PsiPog.net

View topic - The Time Barrier

PsiPog.net Forum Index » General Discussion » The Time Barrier

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

The Time Barrier

Author

Message

Posted on Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:16 am

CD27

Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 125

Okay, I printed out the postings that were posted earlier and am ready to respond to them. First off, I think your view of science is completely flawed, no offense and hopefully none taken. Please know that I am not here to be judgmental nor am I here to start a fight or argument. This is a debate and nothing more, please take nothing personal. Why do I think that your view of science is completely flawed? Read this article please:

CD27 wrote:

Science and The Scientist
‘Sciencism’: By Eric Wright

Being a Scientist isn’t an easy thing to do. It’s hard; it’s very hard and it takes a creative mind and a determination to know. I know, I’m a scientist myself. For the past four years I’ve been studying everything I can get my hands on from all forms of physics to the paranormal. I’m a Christian, and, scientifically, I am justified in being so. With my Christian background behind me, still growing each and every day, I have no choice but to believe in the paranormal. Of course, I don’t take ANYTHING in without justifying it first both scientifically and logically.
I most definitely started my science ‘career’ studying the validity of the Bible and have found it to be sound. My next step was and is still the validity of science. You see, the two don’t really mix well together. With my basic thoughts still ringing, “If God created the universe, hence creating every part of it including the laws of physics, and anything that is created can be manipulated and/or destroyed in any way possible…then anything is possible”. I don’t know if you caught that, but what I just did was make a bold statement that goes against everything science stands for, “Everything and anything is scientifically possible, despite the laws of physics and nature”.
Why, I mean, HOW, could I possible make such a statement and actually live to speak about it? Scientists around the world would make me an outcast, would completely ‘disown’ me as a fellow scientist. This is our problem with science. The problem is that scientists have fallen into this thing I call ‘Sciencism’. Yea, I made it up, so what, it’s a cool word and it’s got a really nice ring to it…kind of. I base this off of racism and sexism and other things that have ‘ism’s in them. So what’s Sciencism? Sciencism is prejudice to anything that science doesn’t agree with.
If you haven’t noticed in the past 1,000 years, the paranormal has not exactly been the friend of science. If God can make mountains move, can create this universe, can make a man walk through fire without burning, I don’t care if it’s God or not (remember that even the devils can do this), then, scientifically proven, the paranormal is real and it can happen…it’s possible. No, I can’t sit here and redo it for you, I can’t experiment it or anything, I can’t justify it based on our current technology, but it’s real. If God’s real, then the paranormal is real, and friends, God Is Real.
Science has strayed, and it’s strayed WAY off course. Now we have a scientific method. Now we have a ‘science magazine’ and a patent office. Now we have this icky word ‘evidence’. Guys, if everything is possible, and it is, then we don’t need evidence to prove that to us. I don’t care if you claim you can snap your finger and have a lollipop just magically appear in your hands, you don’t need evidence to prove it’s possible, you only need evidence to prove it’s possible with your current technology. Science has nothing to do with validity, but has everything to do with understanding. My friend, how much about the universe do you think science can explain? I’d say about 99.99999% of it. We don’t know SQUAT.
How then can science, or the scientists, proclaim that something is impossible or that it is not scientifically correct if science doesn’t know everything and is far from complete? If you think science is perfectly complete or on the bridge to it and it is very near, then I want you right now to give me the scientific explanation of how to create a live and strong flower out of scratch. You can’t, can you? That’s because science is so far from knowing just that bit of information that it can not honestly say it’s impossible. If any scientist says that that is impossible, I want to say just one thing…you’re pretty stupid for a scientist. Do you see flowers around you? Then guess what, they were created somehow; you just don’t know how they were created.
Just because you don’t know how something is done or understand how it is done doesn’t mean it cannot be done. I’m pretty sure you would have been hanged for witchcraft two hundred years ago if you said you could talk to someone all the way on the other side of the world (that is if there was an ‘other side of the world’ at that time). They would think it’s magic. They wouldn’t believe you, and the scientists of that day would have said it was impossible. Think of the hundreds of thousands of other feats humanity has accomplished since that time. That’s a lot isn’t it? There are two things I want you to get out of that.
First, science doesn’t know everything, no matter how far in the future you are. No matter how much you know, you don’t know everything and you’re not even close to knowing everything. These things you keep calling impossible are directly comparable to the things the scientists said were impossible near 200 years ago. Face it, science doesn’t know everything, it’s far from it, and ‘scientifically proven’, everything and anything is possible.
Second, there is no such thing as magic. Magic does not exist. The true definition of magic is, “Usage of a higher understanding of the universe”. Just because God or the devil has ‘powers’ that we cannot comprehend does not mean it’s magic. The devil and God both have an extremely higher understanding of the universe around them. Obviously God does, after all, he created it. You put a walkie talkie next to a dog and walk across the room and speak in another walkie talkie and I’ll bet you what’s going through that dog’s mind is, ‘Wow, that’s magic’. To us it’s just technology, and it’s fairly simple, but to the dog, not understanding that, misunderstands it as ‘magic’. So now put yourself in the place of that dog (or any other lower form of animal) and put God in the place of us. How can we look at God’s ability and understanding of the universe as magic?
Have you ever heard of ‘politically correct’? Well now you have ‘scientifically correct’. Science has fallen to the point that nothing in their minds is possible without us being able to demonstrate it and prove it’s possible. Okay, I want them to demonstrate the creation of the universe. Wait, they can’t! Guess what, that means scientifically, by the scientific method, the universe doesn’t exist, period. Obviously the universe exists, but what’s more obvious is the flaw in the method of going at this the scientists have used.
So have I found the validity of science? Absolutely. Science is valid. The method at which science is being looked upon has, however, been corrupted by this thing I call Sciencism. So what have I decided to do about this? Break it, destroy it, PROVE SCIENCE wrong. How do I plan to do that? Well it’s simple; break the laws of physics, each and every one of them. Yea, laugh at me now; I have studied vigorously for over four years constantly about this, have been revealed divinely an entire theory spanning some seventy pages long and branched ideas from that theory that span well over 300 pages. With the one basic thought controlling my scientific study (Everything and anything is possible, despite the laws of physics and nature) and with this theory God has handed directly to me (now that is another story entirely, and it’s extremely fascinating) I will break the laws of physics.
How do I plan on doing this? It’s simple; I’ll bypass the laws of physics. Breaking them directly would cause extreme damage on this universe that God spend six days creating. Hence, I’ll bypass them. I have the theory already made, I have found evidences by other experiments and theories including but not limited by the following:

The String Theory (Which I actually rewrote)
Quantum Physics
Holographic Brain Theory
Holographic Universe Theory
Zero-point Energy Theory
Special and General Relativity
The Philadelphia Experiment
The Montauk Experiment
The Rainbow Project
The Hutchison Effect
David Bohm
Karl Pribram
Nikola Tesla
Albert Einstein
Niels Bohr
Psionics
Paranormal
Supernatural
Much, Much More

All of those and more are what I’ve studied, and all of which I use either the theory’s evidences, evidences provided by the experiments, or evidences provided by the scientist. All of these evidences are accepted, at least by some majority. All of them have been tested, and at least some part of all of them agree with my theory, especially Quantum Physics and the Holographic Universe. All I need now is absolute evidence. I don’t have the money nor the ability to make the equipment I need to conduct my test. I do actually have a test, one that, through my research, has never before been conducted outside the Philadelphia Experiment (and yes, I have discovered and corrected the anomaly that caused that experiment to fail). My discoveries I believe will most definitely shape the way science is thought of ever again. My main motive: “God gave this to me for a reason, and I understand that everything is possible, so at some point in the future someone else will figure it out if I do not, and if that person is not of God, grave danger will fall upon the face of this world.
So I will be departing on August 1st of 2007 into the United States Navy and will receive absolutely free schooling for as long as my heart desires and will get great training. There are my resources, I am taking it, and through the rest of my life I refuse to allow Sciencism to control my way of thinking about science…how about you? How do you think about science? Science is not perfect and we must accept responsibility for our actions with it; that includes hindering the knowledge of our culture of the universe around us. How can we truly call this science if we refuse to open our minds to the possibilities around us? It is not superstition that controls me; it’s superstition that controls Sciencism. If you want to view my theory and maybe even help me in some way, view this link: http://www.psineticforums.phpbbweb.com/psineticforums-ftopic4.html

I refuse to believe that science is anything other than the study of possibilities. Quantum physics, one of the most renowned theories in the world, is nothing more than probabilities, and nothing is exact. How can something be a ‘fact’ if it is only probable? A fact is something you know for certain, something that CANNOT be questioned, and science is all about questioning. Also, your reliance on Special Relativity is horribly flawed. You can’t speak about mass without gravity, and Special Relativity was written solely for the exclusive purpose of NOT including gravity. I’m sorry, but if you want to speak about Relativity with me, you should know what you’re talking about. Use General Relativity. Special Relativity is simply a stepping tool for those who would rather not include gravity, which was widely misunderstood in that time, in their equations.
My first point here: Special Relativity is by far science. It is completely and utterly false. Without gravity it would completely falsely conceive the universe. Once gravity is introduced (General Relativity) the equations and answers changed radically. Point Number Two: Relativity, both Special and General, is nothing more than a theory set upon mathematics. There has been very little valid testing done, especially during Einstein’s time, and all the valid testing we do have now is extremely recent. Relativity is highly held because of its high mathematical standard and proofs through MATH, not physics, not testing, math only. Einstein was not in the right period of time to test his theories, and his only observation was within his mind (look up reference framed…what do ya know, created by Einstein himself). Know your work before you use it to bash someone else’s work.

So you think I’m full of myself? You think I link things in ‘reality’ with things that “don’t exist”? Number one, who’s to say it doesn’t exist? Did you create this universe? No, I thought so. How then can you honestly say, scientifically, if something exists or does not? We don’t know ANYTHING about the universe that is among us, and what we do know we barely understand. With all of your knowledge, and much, much, more, you could still never make an accurate estimate of what ‘fact’ really is. As I said before, science does not work on fact, it works on probability. Even one of the greatest theories in the world, which has more evidence supporting it than my own theories, states that the best we can do is speculate on the probability of facts. You say the speed of light is impossible to achieve? Tell me then, why can light reach it? If light can reach it, then that speed is possible to reach, maybe not for a living being, but for SOMETHING. If that’s the case, then I’m sure that with ample understanding that property could be achieved and manipulated perfectly in due time.

Science is not about the fact, it’s about the probability, and the only way to theorize is to link it to things outside the box and test it. And if the test fails, what should your response be? Not, “it’s impossible!”…no, that’s not science and it’s stupid. Your response should be, “this test doesn’t work, we should learn more about it.” NEVER dismiss a claim, even if it sounds stupid, even if it doesn’t agree with the current laws of physics. Never, ever, say something is impossible, because, scientifically, anything is possible and your mind isn’t a massive well of knowledge of all that there is to know. Thinking so makes you ignorant and arrogant. Don’t fall into the trap of Sciencism, and if you do, don’t you dare call yourself a ‘scientist’, because you’re nothing more than an idiot.

Again, I’m not saying this to make an argument, or to make you think I’m trying to insult you, because I’m not, it’s a general statement, and is not directed to any one of you (except for a few parts, and you know who you are). I don’t say this to point fingers, and I don’t say it to crush you or your way of thinking, but to help you build it up. Science doesn’t discriminate. Yea, I tend to base my opinions on the unknown, why? Number one, because we have so-called ‘experts’ out there would fight with me all day and say, “That’s impossible! The laws of physics don’t agree with that!” when the ‘laws’ of physics don’t even exist. Anything is possible, and just because we don’t have the understanding of this vast universe it doesn’t mean it’s impossible. Number two, because it is the unknown, because it isn’t wide, because it is controversial, because it’s something worth studying. ‘proven things’ are a bore and I don’t want to build on false teachings that things are impossible, and I will do everything I can in my power to break this way of thinking and everything it stands on. If you think that’s stupid, then I hope you’re there when I do it. I have a friend over at www.ppsociety.com that says, “Those who think it’s impossible should not interrupt those who are doing it”; anything truer would be a ‘law of physics’, right?
Yea, when I jump I will come back down, but what happens when something interferes with that ‘constant’, I’ll just keep going up, sideways, vertical, whatever I want. If you guys think this is stupid, so be it, whatever, I don’t care. I can’t base my studies and discoveries on things that have been placed under limits of ‘laws’, because my theories are all about breaking those laws. I’ve written the theory, even gathered up evidence to get the attention of some other scientists, have spoken with several key scientists and learned much, and that ‘crazy jellotivity theory’ that you think so highly of was written by one of my best friends and one of the greatest scientists I’ve ever known, Kamavasayita (well, that’s his screen name). His theory has evidences for it, has mathematics for it, and has more basis for it than half the stuff you learned in school. Though I try to reach beyond that which is known, I still try to keep it in some area of restriction, for the better understanding of mankind. How can mankind grow from something they do not know? The idea of science should be to get as close to the line as possible and keep pushing it so that more questions pop up, more discoveries are made that would otherwise never be thought of because people simply cast them off as ‘impossible’.
I’m sure airplanes were impossible two hundred years ago, how about talking to someone across the world (you’re get burned at the cross for that one), how about the very concept of electrical music (guitars, amplifiers, and all that fun stuff). Every bit of it was at one time impossible to someone, and to everyone now, it’s possible. Why? Because some scientists dared to push the envelope. Einstein got all kinds of pressure from scientists who relied on Newtonian physics and its ‘laws’. He didn’t give up. Nikola Tesla got the same, and he became one of the greatest scientists in the world, more so to me than Einstein was (though not many people know of him). He never gave up. Edison, Franklin, Wright Brothers, Bohr, Hawking, and many more. They all pushed the envelope, denied the ‘current laws of physics’ and claimed that there was definitely something wrong. I’m just taking it one more step further…there’s something wrong with our entire concept of science.

I think this post is rather long enough now. I think I had ample time to think it through and give you the best response I could with the information I had from you. I appreciate your responses, and look forward to some more, so long as they are not completely harsh and rude. I may even have to put this post in another Thread to save space and keep the topic from changing. So, if possible, let’s try and stick to the main topic, “The Time Barrier”.

CD

Posted on Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:53 pm

derricktheone

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 356

Very great post. I do not think you are full of yourself. I do not even understand why that was said. You simply posted your theory and everyone jumped down your throat. I commend what your doing and believe, if not you or a friend, someone will prove "these people" all wrong. There's simply too much ignorant, know-it-all people on this site, to not have your theory disregarded as garbage. I'd like to get your email to keep in touch. PM me.

P.S My father once had a videotape which proved one of the laws of physics wrong. It was from around 86' and on the 11 o' clock news (pm). There was all kinds of hype about a man who made a machine with results showing he could create 10x more energy as product, than the amount of energy which what was put into it. (I can't remember the name of that law right now) The broadcast was supposed to be all over the news the next day, however, never was. The man was never heard of again as well. I'll get a hold of the tape and mabye send it to you. My father's friend has it now, but I know you would appreciate it.

"Those who think it’s impossible should not interrupt those who are doing it" Great quote

Posted on Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:50 pm

Niushirra

Joined: 17 Jan 2006
Posts: 299

You should seriously go shoot yourself. The world dosen't need another arrogant idiot who thinks he can break the laws of physics with flawed math. I'm sorry but Einstein was right and no amount of mathematical fallacies can ever change that. Furthermore, quantum mechanics is not based on probabilities and neither is science. Science is the analysis of observations. We observe things and then based on them make conclusions about how things work and such. You made a mistake and lost, accept it. Also, since you seem to like quantum mechanics so much I would just like to point out that gravity does not exist in quantum physics. Or at least, it's a stunted form. Special relitivity HAS been proven though in PHYSICAL tests. Space ships in orbit with clocks on them synced to an atomic clock come out a few seconds off when the spaceship lands due to the time distortion at those high speeds. In particle accelerators they measure more mass in tiny tiny particles as they speed through the ring at speeds near light.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html

Huh, seems like it actually works.

I got nothing against jellotivity because I don't know enough about it but at a glance it looks like nothing. Go ahead and use it, I'll trust for now that it's good. Your theories are based on no evidence that is not horribly flawed. Science is a process of building on old information and sometimes jumping ahead and then making connections back to the old knowledge. Quantum mechanics is still jumped ahead. The whole of research on quantums is to connect their wacky laws with our normal laws.

Derrick, it's good that your playing devil's advocate and taking a minority's side but even you have to realize they're wrong. Also, your 10X energy machine is wrong. There are so many ways that could be faked, mistaken, or just cheated at. He could have a machine that draws any stray energy around it and then takes a small amount of energy to operate. Then he would gain a little tiny bit of energy from the enviroment and say OMG I CAN CREATE ENERGY. Some scientists said they found a cold fusion method a while ago and it was found that they had actually mistaken the data for cold fusion. Sometimes the analysis is wrong so I'm not saying he just lied about it.

Posted on Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:56 pm

Tankdown

Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 688

Okay...I see so many things wrong with this post of yours CD27,......and no its not what you think it is. Most of what you say is wrong due to manipulating from this world and even youreslf.

I am having some deeply close friends of mine to review your words to say everything that is wrong with it.

Like to said to all of us, I will say to you.

Even strong prejudice exist within you.

Your word of god seems wrong as well. However I can't speak about that out loud.

Say that I am wrong you may, honestly I encourage such behavior.

CD27...I feel like you are repeating something I have seen before....nothing good can come from it.

Posted on Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:57 pm

ErikJDurwoodII

Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 16

I said this earlier, but I'll say it again:

The first question that should be asked when seriously looking into a theory is: "That's great, but how do I test it?"

Without SOME form of experimentation that produces DETERMINED outcomes, not just satisfied mathematic equations, it will always be a theory and usually of no use except as arguing stock or at least inspiration or a springboard.

Ideas have to start somewhere and it's usually a theory, but progress is made in what is DONE; otherwise it just adds to the millions of other theories that already clutter the field.

Quantum mechanics is a difficult field because most of the time, you are dealing with variables that are not directly observable, if at all. The non-physical quanta get a lot of flak from the orthodox scientists as they state it is not science if it can’t be objectively observed. While they are correct on the basis of classical physics, we are dealing with a NEW science. It is different yet tightly woven with classical physics.

You can’t look at QM with Classical Physics’ eyes. It won’t make sense. QM is not a replacement for Classical Physics, but a companion. It is what is beyond the “physical plenum” of observable, predictable and undeniable variables. Hell, QM is pretty much the scientific equivalent of what ancient cultures have been catering to for millennia.

You can’t pick up a book anymore and copy somebody else’s experiment and expect the same outcome even if you copied it verbatim. You have to come up with your own tests. First, tests that satisfy you and your expectations. That’s what matters first. After that, design the test in ways to enhance the predictability and support that with clear and experienced theories and hypotheses. Get other people to try. See if they get the same results.

At a point, you could say quantum experiments don’t deal with observing a reaction to discover the outcome, but rather engineering reality to come to the conclusion you want. If you succeed in that, you will have a foundation of understanding the mechanisms that allow for such engineering.

This is a totally different beast needing a major paradigm shift, and some people are just not up to the task. ^__^

"Remember, the pride of being right is not nearly as valuable as the willingness to be wrong."

Posted on Wed Jan 17, 2007 5:37 pm

derricktheone

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 356

Niushirra wrote:

Derrick, it's good that your playing devil's advocate and taking a minority's side but even you have to realize they're wrong. Also, your 10X energy machine is wrong. There are so many ways that could be faked, mistaken, or just cheated at. He could have a machine that draws any stray energy around it and then takes a small amount of energy to operate. Then he would gain a little tiny bit of energy from the enviroment and say OMG I CAN CREATE ENERGY. Some scientists said they found a cold fusion method a while ago and it was found that they had actually mistaken the data for cold fusion. Sometimes the analysis is wrong so I'm not saying he just lied about it.

It very well could have been faked or misconducted, but without even seeing it or hearing about it, I don't think you should state "it's wrong" with complete conviction. I DO understand how you (and others) ofcourse could say it's wrong, and although I may not agree 100% with it, I'm not going to close my eyes and cover my ears to the idea. Mainly because I believe the laws of physics have been broken before. There's just too much useful information science has thrown aside in the past (because it didn't fit, or because it couldn't re-create it) to make me believe in it as strongly as I once did. Too many "Sciencism" attitudes out there lol.

Posted on Wed Jan 17, 2007 5:59 pm

ErikJDurwoodII

Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 16

You don't "break" the laws of physics. You simply operate in an environment where said laws do not apply fully or at all.

Physics is for the Physical.

Posted on Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:48 pm

derricktheone

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 356

Thanks for the anal correction Erik.

Posted on Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:05 pm

ErikJDurwoodII

Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 16

I wasn't trying to sound like I was correcting you. If I did, I'm sorry. I was actually trying to give a more "food for thought" kind of statement referring to the discussion as a whole.

On the topic of the 10X energy device, I too have seen in operation, and am endeavoring to build, an “over-unity” device. It’s based off of Thomas Bearden’s MEG (motionless electromagnetic generator) U.S. Patent #6,362,718. The variant I saw in operation sustained 30x over-unity for about 45 seconds before de-tuning and loosing efficiency. I plan to beat that.

“Free-energy” is a taboo word now-a-days as detractors will state the obvious by saying “you don’t get something for nothing.” This, of course is true, but they will claim bunk at the idea of anything that even claims something similar. If you read the patent app, you will see HOW it works, but nowhere will you see WHY it works or what the ramifications of such a device are. Properly tuned and calibrated, this device can multiply its investment charge by many times by taking advantage of some modern science ideas and practices.

According to classical physics, it can’t do what it’s been shown to do. But for some silly reason, it still does. You can’t argue with results. ^__^

*edit* Unified Theory of Bivacuum, Particles Duality, Fields & Time - PDF Document - 223 Pages

Read that, all who dare. It may not be too terribly reputable, but it has some pretty strongly backed ideas on one of the larger up-and-coming modes of thought in physics. Has a nice and big References section too for you "Pandora's Researchers"

*another edit*
Oh and lastly, for those who don't want to peruse the document, near the end, they make a boisterous claim:

“The correctness of our Unified Theory (UT), involving new fundamental Bivacuum Mediated Interaction, is confirmed by its ability to explain not only a conventional data, but a lot of unconventional experiments, like Kozyrev, Shnoll and Tiller ones, the remote genetic transmutation, remote vision, mind-matter interaction and other without contradiction with fundamental laws of nature ( for details see http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0103031 ). In the framework of new approach, the ’paranormal’ phenomena turns to normal or natural ones.”

Read their stuff. It’s good. Not only is it good, it’s well supported showing lots of research and careful math and it’s presented in a way that does not coerce Classical Physics and shows they both play nicely together. Be critical, but open to new ideas.

And if you feel so strongly about how it’s flawed or incorrect. SHOW YOUR WORK! They did, and it’s only fair that you do too. ^__^

Posted on Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:12 pm

derricktheone

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 356

ErikJDurwoodII wrote:

Mabye that's the machine I was talking about.....

^
^
Comment Niushirra lol?

Ya sorry Erik I know you weren't being rude. I let my anger momentarily control me. Lost a poker tourney to a moron lol Rolling Eyes

Posted on Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:59 pm

JOHNNYBEGOOD

Joined: 17 Jul 2006
Posts: 354

CD27, I recommend you try contacting someone like Steven Hawkings and see what he says about it. I wouldn't get up your expectations, though.

Posted on Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:43 pm

Tankdown

Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 688

Yup...its clear that even my resources don't agree with you.

Sadly to say, and I mean no offense, but its really is pointless to agure with you.

Posted on Thu Jan 18, 2007 4:10 am

DemonHunter

Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 100

I don't think the time barrier actually exists. Because time itself exists only in your imagination. You can slow it down and speed it at will. Or you can just take it as it comes and see what happens.

Posted on Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:38 pm

CD27

Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 125

...Response pending...i'm still reading some of the posts here. They look rather promising, interesting to say the least....i'll respond soon.

CD

Posted on Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:50 pm

Niushirra

Joined: 17 Jan 2006
Posts: 299

Well, I read up and I think I get everything to the extent I need to get it. Unity theory kinda sounds like a more developed commonplace theory that I have. Look for it on psipog. The device, to the best of my knowledge, uses this theory to access "floating energy." It dosen't "create energy." From what I got it's more like trapping it. They repeatedly said in the patent that it was a magnetic generator that did not use moving parts. It still is a very good device.

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

PsiPog.net Forum Index » General Discussion » The Time Barrier

You must agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy to view this website. Click here to contact the webmaster. XHTML?