|
REPLY TO THREAD
|
|
Subject
|
July 11, 2010 and TimeWave Zero
|
|
User Name
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Font color:
Font:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Original Message
|
Using a slightly different number set, Sheliak has determined that today marks the beginning of a period of extreme novelty. Hooray!!! If this is true, we will begin to see new and exciting changes in our consciousness and world events as we move ever closer to zero point.
As time folds upon itself in smaller and smaller cycles, the illusion of time speeding up becomes greater and greater.
:timewave7_11-10:
From:
[link to www.fractal-timewave.com]
Clearly this is quite different from the 2010 timewave obtained with either the Kelley number set or the Watkins number set, so the Sheliak number set cannot be called simply a "correction". It is quite different, and no reason has ever been given for why it is so different from the timewave originally revealed to Terence McKenna, except perhaps that the Sheliak construction is completely misconceived.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted above, the Watkins number set is the Kelley number set without the "half-twist". Some have inferred from the name given to the Watkins number set that Matthew Watkins discovered the half-twist. This is not so. Peter Meyer discovered this in 1994. Later, when naming the four number sets, he gave the name "Watkins" to the Kelley number set without the half-twist, since he felt it would be immodest to name it after himself, and Matthew Watkins had made a contribution to Timewave Zero theory by condensing the construction (from the I Ching) of the numbers in the Kelley set to a single formula. Ths formula (stated in the programming language MAPLE) is given in his article Autopsy for a Mathematical Hallucination?. In that article Matthew Watkins quotes the footnote in the user manual that Peter Meyer wrote in 1994 for an earlier version of the Timewave Zero software:
This is the mysterious "half twist". The reason for this is not well understood at present and is a question which awaits further research.
Watkins concludes that, because no reason could be given (by Terence McKenna or by anyone else) for the existence of the half-twist in the original construction, "the 'timewave' cannot be taken to be what McKenna claims it is." But since he does not say exactly what McKenna claims it is, we are left not knowing quite what to make of this conclusion.
From:
[link to www.buddhatrance.com]
Although the timewave isn’t physically a spiral, events along the timeline match up when the thread is laid out in a spiral fashion. With the outside of the spiral representing the past, time progressing twists inwards until it eventually reaches the centre and stops. Draw a line from the centre out to any point on the edge and events along that line will have intimate connections even though thousands of years may separate them. As you get closer to the centre, events appear closer together, indeed they may seem to overlap. Just before the end of the spiral, the last few moments will hold the significance of all previous moments.
[link to www.youtube.com]
Terence McKenna – “We are on the brink of making the quantum leap to the conquest of another dimension by obliterating our fixity in time. And then we will migrate into the future. Each into our own future. And then human history is looked back on as a nightmare awakened from, a brutal but necessary interval to being happily kissed goodbye.”
|
|
Pictures (click to insert)
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | | | Next Page >> |
|
