophysics while were in this thread.
 
RADII said:
I'm sorry, I can't see this as any more than a variation on the Bible Code, or the Da Vinci Code, both of which hinge on observer bias.

In any given corpus of size 'N' characters, it is only a matter of time, with the freedoms you specify that some number 'n' of characters, divided into 'b' blocks, starts to exhibit 'c' coherence. If said degrees of freedom are applied experimentally to 'N' it is only a matter of iterations before 'c'' begins to approach c-sub-b, or rather your desired "correct 'key' word(s)" which you can then assemble (& I'm betting it isn't serially) into your 'decoded messages."

You demonstrate your predilection to this sort of bias with your statement ["intuit correct "key" word(s)"] which is nothing but fanciful speculation. It is then no mystery that you arrive at ["I have yet to derive any messages that were internally inconsistent"] a perceived infallibility to your process. So tell us, have you applied the exact same process to another corpus, like a Dr. Seuss book? Do you get the same (or any) messages? The answer is probably no, violating the replicability requirement for the Scientific Method.
Click to expand...



I did try the process elsewhere, e.g., the Constitution, but found it doesn't work. To assess this process of decipherment, I really suggest getting the Dunfield book, which goes into the details at length.
 
Why don't you collect a random set of threads from here and try "the process" on them?

That would be most enlightening. And maybe more fun than your psychotic bullshit has been before.
 
Michael Anteski said:
I did try the process elsewhere, e.g., the Constitution, but found it doesn't work. To assess this process of decipherment, I really suggest getting the Dunfield book, which goes into the details at length.
Click to expand...

But that's not my responsibility, nor anyone else's but yours.
 
Dr_Toad said:
Why don't you collect a random set of threads from here and try "the process" on them?

That would be most enlightening. And maybe more fun than your psychotic bullshit has been before.
Click to expand...

Dr_Toad,

Your post reminds me of the passengers who kept playing cards after the Titanic hit the iceberg (the"Titanic" being standard quantum theory as a model of the cosmos, and the "iceberg" being the ether theory.)
 
Michael Anteski said:
Dr_Toad,

Your post reminds me of the passengers who kept playing cards after the Titanic hit the iceberg (the"Titanic" being standard quantum theory as a model of the cosmos, and the "iceberg" being the ether theory.)
Click to expand...

In the version you just presented the Titanic is still afloat and the iceberg is being used as ice cubes in the drinks at the Noble Award's party

:)
 
er... not reading entire thread.

Aren't neutron stars because the gravity is too weak to meld the neutrons together after a star has spent all its fuel and collapsed?
 
Standard quantum theory does not hold up as a basic cosmic framework. Current concepts like "dark matter" and "dark energy" are reflections of a basically "dark" theoretic framework.. There should be drastic change at a basic level, a need currently being ignored.

There was no mystery "Big Bang" that started the Universe. -Instead, there first was a universal oscillation, which produced a universal ether.
 
Michael Anteski said:
which produced a universal ether.
Click to expand...

Questions
  • How many ether detectors are there? You don't have to be precise say between 1-100, 100-1,000, over a 1,000
  • Any links to photos of these ether detectors?
  • Links to published papers
Thanks

:)
 
Uh... Does this ether theory explain black holes. It'd be when gravity is strong enough to say: "I'm not going to be a neutron star".
 
Michael 345 said:
Questions
  • How many ether detectors are there? You don't have to be precise say between 1-100, 100-1,000, over a 1,000
  • Any links to photos of these ether detectors?
  • Links to published papers
Thanks

:)
Click to expand...
I never mentioned ether "detectors." -I do havc a protocol for generating a selectively-etheric force-field, from my codebreaking work. It would be expensive, however, and I haven't found a financial sponsor to be able to get it done. -The way you could (potentially) detect the ether by thus producing an ether energy field would be to measure the change in density of materials inside the test system. If an etheric effect is present, the materials should become less dense (relatively less quantized and relatively more etheric), which can also be called a levitation effect.
 
Beer w/Straw said:
Uh... Does this ether theory explain black holes. It'd be when gravity is strong enough to say: "I'm not going to be a neutron star".
Click to expand...

Beer w/ Straw, If you go back in this Thread to my Introductory Post,you will see that I go into the question of how black holes were produced, according to my ether model. -The idea is that etheric forces were projected, creationally, during the formation of our type of world (our present atomic/quantum world), projections that were done from a previous world which was only partially quantum-structured, and was otherwise mostly etheric. That world had been found to be magnetically unstable, so a decision was made to create a more-stable world (our present universe). However, a major potential stumbling block was that as soon as quantum and atomic particles are created, there are simultaneously created an equal amount of antiparticles, so the ether energy was used to "power" the antiparticles toward black holes, out of the way of the new quantum/atomic universe.
 
Michael Anteski said:
I never mentioned ether "detectors." -I do havc a protocol for generating a selectively-etheric force-field, from my codebreaking work. It would be expensive, however, and I haven't found a financial sponsor to be able to get it done. -The way you could (potentially) detect the ether by thus producing an ether energy field would be to measure the change in density of materials inside the test system. If an etheric effect is present, the materials should become less dense (relatively less quantized and relatively more etheric), which can also be called a levitation effect.
Click to expand...

I never mentioned ether "detectors." True enough

Sooooo I guess ether detectors are like god detectors - non existent BUT those who believe god and / or ether (even god plus ether) just know either or both do exist

I haven't found a financial sponsor - Solution Don't call it ether. Call it Essences of the Lord, Brand it, Make it a religion and flog it on TV. Build a laboratory looking piece of equipment which starts with a funnel, about halfway along has a condensation coil, ends with the Essence of Lord dripping into collection flask

$50 the lot

When the church money rolls in you can build your selectively-etheric force-field equipment

Need publicity I can help there

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top