GENIUS FORUMS

For many years I have been studying the structure of the Aether, and Dark Matter (Which I believe are the same thing). And for many years have come up with a hexagon shaped structure similar to Snowflakes. With a Aether made from Hexagons you get many fractals naturally, because hexagons produce fractals when linked together. Anyway.. I took a look at some threads back a few pages, and found this picture (I added a hexagon grid to it). I could see my hexagon structure in it, with a bit of lens distortion (or universe spherical inversion). I tried to correct the distortion.. I got close I think, and ended up with this....

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pinchopaxt ... iverse.jpg

I find that the lines in the image closely match the hexagon grid. I think that the grid can be tweaked a bit more. Strangely.. the grid is distorted close to centre, I put this down to lense distortion, however.. I suppose if you look outwards from the centre of any hexagon shaped hive, you will always get a sort of fractal sphere.

Anyway, you can do this with almost anything, and it will turn out to match the shape. Like tree branches for example, and even the human body.

Visually, does this only work when you place the grid at a certain scale? I imagine if you increased the size of the grid, you won't get the same effect.

Here's a clearer version of the Hexagons...

Robert wrote:Visually, does this only work when you place the grid at a certain scale? I imagine if you increased the size of the grid, you won't get the same effect.

Well hexagons are fractal, so a small hexagon soon makes a big hexagon. If you look at atoms, they create a very small hexagon. What I am actually looking for is the invisible structure that surrounds an atom, but as a fractal it will show up enlarged in the universe like my pictures. All shapes seem to obey the Aether as they build up into the visible world. And my theory is that Snowflakes obey the exact same rules, and actually create a 3D image of the Aether.

But back to your original question.. I think that there is a way to make my grid work even better, it might be mapped onto a huge hexagon instead of spherical lens correction.

Also when you look on the internet you will find things like this....

http://www.universetoday.com/2007/03/30 ... orth-pole/


And this....

http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view_rec.php?id=3350


Apply gravitational forces to the hexagon, and I see something in this...

http://cookerycontent.files.wordpress.c ... tomato.jpg

And this....

http://cache2.asset-cache.net/xc/dv1322 ... EFC0BD407E

And this....

http://www.ambanature.co.uk/ekmps/shops ... ay2007.jpg

And when you get accustomed to it you can move on to this...

http://phillips.blogs.com/photos/uncate ... ramask.jpg

And we like to live like this, because nature obeys the rules of this shape...

http://framingdevice.com/images/Project ... es-735.jpg

4d? And hexagonals are part of the structure yes. Same as fractals.

What do you reckon dark energy is made of? Crystals. (Which look very much like snowflakes)

It's new-age nonsense, designed specifically for idiots to believe.

Satan is far, far cleverer than you are. You don't stand a chance.

You can call on the Lord Yeshua, who has power, to save you.

Any time you need it, you can call on the Lord. He is always there. You chose to be in human form to experience being away from God, as a child wants to go to summer camp to be independent away from the parents.

yana wrote:4d? And hexagonals are part of the structure yes. Same as fractals.

What do you reckon dark energy is made of? Crystals. (Which look very much like snowflakes)

Dark Energy, Dark Matter, Aether.. all the same thing. What are they made from.. it goes like this..

1/ To create the universe you need a form of perpetual motion.. motion from none motion.
2/ You can't start with nothing, so there has to be a minimum requirement. This in fact means that zero does not exist, so should never be used in math's.
3/ The minimum requirement is matter, and antimatter. The two things combined make everything in-between matter, and antimatter. Matter is a sort of expanding energy, and antimatter tries to shrink it. Or rather push it away, because if anti-matter gets inside matter it actually expands it, and pushes it away from the inside. Outside push = shrink, inside push = expand.

When matter, and anti-matter are combined it is like blowing up a bubble, or balloon. when all of the bubbles are pressed together they create hexagon shapes like washing up liquid. So the universe is made up from pressed together bubbles of energy.

4/ From being pressed together you can now create perpetual motion. As one balloon shrinks, the others move towards it to expand, and vice-versa. As the areas get smaller, and smaller the anti-matter will be forced inside the matter. This creates a brand new entity, and also a big vibration all the way along the touching bubbles. This is the first wave. We are adapted to work with waves, and vibrations. You eventually get a huddled together snowflake from these forces, and reactions. You eventually get everything that you see. An entire universe of hexagonal froth. The soup of life.

To create the universe you need;

1. a string
2. a particle
3. an atom

Avoid 0's like the plague.

Otherwise I'm impressed by your mode of thinking. NASA sends its regards as well.

yana wrote:To create the universe you need;

1. a string
2. a particle
3. an atom

Avoid 0's like the plague.

Otherwise I'm impressed by your mode of thinking. NASA sends its regards as well.

A string would just be the interconnected bubbles, same as a wave. Imagine a photon as both a particle, and a wave. It is a particle travelling along a hexagonal route, which in fact is a wavy line. Which is exactly why we probably can never see the Aether (Dark Matter) as everything is polarised from it. Light travels through it, not to send an image of it. Atoms sit in the middle of it, and line up to it, never to step halfway between it. Closest visual property is Snowflakes, which are like sand castles of it without the bucket.

Pincho Paxton wrote:

yana wrote:To create the universe you need;

1. a string
2. a particle
3. an atom

Avoid 0's like the plague.

Otherwise I'm impressed by your mode of thinking. NASA sends its regards as well.

A string would just be the interconnected bubbles, same as a wave. Imagine a photon as both a particle, and a wave. It is a particle travelling along a hexagonal route, which in fact is a wavy line. Which is exactly why we probably can never see the Aether (Dark Matter) as everything is polarised from it. Light travels through it, not to send an image of it. Atoms sit in the middle of it, and line up to it, never to step halfway between it. Closest visual property is Snowflakes, which are like sand castles of it without the bucket.

If you're not already, study physics is my advice to you. You would do well in our field.

yana wrote:

Pincho Paxton wrote:

yana wrote:To create the universe you need;

1. a string
2. a particle
3. an atom

Avoid 0's like the plague.

Otherwise I'm impressed by your mode of thinking. NASA sends its regards as well.

A string would just be the interconnected bubbles, same as a wave. Imagine a photon as both a particle, and a wave. It is a particle travelling along a hexagonal route, which in fact is a wavy line. Which is exactly why we probably can never see the Aether (Dark Matter) as everything is polarised from it. Light travels through it, not to send an image of it. Atoms sit in the middle of it, and line up to it, never to step halfway between it. Closest visual property is Snowflakes, which are like sand castles of it without the bucket.

If you're not already, study physics is my advice to you. You would do well in our field.

I have had to create physics from nothing. That's the thing about this.. the Big Bang includes pre-defined physics, my froth actually creates the physics of gravity, magnetism etc. It creates it's own physics apart from expansion, and shrinkage. Which need to come from openings in our universe. A bit like a pressure valve in a boiler. Energy builds up, but the pressure valve lets it out again. Most likely this is Sun / Black hole.. sun.. new energy... black hole... pressure valve. Breath in.. breathe out. We are inside a balloon with holes in it, with other balloons all around it. Some blowing in, and some taking material out.

Joker. ;)

You are absolutely right. The universe is one giant bubble, and we're living in it right now. Study the transcendental. (It's highly cerebral knowledge)

yana wrote:You are absolutely right. The universe is one giant bubble, and we're living in it right now. Study the transcendental. (It's highly cerebral knowledge)

Couldn't find it, but what would be the point of it.. I thought that I was the writer, and not the reader? You can't be a reader if you are leading the way... unless it includes a Hexagon Universe?

Pincho Paxton wrote:

yana wrote:You are absolutely right. The universe is one giant bubble, and we're living in it right now. Study the transcendental. (It's highly cerebral knowledge)

Couldn't find it, but what would be the point of it.. I thought that I was the writer, and not the reader? You can't be a reader if you are leading the way.

Sorry :) Just trying to share some information with you.

.


Pincho,

I'd posted this in Worldly Matters (In The News thread) a couple? weeks prior.

from Universe Today . com

The satellite itself is 6-sided ;-) Check out image 103, too.

GOCE satellite begins mapping Earth's gravity in lower orbit than expected

http://www.universetoday.com/2009/09/30 ... n-expected
Is Earth's gravity as intriguing and misshapen as this image above?

.

Well the hexagons that surround us, squish us a bit. I created this quick image to show you, and it's not even the right structure, because it would be hard for me to make an exact model. But my picture below shows the forces around us, and maybe the forces are a bit higher than they should be. I once warned NASA about this possibility, that pressures may be building up around the Earth. Since then I have learned to ignore it....

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pinchopaxton/Gravity.jpg

To make an accurate model you need two shapes by the way.

With this in mind, weather is simply color (prism).

I think that this model is more accurate. It's the shape that I was working on with Earth's gravity in green...

You're wrong. The universe is not hexagonal, its 4-dimensional. I won't give you an explanation why.

This image of a rare whole snowflake shows how it fits my model.........




4D... well the 3D part is just directions, and I have 2 more outer universe which create our own. You can count time as a dimension if you like, but it doesn't really exist.

You are talking about the structure of the universe, not the definition of its nature. Am I right or wrong?

yana wrote:You are talking about the structure of the universe, not the definition of its nature. Am I right or wrong?

I am talking about 'The Theory Of Everything' which this is. It's been talked about in science that if you solve the structure of the Universe you solve everything... and I have solved everything with my structure. Quantum physics is now just normal physics.

The theory of everything is just gibberish at the moment. Solve the particle physics first. And yes, I mean that in a good tone.