**J****OHN HENRICKSON’S PERSONAL PAGE**

**_______________________________________________________________________________________________**

**henricksonjohn@gmail.com
http://www.henrickson.org/john/Time
Numbers and Materialization.htm**

**April 24, 2019**

**TIME,
NUMBERS, MATERIALIZATION, AND BRIEFLY ABOUT QUANTUM PHYSICS**

**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 0’s and 1’s 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 what’s relevant to generating materialization. You just need to relate my theory of the
fractional mathematical representation of infinity and involve humanity’s 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 it’s
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
1950’s 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**