_______________________________________________________________________________________________ Numbers and Materialization.htm


April 24, 2019




Does time exist? In my humble opinion, no, time does not really exist.There is no such thing as time in existence.I believe it is a made up concept by someone at some point in the relatively remote past used to identify the day ins and days outs of the years as they go by..


But consider this, what if time does, indeed, exist?Well, here is my unconscionable theory about numbers and how it could relate to the happening of materialization, or possibly quantum entanglement, which is a fictious theory also, in my opinion.


Although it may seem unconscionable, the number one never reaches the number two.  When you calculate using on decimal points, .999999 repeating going up infinitely, yet for some reason, it never, even in infinity, reaches 1.  If you begin to think about it, it becomes unconscionable, and the more unconscionable the numbers roll off, the more fascinating it becomes.  The only way you would be able to accomplish this feat would be to be Jesus Christ.  It must have been the sort of logic that used when creating computers, since 0ís and 1ís are distinct, and separate identifiers of things.


Here is another way to look at numbers!!!!  How, what other way than in fractions!!!!!!!!!  Here, we have an infinitely different number of fractions, none of which can ever represent infinity, standing alone, by an absolute unequivocal representation of a fraction.


Here is an interesting note, focused on what is represented by fractions in 9.  Look, when you follow the existing pattern of 1/9, to 2/9, to 3/9, to 4/9, to 5/9, to 6/9, to 7/9, to 8/9, you simply get .1 repeating, .2 repeating, .3 repeating, .4 repeating, .5 repeating, .6 repeating, .7 repeating, and .8 repeating, respectively and infinitely.  When you get to 9/9, you reveal a situation where the theoretical next step in the pattern does not follow.It can be reasoned that 9/9 should equal .9 repeating, but this is not the case.It does not explicitly equal .9 repeating, but rather 1.What you can bring away from this is when using fractions in cycles of nine in the denominator, the effect achieved can be considered awkward.


However, thinking about having infinity in the numerator as well as the denominator on, you should get the answer that this number simply does not exist.However, when you think at the distant and remote edges of the infinity expression made mention of by me in this paragraph, it may indeed be possible to conclude that if infinity extends for eternity in both directions, then there is indeed a theoretical expression represented by infinity in the numerator and the denominator hence satisfying the requisites of math to achieve the result of the number two, only if the illusory concept of time is cut off.


How this magical number is impossible according to regular understanding of fractions it is relevant to mathematical expressions of graphs.What you can draw from this is that a straight line is an impossibility, since according to mathematics, infinity in the numerator and the denominator does not exist, but it does to me.


You need to consider how this deals with there being a possible material misrepresentation on the part of a 3 dimensional graph that places hardship upon the basis of how math interacts with the time/space continuum.  Because of this misunderstanding of how the 3 dimensional graph can theorectically expand, we need to look into representations of infinity.Imagine if it were a reality that one could expand in all dimensions instantaneously for, a certain amount of time before matter and time and form a sphere.


The question to be answered from this theorization was what are implications about what we clearly know about time, number, matters in regards to future uses for goodness?


The reasoning behind the existing theory that says that fractions can be verified as indeed existing through separate numbers.  On the other hand, my proposed theory indicates fractions are in and of themselves insufficient to constitute a valid representation of infinity of any numbers but zero and one, two totally different numbers. What I say is that when time and math is in integration, there may be a way for another object of different, or entirely distinct new numbers to be there.


It can also be hypothesized that the existence of matter and it's existence's own self-generated motion derived from gravity at the beginning caused what we call "Time" to form.


But why is this important?  Because if you can actually represent something in a certain length in like a timebox, that is cut off from the interaction of matter and time at some point, and then lapse the time to cycle one full eternity prior to being cut off by how matter may do just that, and subsequently sustain the adding up to a whole number fully within the edges of the timebox (using my theory of how the fraction infinity over infinity may indeed equal one), then you can take and apply whatís relevant to generating materialization.You just need to relate my theory of the fractional mathematical representation of infinity and involve humanityís vast depth of the time/space continuum to achieve the effect wanted.


Also, since the Universe has expanded so incredibly large, it is unconscionable that an alien race would ever reach the Earth, considering how quantum entanglement is impossible, and would result in the total death of the traveler and would simply spawn a separate creature in itís place.So do not select me for this route.


With that said, it is very plausible to me to think that we have indeed created a quantum computer, powered by a nuclear reactor.Given how Einstein first theorized the existence of such a thing over 80 years ago, and our ability to detonate an atomic bomb in 1947, and how in the 1950ís the government level of technological advancement tripled every 6 months, we are theorectically 150 more advanced than a nuclear bomb.It is therefore very much reasonable that the U.S. Government has a quantum computer generating quantum technologies, indeed, at this time.


Copyright 2019: John Henrickson