Flipboard

View my Flipboard Magazine. View my Flipboard Magazine. View my Flipboard Magazine. View my Flipboard Magazine. View my Flipboard Magazine.

Saturday, April 30, 2022

More Lue's Clues Answered - The Bridge Between Mainstream Physics and High-Strangeness

Opening Comments

This post is a wall-of-text for a reason. It covers overlapping topics that are directly relevant and extremely important to the topic. An attempt was made to find a balance between ease of reading and information content. Monolithic posts are preferred over smaller ones so that finding the posts is easier and so that a deep recursion to gather information isn't necessary. As with the other posts, this is meant to be a primer and resource to help you discover some of the physics involved in this area of interest for yourself.

It is highly suggested to review these two previous posts to get caught up to speed on some of the outstanding topics:

The TLDR below should satisfy the curiosity of the casual reader.

POST FORMAT

  • TLDR

  • Updates to the Reference Material Page since 2022-04-08

    • New Videos
    • New Questions
    • New Answered Questions/Clues
    • New Research Section

  • Answered Clues

    • Credentials
    • Answer to question regarding "Relative Size" comments by Lue
    • Answer to question regarding "Space is irrelevant" comment by Lue

  • Other Comments and Observations

    • A follow-up on Dr. Yakir Aharonov's Cheshire Cat
    • Thoughts on Simulation Theory
    • Thoughts on the qualifying word "Exactly"
    • Future Work
    • A Very Unscientific Play on Words

TLDR

  • The "Space is irrelevant, and somewhat time" comment by Lue is a reference to Minkowski Geometry
  • The Minkowski Geometry describes Einstein's Special Relativity much more clearly than other geometries
  • The relative size comments made by Lue are a direct connection to Conformal Theory and/or a re-base of our measurement systems
  • A conformal change maintains angles and relative sizes between objects, we wouldn't notice a change if inside the system
  • Minkowski Geometry and Conformal geometry are very closely linked - THEY DO NOT NECESSARILY MAINTAIN CAUSALITY
  • Both of these points lead directly to the work of and comments made by Sir Rodger Penrose
  • The Cheshire Cat work of Dr. Yakir Aharonov shows that the separation of charge, spin, mass, polarization, etc of particles is possible. This is DIRECTLY relevant to the topic and of EXTREME importance!
  • Simulation Theory is often brought up, the most likely and most powerful simulation theory is rarely covered.
  • The use of the qualifying word "Exactly" is an evasion technique; it has a very specific meaning.
  • Future posts will focus on the Q.M. description of conciousness put forward by Sir Rodger Penrose and Dr. Steward Hameroff
  • A play on words of what it means to be divine.

Github Reference Material Updates

Since 2022-04-08 the following have been added:

A Research Documentation Section - Includes Links to Papers, Wiki Articles, Etc.

13 Videos - Several of Which are VERY important

Date Person Answer/Statement Analysis/Comments Interviewer/Venue Duration Link
2022-04-28 Lue No Transcript Spaced Out Radio 3:48:57 link
2022-04-27 Jim & Lavenda Nada No Transcript TTS Talks 58:33 link
2022-04-23 Lue That UFO Podcast 1:36:48 link
2022-04-21 Lue Nada Post UFO Disclosure 37:40 link
2022-04-21 Jim Nada Whitly Strieber 1:24:31 link
2022-04-16 Lue Nada UFO Man 1:35:59 link
2022-04-14 Penrose Some Lue's Clues Here Jordan Peterson 1:40:38 link
2022-04-13 Lue Nada Fox news 2:20 link
2022-04-08 Lavenda Whitley Strieber 1:07:25 link
2022-03-29 Penrose Good Interview Fundacja Wega 1:03:12 link
2021-03-04 Hameroff Lue's Clues Here & T-Symmetric QM TOE 2:10:26 link
2020-05-12 Penrose & Haneroff Qualcomm Institute 1:52:47 link
2020-03-01 EW & Penrose Many Lue's Clues asnwered here The portal 2:18:01 link
2020-03-31 Penrose Started Answering Lue's Clues Here Lex Friedman 1:27:56 link

New Questions

In one of Lue's recent interviews he stated something along the lines of "We have taken steps/actions to ensure it doesn't get buried again."

  • Does anybody have a reference to that? I can't seem to find it after seeing it.
  • What were those steps? What did he do to ensure this topic does not get buried again?

** IT IS STRONGLY BELIEVED THAT THE BELOW SHOULD BE THE TOP NON-SCIENTIFIC QUESTIONS OF IMPORTANCE! **

Lue had previously made comments about Legacy Programs and Authorities with respect to rogue ops, as well as the illegality of abductions. He has hinted that the technology not only exists, but some of which we may already have. At a minimum he said we understand the technology. With such a powerful technology it is highly doubtful that the government would not use if for their benefit in certain circumstances. The term "This Technology" refers to any non-public or advanced technology of a possibly sensitive nature that utilizes advanced physics that is not understood intimately by most physicists in the respective fields of study in which "this technology" is fabricated to make use of.

  • Under what Legal Authorities would "this technology" be, have been, or will be used in the assistance of capture, detainment, or questioning of American Citizens?
  • Who is the judge and in what court, if any, would the use of "this technology" be, have been, or will be approved to use for the capture, detainment, or questioning of American Citizens?
  • Under what circumstances would use of "this technology" be authorized for in relation to an American Citizen against their will or without their knowledge?
  • What are the limitations and restrictions of "this technology's" usage in relation to American Citizens against their will or without their knowledge?
  • Has "this technology" EVER been used by the U.S. Government, by an agent of the U.S. Government, by an employee of the U.S. Government, or at the request of the U.S. Government in relation to an American Citizen against their will or without their knowledge? If so, what were the circumstances of the instances?

ANSWERED CLUES

Credentials

Sir Roger Penrose * Knighted in 1994 By The Queen of England for his service to science * Awarded the 2020 Nobel Prize in Physics for his work on black hole formation * Developed Twistor Theory * Spin Network Theory * Conformal Cyclic Cosmology

Yakir Aharonov * U.S. National Science Medal Winner in 2009 * Discovered Aharonov-Bohm Effect * Created Weak Measurement Techniques of Q.M. * Created Two-State Vector Formulation of Q.M.

The credentials and depth of understanding that these two individuals have on the structure of reality can not be overstated. They both collaborated with, and were part of a very small group of giants that included: Einstein, Bohr, Feynman, Heisenburg, Bohm, Pauli, Schrödinger, Hawking, ... They have forgotten more about how the universe works than most other physicists will ever learn. If you want an opinion of a theoretical and mathematical physicist these are the two people you would seek out.

Answer to the question regarding "Relative Size" comments by Lue

On at least three separate occasions Lue brought up the subject of relative sizes during interviews: * UFO Garage Interview * Artizan Tony Interview * Ross Talks Interview

In a past post, Reddit user /u/panel_laboratory suggested examining the work of Sir Roger Penrose because his work seemed relevant to the discussion. They specifically suggested watching an excerpt of this video where Sir Roger Penrose is being interviewed by Lex Friedman. At the linked timestamp he states:

"If you don't have mass you don't have clocks. If you don't have clocks, you don't have rulers; you don't have scale. You don't have a measure of the scale of space and time. You do have the structure, what is called the Conformal Structure. You see, it is what the angels and devils have. If you look at the eye of the devil, no matter how close to the boundary it is, it has the same shape; but it has a different size. So you can scale up and you can scale down, but you mustn't change the shape."

Here are examples of the "Escher Circle" drawing with the Angels and Devils that Sir Roger Penrose was referring to. The proper name for what he was talking about are "Tessellations on a Hyperbolic Plane"; Here is a Google Image Search of such prepared for you.

Tessellations are interconnected tiling laid on a plane. Sir Roger Penrose is known for his work pertaining to the mathematics of Penrose Tiling. Here is a nice wiki page showing some examples of Uniform Tiliing of various planes. Notice the Euclidean 666, and Hyperbolic 777 tilings; One can assume that is why the "Angels and Devils" where chosen as representative shapes on the respective planes.

In this video he is speaking with Jordan Peterson:

"The Maxwell Equations have a very interesting property: that they can't tell big from small. There what's called conformally invariant. If you have this electromagnetic system, and you stretch this system to bigger or smaller it doesn't notice the difference. The equations work just as well, and you can squash them here and stretch them here."

He then goes on to talk about Escher Limits, hyperbolic geometry, and the Angels and Devils picture.

Here in an interview with Eric Weinstein he talks about "Cohomology":

"The ambiguity is you don't know how far away it is. It could be bigger and further away or smaller and closer and the picture was consistent. But you get an inconsistency if you go around....."

Later in the same video he goes on to talk about the Riemann sphere. And the stereographic projection flattens out all points on the sphere and that the projection is Conformal; the angles are preserved.

It has to be mentioned that there is an entire branch of theoretical/mathematical physics dedicated to the idea; Conformal Field Theory (CFT). It also must be highlighted that there is a correspondence (A transformation) between CFT and Anti-DeSitter Space that was found to be quite a big deal in 1997 because it found a mechanism to convert between the two different algebras that various groups claimed described reality.

One can ask MANY questions regarding both UAPs, as well as reality in general. Such questions may be:

  • Could a non-uniform conformal field be used for propulsion?
  • Could a non-uniform conformal field explain some of the UAP observables?
  • Are the references to conformal theory a larger part of disclosure as it pertains to reality and our understanding of it?
  • Have we experienced a transition from one size to another?
  • Would we be able to tell if we are in fact bigger or smaller?
  • Hou would we measure such a change?
  • If we, and everything around us, were to shrink by 0.05% overnight, would we notice? (Probably Not)
  • At what rate of change would it take place before we noticed, if any?
  • Is the conformal change constant, or does the rate change?
  • Are the changes local, or do they extend to the entire universe?
  • What fields would a conformal change effect?
  • Can each of the fields conformally change independently, or must it be global across all?
  • Must the changes of each field/dimension/measure maintain a constant proportionality to one another?
  • Are there any effects which would not conform to the change and could we measure them?
  • If the conformal change were to follow Dr. Yakir Aharonov's T-Symmetric formulation, would the conformal change extend backwards in time?
  • If they extend backwards in time, would we then experience the conformal change through our entire lives while simultaneously not experiencing it?
  • If absolute distances were to become larger, but the speed of light remained constant, would this cause a change in our measure of time?
  • Have we detected a change in our measure of time?
  • How would we tell if a change in our measure of time happened if it extended back to the beginning of the universe, or at least until the point that we first started measuring time?

One can see how this gets very complicated very quickly. The questions border hard science, perception and conciousness studies, and the philosophical.

There seems to be an abundance of references to Sir Roger Penrose talking about the various conformal size comparisons. It is assumed that putting us onto the ideas of Sir Roger Penrose was the primary reasons for Lue so blatantly hitting us over the head with at least three such references to his work. Besides directly tying Roger Penrose to the physics of the disclosure process, it is not precisely known how conformal invariance deals with disclosure.

The entire concept seems quite reminiscent of "Horton Hears a Who" and "Honey I Shrunk The Kids". One has to wonder if Dr. Seuss and Rick Morranis were experts in Conformal Field Theory.

The story doesn't end there; more ambiguity and levels of meta are baked into this half-truth-frosted cake of obfuscation.

In this Interview with Jim Semivan, Jim mentions the book "Operation TrojanHorse"). This fact was picked up by Twitter user @tinyklaus which prompted him to make this post had another except from the book that does directly relate to the topic.

"Our world exists in three dimensions: height, width, and breadth. We can move in many directions within these dimension: up, down, sideways, forward, and backward. We measure measure space in relation to our own size, by inches, feet, yards, miles, light years. If we were 25 feet tall and our planet the size of Jupiter (many times larger than Earth), we would have undoubtedly adjusted our measurements of space accordingly. Our inch might equal an Earth foot, our mile might be equal to ten miles."

"Space does not exist except when we make it exist. To us, the distance between atoms in matter is so minute that it can only be calculated with hypothetical measurements. Yet if we lived on an atom and our size was relative to its size, the distance to the next atom would seem awesome and beyond reach. The ant lives in a world of giants where even a blade of grass is a gigantic structure and a tree is a whole universe. If ants had measurements, their inch might be the size of a point of a pin, and their mile would be less than a foot."

"How dare we try to reduce the universe to our own terms? We can't even see or sense a large part of the world around us. Man is not the final, perfect end product of evolution."

"He is the beginning."

Answer to the comment of - "Space is irrelevant, and somewhat time"

In a past post the idea of Lue and Tom hinting at a broader space-time metric, including complexified-time, was explored. In that post it was pointed out that Lue said: "Quantum physics shows that space is, to some degree, is rather irrelevant...". The statement couldn't be unpacked at the time.

In this interview at 57:00 Sir Roger Penrose states:

"The space of Special relativity is really four dimensional and its this kind of geometry in which you can have distances which are zero although the points are sort of a long way away from each other and this represents a light ray. So you have one event and the light from that event reaches another event. When I say event I don't mean just a spacial position, but the time as well; a position is space-time. So you need four coordinates; three space and one time coordinate - so that's what we call an event. So you have an event in space-time and imagine you have a particle moving at the speed of light to another such event. Now the distance between those two in this kind of geometry that Minkowski introduced is zero.... Minkowski realized special relativity is this special kind of, what we call, Minkowskian geometry."

The biggest takeaway from Minkowski Space/Geometry is best described by the linked Wikipedia article: "in Minkowski space-time, all frames of reference will agree on the total distance in space-time between events". It is outside the scope of this post to go into more detail and leaves it up to the reader to explore this topic and other geometries and algebras of utmost interest. Sir Roger Penrose does a great job of describing Minkowski Geometry and its applicability to understanding space-time.

Retrospectively it seems obvious this is what Lue was implying when he made the above comment; it should have immediately screamed "Minkowski Space".

Lue very well could have meant something related to light-speed travel, complexified time, block universes, time and space mixing at the algebraic level, or some other related topic. It also has to be highlighted that in Minkowski space the conformal group does not preserve causality; thus prompting his reference to time not being somewhat relevant? The ubiquity of Minkowski space in this area lends credence to the probability of that being what he was referring to.

Again referencing back to the same Interview with Jim Semivan, Twitter user @tinyklaus made this post. The post has an excerpt from the book.

"Our second conclusion is that the source has total foreknowledge of human events..."

"It may be that all events occur simultaneously when viewed by a greater intelligence..."

As posted before, this is reminicent of the Block Universe view of time. Is this what Lue meant by time somewhat not mattering?

Interestingly enough, as the finishing touches were being penned on this writeup, @tinyklaus wrote a Medium Article with similar lines of reasoning.

In an apparent act of serendipity the Google News science section has in the last few days had various articles on the possibility of time not existing.

OTHER COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS

A follow-up on Dr. Yakir Aharonov's Cheshire Cat

In the last post about the Time-Symmetric Formulation of Q.M. by Dr. Yakir Aharonov, many papers and works of his were mentioned.

This author has not read more than a few of Dr. Yakir Aharonov's papers since that last post. Most of this post's author's time was spent researching the works of Sir Roger Penrose and Stewart Hameroff. Of Dr. Aharonov's works that were reviewed three additional papers stood out like diamonds. It is highly recommended that the papers be read and the deep implications of the papers be understood by the readers.

The names of the papers plays on one of the characters in the book "Alice in Wonderland"; the Cheshire Cat. It is suggested to read "Alice in Wonderland",[Dr. Aharonov also suggest it in one of his talks). "Alice in Wonderland" was written by a mathematician in the 1860's named Charles Dodgson, A.K.A. Lewis Carroll. It was intended to poke fun at a certain algebra and how unrealistic it was; therefore concluding the algebra could never be of any real use and that mathematicians should stay grounded in reality. That algebra was later found to accurately describe many aspects of quantum-mechanical systems as well as 3D rotations (which consequently is used in many video games). That algebra is the Cayley-Dixon algebra of Quarternions.

In "Alice In Wonderland" the Cheshire Cat's body disappears, leaving just a smile. Alice says "I've seen cat with a smile, but I've never seen a smile without a cat." Such an analouge was found to exist in the Quantum-Mechanical world.

A particle has properties such as Spin, Mass, Polarization, Electric Charge, Magnetism, etc. Under classical (Macroscopic) conditions wherever the particle goes, the properties go. Using Dr. Aharonov's weak measurement, and later strong measurement, mechanisms he and his co-authors found that one could separate the properties of the particle from the particle itself. The polarization of a photon was separated from the photon itself. The polarization of the photon traveled down one path of an experiment, while the other components of the photon traveled down another. The same may be able to be extended to Charge and Magnetism, Mass and Spin, and any of the other properties of a particle.

Please contemplate the consequences of this discovery. It is like throwing a baseball toward a bat at home plate, but the mass of the baseball goes to first base.
* What happens when the bat hits the, now massless, baseball?
* What happens if the mass of a million baseballs is attached to a single baseball?

If the mass of a single electron can be separated from the electron itself, then the mass of a million electrons can be separated from a million electrons, hence, the mass of 1042 electrons can be separated from 1042 electrons. The only difference is a matter of efficiency and scale. If there is a simple atomic structure that can be discovered that performs this type of separation it can be manufactured at scale.

The other papers convey the same depth and profoundness of ideas. They including the forward and reverse-time effects, negative properties (Negative Mass, etc) being found and measured in unlikely places, and how the Time-Symmetric formulation of Dr. Aharonov's creation can be used to describe and predict them accurately. It is a how-to on co-locating large amounts of mass, spin, charge, etc in a potential well while separating the other particle properties from the particles themselves.

One can quickly see how these experiments and results directly applicable to various areas of materials recovery and reverse engineering.

Large scale application of this knowledge is NOT science fiction, it is well within the bounds of understanding and practicality within a few decades; if not already. Please understand and don't underestimate the importance of it. Please don't dismiss it just because you don't fully understand the implications; don't be like Charles Dobson.

Thoughts on Simulation Theory

The topic of Simulation Theory seems to arise quite often in this area of research; it is after all an outstanding area of academic research that has had many physics, sociology, psychiatry, and philosophy PhD theses dedicated to it. As stated in previous comments in past posts it is assumed that we do in fact live in a simulation; it is only the nature of the simulation that is up for debate.

It is opined that there are at least five different types of simulations in which we could live:

  • Brain-in-a-box - We are fed a digital representation of reality directly into our brains, ala Matrix
  • Conventional Computer Running Classical Algorithms - All of reality is simulated
  • Conventional Computer Running Quantum-Efficient Algorithms - All of reality is simulated
  • Quantum Computer - All of reality is simulated
  • Base Reality with Temporal Manipulation/Causality Misinterpretation/Retro-causal Actions/Closed Time-like Curves
  • ??? - The unknown

The first four types of simulation possibilities have been researched to death, papers written, PhD's awarded, movies made, and sanities have been lost.

As for the fifth, there is a mountain of media available for consumption on the topic of time travel but none that consider the possibility in an academic sense; rather, only for purposes of entertainment. Surprisingly little academic attention has been given to the possibility of living in a base reality where temporal or causal manipulation could be the processor of the simulation engine.

A base reality with temporal manipulation as a simulation would manifest in very interesting ways. The manner of manifestations would be limited to the type of temporal manipulation available to those both inside and outside of the simulation.

Take for example the possibility of hyper-evolution in the context of a temporal simulation. If one had temporal manipulation capabilities and wished to evolve a certain biological trait or to find a novel solution to a biological problem, the process of evolving that trait would be very straightforward. Place the test subject in a given environment, set the stimulus and initial conditions of the environment, then let it run for a specified amount of time (inducing intermittent stimulus when needed). If the given trait or solution was not found, change the initial conditions of the experiment to have different stimuli; in effect never running the first experiment. Repeat the process until complete.

A more concrete example could be: * Problem - Food Shortages * Possible Solution - Evolution of Food Source Hyper-Growth Rate * Selected Species: Maize (Corn) * Desired Trait: Four meter growth in three months * Environmental Variables: Length of Daylight, Length of Darkness, Frequency of light, Intensity of light, Ambient Pressure, Ambient Temp, Humidity Level * Cross-Breeding Genome Variable: Acidosasa edulis (bamboo) * Enable Gene Base Mutations: True

With this type of experimental setup all combinations of all the variables (Environmental, Target Genome, Source Genome, Gene, and Gene Mutations) could be run concurrently. Just as with quantum computers, all solutions to the problem are tested at 'the same time'. The optimum solution to the problem could be found with ‘just one’ experimental run.

Even this one small example is just the tip of the iceberg. With this type of power what other solutions could be found to problems we have yet to discover? Once temporal manipulation capabilities are developed, if they can (and appear to) be made, all knowledge of the universe from the beginning to the end is available to the possessors of the knowledge. It has from that point been available from the beginning to the end of the universe. Entire species, ecosystems, formation of entire planets, solar systems, galaxies, universes, ...., could all be tested simultaneously. The wielders of such power could even run self-modifying simulations.

Is this what Jim Semivan was conjecturing and why he considers it a good thing?

Finding problems to solve seems more of a problem than solving the problems themselves.

Serious thought and discourse needs to be put into the moral implications of such power and its use. To whom does this knowledge and power get entrusted? To whom has it always been entrusted?

Is this exactly what was suggested in John Keel's book "Operation TrojanHorse". To once again quote the book:

"Our second conclusion is that the source has total foreknowledge of human events..."

"It may be that all events occur simultaneously when viewed by a greater intelligence...""

"How dare we try to reduce the universe to our own terms? We can't even see or sense a large part of the world around us. Man is not the final, perfect end product of evolution."

"He is the beginning."

Thoughts on the qualifying word "Exactly"

The word "Exact" or "Exactly" has a very 'exact' meaning when speaking in scientific terms. It means that there is absolutely zero discrepancy in the description or measurement of an object.

There are very few ways that something can be exact:

  • The object being described is itself
    • Example: My cat Fluffy is exactly like my cat Fluffy.
  • The object is an abstract entity
    • Example: 1 + 1 is exactly 2, or “My thoughts exactly.”
  • The object or property is being defined by the description or measurement
    • Example: A meter is exactly the length of the path traveled by light in a vacuum in 1/299,792,458 of a second
  • The object is real, but of such a fundamental nature that any two are indistinguishable
    • Example: A electron is exactly like any other electron
  • The system of measurement is defined by low precision.
    • Example: The book costs exactly $5.00

The very laws of nature do not permit exact measurement nor absolute knowledge.

Persons talking disclosure may use terms such as "We don't know exactly what they are.", "Exactly how they work is unknown.", or "How the operate isn't exactly known."

As an example, assume an F-35 takes of from Osan Airbase, South Korea, piloted by Lt. Colonel Snuffy at 13:10:27Z on 10OCT2020 from 27R. Pretend you are doing an interview with a person who knows a large amount of information regarding the sortie but does not want to divulge information.

Q: What took off?

A: I don't know exactly what it was that took off. * To know exactly "what took off”, you would have to know every atom's position and state at exactly the time of takeoff.

Q: How does it work?

A: I don't know exactly how it flies or how it is controlled. * Does every interviewee know the details of Bernoulli aerodynamics? * They don't know the intricate details of the fly-by-wire system, engines, etc.

Q: What were some of its flight characteristics.

A: It was going "backwards"; it’s exact flight characteristics are a mystery to me. * Vectored thrust of F-35 aircraft can "fly backwards" for short times under complete control. Is that flying?

Q: When did it take off?

A: We don't know exactly when it took off. * Even down to the second measurement has an infinite amount of missing accuracy.

Q: What was the intention of the pilot?

A: The exact intentions aren't known. * We can't know every intention of every pilot, including Lt. Col Snuffy. We can't read his thoughts.

Q: Where did it take off from?

A: It can't be said for exact certainty where it took off from. * Measurements aren't exact. Saying 27L isn't enough. It would have to be at 32.003929039029030913 meters from the end of the runway to know exactly.

An interviewer should follow up and ask the limits of their knowledge, the accuracy of their knowledge, and the precision of their knowledge. This isn't a matter of being pedantic; it is a very well know evasion technique.

There are undoubtedly very strong and well-justified reasons why information is being obfuscated, but it should be acknowledged and the inexactness of their 'exact' answers should be pinned to the top of /r/technicallythetruth.

Future Work

In an upcoming post it will be highlighted that one of the objectives of the disclosure team may have been to connect the work of Sir Roger Penrose and Stewart Hameroff to the previously-posted about Dr. Yakir Aharonov. The intersection of their work in regards to neural science and consciousness is very intriguing. It was hoped that an analysis of their 'ORCH OR' thoery of consciousness could have been posted now, but that topic dwarfs both the complexity and word count of even this post. Care and detail will be paramount to properly do the topic and their life’s work justice.

A strong effort will be put into compiling the information in an intelligible format for logical consumption, incuding some additional physics and assumptions that may be at play but intentionally avoid by the authors to avoid critisizm. It is hoped the work will be done and posted on the U.S. Memorial Day Holiday weekend. Let that be a justification to cancel the holiday weekend plans of The Men In Technicolor.

Some posts containing background information and in-depth descriptions of supporting experiments, evidence, and simplification of complex topics will probably be necessary between now and then; keep an eye open.

A Very Unscientific Play On Words

Lue said:

"The further up the pyramid you go; the more religion and the more science begins to align itself until at some point in the pyramid the two become indistinguishable."

If you haven’t watched Lue’s “Somber Followup”, or haven’t watched it recently, you should.

“Somber Followup”:

“Imagine everything you’ve been taught, Whether it is through Sunday School or ...”

With that in mind please ponder this:

Heaven is the the place of God and other beings of _________. [Divinity]

Divine beings are from _________. [Heaven]

Divine knowledge is secret knowledge bestowed by the _________. [Divine]

Theology is the systematic study of the _________. [Divine]

Priests and Pastors attend schools to study _________. [Divinity]

Religion is the worship of and obedience to the _________. [Divine]

The opposite of Heaven is _________. [Hell]

Anybody who has watched Harry Potter knows that the meaning of DIVINATION. Mirriam-Webster defines it as: "the art or practice that seeks to foresee or foretell future events or discover hidden knowledge usually by the interpretation of omens or by the aid of supernatural powers."

If Divination is a practice to know "The Future", then:

Heaven is the the place of God and other being of _________.

Divine beings are from _________.

Divine knowledge is secret knowledge bestowed by the _________.

Theology is the systematic study of _________.

Priests and Pastors attend schools to study the _________.

Religion is the worship of and obedience to the _________.

The opposite of Heaven is _________.

"If you want to learn about UFOs, stop reading books about UFOs." - Truer statements are few between.

** Have humility, show kindness, embrace empathy, be curious! **



Submitted April 30, 2022 at 07:42AM by _throwaway_thekey https://ift.tt/Ps2BiNR
Posted by at
Labels: ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

What is Omnism?

Omnism-How Omnism works

A brief overview of how Omnism sees God.