Here is a preview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ4Ewb6TzrU

I know, he sounds like Kermit the frog, but if you are interested and I'm serious, this is great even if you won't agree or you think this is too much to take once.



Set yourself up for 8hrs of his lecture here. Yes I actually watched it, took me a week.

1.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6151699791256390335&hl=en

2.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1895475242307393956&q=source%3A004764722344893170701&hl=en

So very interested, but alas.......dial up.

So without having to sit through 8 hours does he ever get around to explaining the fundamental structure of the universe using any math at all?

This intro vid just sounds like amateur popular physics meets self actualization seminars.

He goes into great details about the structure of the universe and more, basically the structure of everything. Of course just a theory but I thought it was interesting. you can also google him on youtube, catch his lectures in 10 min. pieces.

here is an a piece:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFnWbR8fwuY

It was worth watching. He is amazing. Loved the stuff he revealed about crop circles.

I've been looking at sacred geometry for a bit.

I have always pondered what people meant when they used the term "event horizon."

This guy doing the talk in this video speaks the truth about the (ridiculous) search for the particle which I agree will NEVER be found because it is a journey to the infinitely small. (Infinity)

He also speaks of "nasty infinity" which is the infinitely large that goes the other way.

Between these two infinities is the event horizon... us.

We are the event horizon!!

And why not? We are the event! Existence of a sentient being is the event.

He also talks about how atoms, (of which we are made) being 99.9999% space. So WE are 99.9999% percent space. (give or take a few 9's)

Now the main part of the video, (and it was a long one) is about geometry. It is what some call sacred geometry and how he figured out the structure of the universe (space).

Then he gets into crop circles and proves that we have been contacted by a higher intelligence with these crop circles. (The proof is overwhelming.) He does not say who. (Perhaps other dimensional beings.)

Nothing he talked about conflicts with my personal world view or the idea of a holographic type reality.

Here are the conclusions:

We are the event horizon.
There is no ultimate measurable particle.
There are two infinities. (small and large)
A particle is a black hole.
We are living inside of a black hole.
There are also infinite numbers of black holes outside of us.
We have been contacted by an advanced intelligence.

Very interesting and enlightening.

Glad you liked it, I always favor those who challenge the status quo, even if they are wrong.

About the history section of his lecture, I'm not quite in agreement, although I do agree with the assesment that we aren't the most advanced civilization on Earth.

As the saying goes - Every generation thinks they are smarter than the one before and wiser than the one after.

So do you think he is wrong? If so, in what part do you think he was wrong?

About his comet twice the size of Jupiter and something I found on a forum:


"The event he was referring to was Comet NEAT (C/2002 V1) which made a close approach to the sun beginning Feb 15th through the 20th and although its corona may have grown larger than Jupiter but it’s mass was definitely not twice that of Jupiter. I have not been able to find a specific article that identifies its exact mass other than general references to its mass as nothing out of the ordinary although I feel most confident it is out there. I have provided links to the information so you can make up your own mind.

I will say this, I have really enjoyed watching Nassim's video on Youtube and think he is extremely intelligent and intuitive and I think he has some very intriguing theories related to the physics of the universe. I am especially interested in his theory related to singularities and their relationship to un-identified mass in the universe, yes I am one of those still not convinced that black matter exist.... I also appreciate how he identifies where physicist gloss over -or conveniently overlook- information that does not substantiate their belief system and or view on the nature of the universe; which he is ironically mirroring by stating information as fact when it took me no more than an hour searching the net to show his information was incorrect. This only discredits him and his physics when he does not validate the information he is presenting before he states it as fact. He also loses me, and many others I am sure, when he begins to elaborate on how aliens are trying to communicate the mysteries of the universe to us through crop circles and that aliens built the pyramids. Doing so will only steer people away from the real genius behind his work and limit the available resources that could be dedicated to investigate it, which would be a great tragedy."



Here is link that even talks the comet conspiracy he referred to http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/comet_conspiracy_030228.html

http://www.gulfcoastnews.com/GCNstories/gcncomet.htm

sounds interesting ill have to check it out this weekend

I agree. I told you you won't agree with his historical stuff and the alien and comet near thing..neither the Sun pulsating idea by looking at the SOHO images.
He really needs to just concentrate the fractional universe-idea and the black hole theory and steer clear from the rest of the stuff. Mozes stealing the crystal device and splitting water with it and talking about where the arc of the covenant is really just something that is beyond and controversial..he shouldn't even get into those topics.

I agree. He lost me when he started talking about Moses, and when he did not identify the comet. I remember when that comet neat came through.

I agree with him on the advanced society or aliens. I don't know what else can explain the crop circles and the pyramids etc. Not to mention all the UFO's seen coming out of the sea and volcano's etc. I think they come from some place inside the earth. I don't understand why scientist just ignore these things.

If there was an object called the arc, I suspect it was some kind of advanced technology. But even so, he should stick to the math and what he can prove if he wants credibility.

He talks a lot about geometry, but I don't see any math, or any research.

Has he published anything in any reputable scientific peer reviewed articles?

Starting from popular physics then trying to sync up your science is backarsewards.

He did not present any math in the video but claims to have solved some of Einsteins ... whatever equations... by not forcing the universe to be assumed finite.

At the time the video was made, he had not been published was said he was about to be... (crossing his fingers)? Anyway it was in "Temple University Press."

He decoded the Cabalistic tree.

Even as an artist I have not gotten into a lot of geometry. Its very interesting though.

Well the only reason I remain skeptical is 1 reason and it certainly isn't a valid reason, just a gut reaction.

Most experienced scientists and mathematicians are extremely humble in there conclusions due to the backlash of making glorious claims if they turn out to be wrong.

Not to mention the science community respects humble intelligence above all else it seems.

This weekend I will check some of it out, however I am not schooled enough to verify his statements, unless of course he provides some math that I can send to some friends of mine hehe.

Perhaps I can at least identify some of his claims to detail here.

I think he is talented in math, and very creative minded but not a scholar.

My inner skeptic sees him as rather "out there on the edge" and he even admits that he is "way out there on the fringe" with his ideas.

I personally don't think he will be taken seriously unless his solutions really do work .. as he claims they do.

But if they do work, and they pose more questions than answers, they might be ignored by the scientific community.

But I think he may have stumbled upon something important where the structure of space is concerned that will actually be a step in the direction of proving the holographic nature of this reality.

Your quite right, Einstein himself was seen as a cook for a long time even after he was published, but the proof is in the pudding.

When GR was tested that all changed. I hope the man works hard at actual research and keeps it scientific.

So much to say... so little to prove.

Crop circles are bogus. They prove nothing about contact from other intelligent life forms. They are and can be shown to be made with a little planning, a rope, and a tamping board which swings arcs from different positions by the designer of the circles.

A unified theory is the holy grail of science...

We shall see.

Personally, I feel that anyone who believes that crop circles exist as a result from aliens visiting us has much to learn about proof, and even more about research.

Ah well, freedom of speech is a beautiful thing.

That could be a fantastic basis for a philosophical discussion...

Creative it is glaringly obvious you have done no research on crop circles if you truly think that they can be accomplished by a rope, and a tamping board.

It is also obvious that you have not taken the time to watch the video.

What you say here is laughable.

Until you or someone comes up with something better than that, I remain totally convinced they are not being done with a rope and a tamping board.

I suggest you look a little closer at how many of these crop circles are happening and how complicated they are and how impossible it would be to duplicate with a rope and a tamping board.

Investigate a little and see if you can do better than that.

Ive seen some pretty amazing crop circles done with common items and a little time and intelligence.

You want aliens, I can send you a dvd with nude aliens for $99.95 if you cash this check for me.