»Orbitally Rearranged Monatomic Elements«

I've been very interested in this subject for quite sometime & I thought that you may find this very interesting too....
This ORME was known as Star Fire by the ancients.... check this out..

Alchemy and all this drivel requires belief. If you're new to this kind of thing, it's a fun read. You could spend your life (As many people do) searching for something that seems undefined.

If I'm looking for any unifying theory, I really get a kick out of current physics of string theory.

That was an interesting read. I doubt it sheds to much light on the movies, but interesting. I can't beleive some people actually beleive that! Alchemy died a long time ago.

Peepers wrote:

That was an interesting read. I doubt it sheds to much light on the movies, but interesting. I can't beleive some people actually beleive that! Alchemy died a long time ago.

Jung, one of the founders of modern psychology, was an Alchemist.

I can't get the

It probably did. It was a pretty ridiculous theory anyways.

Actually, string theory is the current equationary treatise for cutting edge physics. Altho is sounds like BS, it's real.

Hey, anybody here got a proof for Fermat's Last Theorem I can buy for $5US.

It may be a "real" theory, but that doesn't make it any less ridiculous. I have come up with better theories while sitting on the toilet.

LauraS wrote:

Peepers wrote: That was an interesting read. I doubt it sheds to much light on the movies, but interesting. I can't beleive some people actually beleive that! Alchemy died a long time ago. Jung, one of the founders of modern psychology, was an Alchemist.

I'm sorry you are incorrect. Jung used alchemy in a metaphorical sense, and by any stretch of the imagination he was not a alchemist in the context we were discussing, which is the attempt to chemically transform elements into gold.

I wish people would read and think before they post.

Peepers wrote:

I'm sorry you are incorrect. Jung used alchemy in a metaphorical sense, and by any stretch of the imagination he was not a alchemist in the context we were discussing, which is the attempt to chemically transform elements into gold.

Sigh -- That was the public face of the alchemetic belief system, and the one that charlatans used to prey on people. Alchemy at heart was always about a spiritual quest, and the "chemistry" part of it was an offshoot of that. I never said that Jung was only an Alchemist -- clearly he moved on in his thinking and writings. And in any case, the point is that Alchemy didn't "die out", it just went "underground".

Further reading on this at

Hard Copy Books
* alchemy.dial.pipex.com...
* amazon.com...
Weird Links
* thezodiac.com...
* mythopoetry.com...
* mythopoetry.com...
History
* levity.com...
* mithec.prohosting.com...

Peepers wrote:

I wish people would read and think before they post.

Quite so....

first - if we're going to talk about superstrings then start a string theory thread. Otherwise stay on the topic of ORME's!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, about ORME's:

Originally known to the Egyptians as MFKZT, moatomic elements have long played a role in physics and medicine. Ingested by the pharaohs to increase longevity, monatomic elements of the platinum group metals bond directly to the telemores on the ends of DNA strands.

Telomeres gradually break down as DNA inside cell nuclei replicates, and are the leading theorietical genetic cause of cellular coherence deterioration over time, i.e. aging.

Derived by the Theraputae (or Theraputate) of Hermopolis, MFKZT came to replace "star fire" (derived by the Scarlet Women of earlier Mesopatamia). "Star fire" (derived by a process not suitable for discussion here) contained telemorase, a hormone suppliment for telomeres, and was similar to MFKZT, however the electromagnetic bonding of MFKZT, unlike the electro-chemical bonding of "star fire," was permanent.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As to alchemy, I disagree about its origins being psychological. I believe that it was merely medieval metallurgy and chemistry which, outlawed along with all the sciences during the Inquisition, took on symbolic formulae that were later, in the twentieth century, applied to the mechanistic processes of the human psyche.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, about ORME's and superstrings:

ORME's are superconductors whose monatomic components, once "programmed" (struck) with "information" (spin) continue to contain that pattern indefinitely, until acted upon by another force.

The way they do this is by shifting a certain amount of their pre-superconductive-state mass into a higher dimension upon being super heated. Ordinarily, all moving particles posess spin and counter-spin. The counter-spin is a nominal force because it occurs in a higher dimension. When elements from the platinum group metals are heated at sun-surface temperatures for prolonged durations, they undergo a forceless explosion as some of their base matter replaces the position occupied normally by counter-spin. The remaining superconductive matter thus has no counter-spin. Such superconductors offer tremendous potential in the realm of quantum computing.

As for superstrings, as I'm sure we all already know, they are based on the premise of an eleven dimensional universe. In this model, the 4th spatial dimension shares the same area occupied by the force of time (which we measure by entropy or particle decay). Thus, it is this dimension occupied by counter-spin.

Now, the border between 3-space/4-time and 4-space is the speed of a photon in a vacuum (c), however we know it is possible to go faster than this, because it is at the square of this speed that matter becomes energy (E=Mc^2). However, according to relativity, anything approaching this speed must become supermassive or superdense, and experiments with particle accelerators demonstrate that before this can occur anti-matter is formed.

Well, what is anti-matter? It explodes on contact with ordinary matter because it has the opposite trajectory and the same velocity. Essentially, it has the opposite spin. So anti-matter is just manifest counter-spin dropping down into 3-space/4-time from a dimension faster than light.

All particles that move faster than light are collectively called "tachyons." Different types of tachyons have not yet been measured because they are too small and too fast to detect. They are about the size of an electron. It is thought that, when they are first formed, they carry a potential electrical charge, like an electron, but a positive one, like the much larger proton. When they burn this charge off, they become infinitely long, occupying every point on their microwavelength history simultaneously.

In my own writings I propose it is their positive, attractive charge that propagates the force of gravity across both very large (intergalactic) and very small (subatomic) scales. When tachyons lose this charge, they become superstrings, occupying (or rather containing) counterspin in a 4-space dimension faster than photons.

oh, sorry, everybody!

I posted the above message.

I thought I was already logged on but I wasn't.

I apologize for any confusion this might have caused.

PM me if you want for more info, or just post a reply here.

Various SuperString theories have other than just 11 dimensional spaces as their base. And are you referring to the changeing of state of a valence electron as a dimensional change, as in a change from State 1 to 2 or 3 is a dimensional change?

Tomorrow morning I'm hopeing to see some real eye candy with Revolutions. ;p

Stinkz wrote:

Quote:

It probably did. It was a pretty ridiculous theory anyways.

Is there really anything apart from the Bible that you don't find ridiculous?

Wow... thank you for bring up and bashing my beliefs again even though they don't have to do with the topic. Have you read the string theory? I find it amazing that so many people buy into it. I also find it amazing that so many people form their opinions of the Bible before actually reading it.

Is there anything I don't find ridiculous? Well... truth. I find chemistry and physics and all we have discovered about the world and how it works as incredibly intriguing. The scientific method isn't ridiculous, and it has led to the developement of the particle theory. I don't find the particle theory ridiculous either.

Ive read the Bible (More than one version), also most of the dead sea scrolls, the Nag Hammadi and other various early versions of the Bible, that I feel truely express the origins of the bible and it's systemics better than the totally re-written versions filtered thru Emperor Constatine in 325 AD. As for Christians, they fall into 2 groups. 1 - They believe, have faith, and are doing real good. 2 - It's a system of control and power to gain money and exploit the believers. Same with Catholicism. If the Catholic church REALLY believed in what they preached, they'd sell off all their gold, land etc, and feed the poor.
I had some maps of St. Louis that I saw one time, and various areas were color coded. Alot were green and brown (Federal and state forests and parks), but the largest color on the regional map, especially in the city and county itself, were red/pink. I looked at the key, and these were all lands owned by the Catholic church. I asked the guy who worked for the city who had given me the maps (They were throwing them out for new versions), how this happened. He said, when you get older, you donate your family farm, house, whatever, to the Catholic church. They are tax exempt. The church then lets you live on the property till you die, then it becomes theirs. So you donate your house, they let you live there for free till you die, then they get it tax free.
So if they really mean the high ideals they spout, sell all that rental property, and build some schools, feed the poor etc.

Just my 2 testicles. ;p

Stinkz wrote :

Quote:

I also find it amazing that so many people form their opinions of the Bible before actually reading it.

I have read it - Quite a few times and I was forced to read it when I was young and being brain washed.... I will NEVER read it again!

Well, don't be so harsh, it is the best 2,000 year old comic book ever written. Especially in it's present state.
I see the future. Civilization has some catastrophic event, and most of the world falls into the 2nd dark ages. Then, over a few hundred years, they rebuild, and start to discover old technologies. Not much exists of the earlier records, but then, in an underground vault in the ancient city of Hollywood, they discover a room full of rotting strips of tape that caries long sequences of images. After many years of archeological and technical research, they find several strips of tape that they can fully reassemble,and run thru a machine, that projects images on the wall. It is found that there are 3 main stories that form a linear explanation of the ancient almost mythologial rise of the machines, the war that follows, and the final truce between man and AI to stabilize the world. It tells in the ancient languages, of a savior, the one, who was prophesied would appear, undergo a series of trials and tribulations, and then perform a series of miracles, and bring together a peace between both groups, one the hellish machine world, and the other the real world of the humans. After many translations, this is released as text in a bound book. Many who read it, start to believe it, and they have faith that this is the true word they have been seeking. It seems to explain to the many people looking for answers the validity of their own lives and mortality a possible answer that they want to believe. More and more people read this, and they also start to believe. It becomes a following, then a larger path, and then a religious movement that is embraced by most of the world.

Shini Gami wrote:

Quote:

It becomes a following, then a larger path, and then a religious movement that is embraced by most of the world.

And it still would make more sense than The 'Good' Book...wait till Stinkz sees these....

Sorry if my posts seem simplistic, I have wrote them between other work.

Thanks all, tomorrow is the day, liquid flowing, streaming action hit me.

As for the Matrix and it's religious refferences, it's only that, good scripts, tossing in some prophesied and allegorical red herring plot elements, and you have a movie people are REALLY waiting for, but also a film that makes people reflect on their own life experiences and their religious beliefs.

Only 15 hours now for the show I booked on, as I want to go to an afternoon screening so my 2 boys, who are Matrix nuts, go along to see it.

To bed shortly, then tomorrow, to the theatre.

Edited to correct my f!cked up spelling.

Shinigami, you have some good points back in your earlier post. I'm glad that you can see two distinct camps of Christians. During the time of Constantine you spoke of, Christianity was terribly corrupted through becoming the state religion and allowing unbelievers into the Church. Very little of true Christianity was left after this time. Even today, most churches still have their roots in Catholicism, which was nothing more than a political system of control. I was not until the Reformation that the Bible was actually getting read again.

Another Smith, I cannot tell you how sorry I am that you have had such bad experiences with the Bible as a child. I can only hope that some day you will give it another chance.

...well, not really, but you might find the concepts on these pages interesting, if you can follow string or quantum theory.

The Matrix and Quantum Consciousness
innerx.net...

Alternate/Parallel Universes
sciam.com...

Quote:

And are you referring to the changeing of state of a valence electron as a dimensional change, as in a change from State 1 to 2 or 3 is a dimensional change?

Heavens to Mercotroid NO! That's just a shell game, with the electron's charge changing energy level states between orbital shells. Am I correct? I don't know what you mean by valence or state? All I know is that when two electrons are bonded they are covalent, thus I assume valence referse to the orbital shell energy level.

Anywho, what I am describing is perpendicular to the electron's orbit. It is the gravitational force that holds it in place in one or another particular energy level orbital shell state.

BTW: thanks for the links LauraS. I thought I was the only fan of Tony Smith! Anyway, I wouldn't give that Scientific American article too much credit. I heard there was some controversy about them rushing that story in that issue to press in order to compete with a similar story on the cover of a competitor magazine.