Home | Community | Message Board


Mycohaus
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Amazon Shop for: Morning Glory Seeds, Scales

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
OfflineArmageddon
Angel of Death
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/14/05
Posts: 22
Loc: London, UK
Last seen: 11 years, 9 months
The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained.
    #3818564 - 02/22/05 08:46 PM (11 years, 9 months ago)

The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained.
Summa Contra Materialism. To the Marxists. On the Unified Theory, the Four Elements of Physics, Armageddon, Einstein, Prometheus, Personalism, the Fifth Element and the 1000 Year Revolution of the Many Points of Light. To the Children of the Future World. VER III (Amended 22-02-04). Correction: LME not ELM.

Lucifer.
www.luciferia.tv
In London. 21-02-2004
Angel of Death. Judge of Judgement Day.
The Morning Star. The Fifth Element.

For Anarchist Communism.
For the 1000 Year Revolution of Light.
For the Final Revolutionary War of Economic Salvation.
The Secrets of Light.
______________________________

cc: sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity , sci.physics.research ,alt.astronomy, soc.politics.marxism,alt.anarchism ,humanities.philosophy.objectivism ,talk.philosophy.humanism ,talk.origins, soc.religion.paganism, soc.atheism, misc.activism.progressive, soc.culture.israel
Etc., etc.
______________________________
The One Fact.
The solution to the Uni (1) Theory.
The ?One? Theory is not a Theory it is a Fact.

Here are firstly my clear and scientific terms for the purposes of simple scientific shorthand. There are only four abbreviations.
(E(t)) for Ether, (L) for Light, (E) for Energy and (M) for Mass. By the use of the term ELME, I use this as shorthand for E(t)LME, or rather Ether, Light, Energy and Mass. In that order. The Order of the terms Ether, Light, Energy and Mass shall become important as I will explain. Ether (Et) is not to be confused with the term ?spirit? or ?person.? The term Ether is part of the ?stuff? of the universe and is a term of Physics, wheras the term ?spirit? or ?spiritual? has to do with metaphysics. E(t) is the space between the atoms and has nothing to do with Et in chemistry. For those struggling with visualising the meaning of the term E (Energy), I would recommend mentally substituting the term ?heat?? For those confusing Ether in physics with Et in chemistry, I would recommend doing a search on google for the physicist Wilhelm Reich who was imprisoned by the CIA in 1959, whose research was confiscated and who died in prison. By Ether as a term of physics I refer to Reich?s definition.
____________________

On the Four ELME?s and the Fifth element. Physics and Metaphysics.

E=MC squared. Light, Mass and Energy are interchangeable aspects of the one L.M.E

Matter is only one of the four ELME?s. In the Holy Trinity of the Physicists: Light, Mass and Energy are not ?separate.?
LME is one not three, however Ether (Et) is also required, for without the Et, the LME cannot exist as I shall prove in this essay.

__________________

The Uni (1) theory.

Which of the four ELME?s came first?

Since no physicist today was alive at the time of the creation of the universe, this is ?theoretical physics,? however this question should be able to be answered to the satisfaction of all physicists whether they are governmentalists or religionists (i.e. evil, the ?chaff for the fires of the Final Holocaust,? the ?demonaics?) or not. The unified (uni = 1) theory, if true should, I ?believe? be able to be explained both to other physicists and also to 12 ordinary people at a Clapham bus stop and should stand as ?certain objective knowledge? irrespective of whether those 12 people can be convinced of it or not. The Uni theory must stand up to all scientific criticism, and this cannot be confused with the three errors of a philosopher, Abuse, Sophistry and Contradiction, all of which one finds on Usenet; they who are ASC-ers are not askers; they are simply fools; the ?asker? asks questions and seeks the truth; an ASCer opens their mouth because they have to say something and they have no interest in the truth. The asker speaks because he or she has something to say and the ASCer speaks because they have to say something and this is usually mockery in the form of ASC.
___________________

ELME and ELME. E=MC squared simplified. The first atom in the Universe.

I the last of the four manifestations of the ELME to appear was not M but E. M is basically
L and Et. Mass is merely a concentration of Light. E (Energy occurs when L meets another M). When the light of the sun hits a Mass on earth, heat is the result, but out in space where the same Light exists it is cold. E does not occur until L hits M, and L is merely a concentration of L and what is true in the macro-universe is true in the micro universe. The first sub-sub (etc) atomic star in creation would have released L through the Ether, but there would have been no E (Heat) until the second sub-sub- (etc) atom star was born. Light is not hot until it meets M. I was spelling ELME (Ether-Light-Mass-Energy) as ELEM (Ether-Light-Energy-Mass) but this is impossible since there could have been no E (Heat) until the Light of the first atomic star of condensed Light (M) met the (M) of the second atomic star.
ELEM is a more convenient anagram since it is included in the spelling of ELEMent, and ELEM and Mentis (the Mind of ELEM) is very poetical, however I cannot envision how there could be any Energy if there was no-thing (M) for the L to hit.

Ether. All is One. The 1 fact.

Let us say that there are two atoms and we refer to these as M (Mass) and let us say that there is a space in between the 2 M?s, which is what I refer to as Et (Ether) and then let us ask the question of what would occur if this space (Ether) between the 2 M?s did not exist? The two would become One. To say that E cannot be created or destroyed is insufficient. What we need to say is that LME (Light-Mass-Energy) cannot be created or destroyed but only transformed from one to another, however without the existence of the Et, the LME would not be able to exist and not even a single atomic star could exist. LME can also be made into the anagrams LEM, MEL or ELM or EML, however this is not a matter of Egyptian mystery cultism (a/k/a Freemasonry / Usury) or of poetry, but of physics, so when I say that LME is the correct spelling I mean that L came first, then M (or a Mass of Light; i.e., an atomic star?) came after that and then E came after that, LME, however is not complete without Et (Ether). By E(t)LEM I refer to the process of creation in that order. Some might argue that E (heat) came first, but it is clear that heat (E) does not appear until L collides with M. Without Et, L and 2M (2 atoms), E is not possible. L converted E when the second atom in creation appeared.

Visualising Atoms and Ether.

Et (Ether), the space between the atoms, can be visualised by thinking about our universe of stars and the large seemingly empty spaces between the stars. Ether appears as if it is ?no-thing? or ?no-mass? but it is clearly a vehicle for Light to travel through, so while it may be no-thing, it is certainly not ?empty.? Just as the vast majority of space in the macro-universe is taken up with what appears to be the ?empty space? between the stars, so too in the micro-universe, the vast majority of space appears to be the space ?between? the atomic stars. If we imagine a water molecule, the best way to visualise the size of the three atoms in comparison the size of the space between them is to imagine the size of our sun and then imagine the distance between our sun and the nearest two suns, and this ?space? would be the Ether. In the macro universe however it can take 1000?s or millions of years for the light of a distant sun to travel to us, whereas in the micro-universe where the speed of Light is the same as it is in the macro-universe, the Light and magnetism of one star is only a mili-second away from the other star, and yet in proportion to the tiny size of the atomic star, the nearest atom would be a similar comparitive distance as the distance between the starts in the macro-universe, so it follows that if one wishes to visualise the atoms, one only needs visualise the sky on a starry night.

First Light, then Matter, then Energy (Heat). Where in the process of creation do we fit the L and Et?

When I refer to L coming before M, what I mean is that M is composed of massive amounts of L. A massive amount of L in an atomic star ?is? M. M has no existence independent of L. Without the appearance of L there would be no M. M is just a term in language to describe a concentration of L.

It seems at first glance that the Et would have to have come either ?after? the L or before the L, but if you think about this, there can be not even one lumen of L if there is no Et. L needs Et to travel through or it is not L. Without Et, Light could not exist and therefore Mass would not exist and the ELM would exist as best expressed in mathematics as zero as opposed to 1; i.e., there would be no ELM whatsoever. If we say that the origin of ELME is above, beyond, outside or ?meta? our universe, a conclusion which the study of physics demands, then that is not to say that the ELME did not exist prior to the birth of creation, merely to say that the ELME did not exist in our universe, since the ?stuff? of our universe ?is? ELME and without ELME there could be no universe.

Without Et there would be no space between any of the atoms of the universe and without the Et the first two atoms could not have appeared and there would not even be one atom, since an atom is an atomic star and it?s electron wave takes up space and the proton takes up space, just as the suns in the macro-universe take up space and the light that they radiate moves through space at just over 11 million miles an hour.

Light converts into Energy when it meets M (Mass / Matter). Without the first Light there would be no E. If we say that it takes a trillion, trillion lumens of L to make one unit of M, this is a poetical approximation, not a precise formula such as E=MC squared, however I am speaking in terms of visualising in our minds the process of creation. How much L in Lumens does it require to produce a kilo of matter? We already know how much energy (E) is required to produce a kilo of matter from Einstein, and it should be possible for mathematicians to calculate the L in lumens that is required to make a kilo of matter, however the number would be vast, but we know that the process of L converting into M is the process of creation and that it is actual. What is actual is not impossible; on the contrary what is actual is possible.

Whether the Et came first or the L came first is a puzzle that a scientific ?mentis? (mind) can resolve. There can only be one correct answer.

Let us say that there was L but no Et for it to travel through. How would you even know it was L? It would not be L without Et.
In the beginning there was the L and the Et. Huge amounts of L separated and from one atomic star there came two L this became L1 and L2. At this point there was a large (in terms of the size of the atoms) space between the L1 and L2 and the first E (Heat) came into existence. Without the Ether there would be no atomic stars in the micro and macro universe.. Most of the space in both the micro and macro universe seems to be empty, and yet L travels through this and can later be converted to E (heat). Et is not empty, but it is no-thing (i.e., no Mass, no Energy) and it is a container for L; L travels through ET

L converts to M just as M converts to L. When M converts to L and in the heart of a star, it leaves a memory to the surrounding universe which travels at the speed of light to our planet and can be converted back into E millions of years later when the L hits M (a solid object). To restate we know that L converts into M and that this would require a huge amount of L, and we know that it is possible because it has been actual in the process of Creation.

Why would Ether have to exist before Light?

Let us imagine that the time is a millisecond after creation and the first appearance of L; the birth of the first micro-atomic star; the sub-sub-sub-(whatever) atom. First Et then L, not the other way around, for without Et there can be no L. The speed of Light would be the same then as it is today and thus this first light would only be able to travel a calculatable distance in relation to time and the speed of L. Even with a very large nuclear explosion the speed of L is unaltered, and similarly at the point in time of the Creation of the Universe, L would be a constant. Thus this L would only be able to move a calculatable tiny fraction of a millimetre in the first micro-second after creation. This begs the question of what the L would move ?through.? Clearly without the existence of Et there is no possibility of L. When Et did not exist neither did L.

So some may argue that since this process then could not have begun with L it may have begun with E (heat). This is also not possible. When L appears and hits M, E is released. L transforms into E so what would the L travel through in order to meet M and convert to E (heat)? E (heat) appears when L hits an object (M). When L is released, E is always released, but when E is released in our homes by switching on electricity, we do not always see the L, but E (heat) can easily be converted back into L, and E is initially the effect of L converting to E when it hits M. First Light then Heat (E).

One cannot have a nuclear detonation without seeing the L, however a central heating radiator clearly releases E, but it does not seem to our eyes to release L. At the atomic particle level, all of the atoms are in fact atomic stars just like the big atomic stars that we see in the night sky and they are releasing L down in their own micro world. We cannot see the L from these atoms because they are too small. If we have a Mass such as a piece of metal, we tend to think that it is very dark in the middle of that Mass, since the L from the sun does not reach in there to light it up, but in fact all the atoms in that metal are like the stars in our universe. Just because we do not see the L when E is released from a radiator in a dark room, we tend to think of this E (heat) as not being connected to L, however E (heat) cannot appear without L first appearing and transforming into E, and since the LME cannot be created or destroyed, but rather only transformed from one to the other, the E from our radiator has been converted at some point from L. In a nuclear power station, small pieces of M are converted into L at an atomic particle level and the result is the conversion of L into E (heat). If we take this heat, we can convert this E back into L at some later stage and we know that they are part of the same ?stuff? of the Universe and interchangable. When there is Light, we always, always know that without exception there is E there. However when there is E, we do not always perceive L but E never the less is L that has transformed from L to E. First there was L then there was E. In that order. Not the other way around. There is only one correct answer to the Uni (1) theory.

First L or first Et? Why E(t)LME in that order of lettering and not some other anagram of the four elementals?

When the first atom existed there must have been Et already in existence, since an atomic star takes up space. M is just compressed L. If L existed and there was no Et, where would the L go? It would go nowhere; it would not be L; it could not transform into E . When the first L of the first sub-sub atomic star M (i.e, what the atomic star is made of) travelled through the Et there would have been no E (heat) until it hit another star (M). In order for L to go anywhere Et would have had to have been created. Without Et, L would not and could not exist. E(t)LME is thus the correct spelling order or the abbreviation ELME.

I cannot have a kilo of light or a hundred yards of light, but I can have a 1000 lumens of Light, however that 1000 lumens would not exist at all without a certain quantity in spatial dimensions of Et. Without Et, if we could stand outside the universe and compress all the LME down and get rid of all the Et, we would not see the L; it simply would not exist; it would take up no space; it would be a non-dimensional non-object and contrary to the position taken by some physicists, it would ?not? weigh the same weight as the current universe since it would not exist without Et. Ether is ?no-thing? or no-LEM and yet L travels through it. Without Et there is no LME; i.e., without Ether there can be no-thing (Mass) and there can be no Light and there can be no Energy. To say that Et was created ?after? Light does not make sense, since without Et, there would be no Light. Et first, then L, then M, then E. In that order. However since a concentration of L is in fact M, we could also say that LM came first, but since the M of an atom is composed of sub-atoms and these sub-atoms are composed of sub-sub atoms, the first atomic star would not really be an atom; on the contrary it would be the basis of the atom (i.e., the sub-sub atom); i.e. what the atom is made up of (i.e. even smaller atomic stars). E(t)LME. This is not an anagram, this is physics; this is the ?details? of Creation and the Uni (1) theory. The first L could not be measured in terms of E but only in Lumens, and this would require L and Et to exist. Then came E. The first Heat (E) in creation would occur when L meets a solid object (M; i.e. another sub-sub atomic star). All this would have occurred first in the micro heart of the first atomic star.

The micro universe of E-MC squared explained and simplified.

Since the atom if we could see it would appear as if a ?star,? this begs the question of why this star does not burn out and what is fueling it? There are not tiny people on this star burning trees. They would soon run out of wood to burn, yet an atom can exist for billions of years and it does not burn out. The answer to this question can only be the same as the answer to the question of why our sun does not burn out. Just as within the sun, tiny pieces of matter are converted into L and when they meet a solid M, E (heat) is released, so too it is in the micro-universe.

Physicists come up with all manner of Latin terms to describe the sub particles of the atom. Rather than speaking Latin, let us say that these small particles which constitute the atom, are to the atom like the M in our Sun which constantly converts into L and into E when it meets another M. This then begs the question of what the sub atomic particles are made of and the answer to this can only be that they are ?also? micro-suns which are constantly turning their micro-M into micro-L. This then begs the question of what the sub-sub particles are made of and the only possible answer is the same answer as for the sub particles. Let us then consider the sub-sub-sub-sub (etc.) particle. What is it made of? This cannot and does not go on to infinite causual regression. It cannot. It ends somewhere. What does it end with? Whatever it ends with is beyond physics; beyond the ELME; whatever it ends with is meta-ELME, and whatever it ends with is outside our universe. All the ELME of the universe has it?s origin in what can only be expressed mathematically as the number One. There can be only One. If the answer was zero, we would not exist and if the answer was two or more, then we would have two or more different universes with different laws of physics, but we know only this universe and that the universe obeys One central Law of Physics, not two or three. There can be only One and this One is meta-ELME.

If we compressed all the ELME in the universe and took out all the Et (the vast spaces between the atoms), what ?size? would the Universe be?

There is only one correct answer to this. If we compressed all the LME at the speed of L, this LME would take up less and less space until at some point it had a diameter of a millionth of a millimetre and then a millionth of a millionth of a millimetre, and so forth and so forth, however since the speed of L would be constant, this would not be an infinite regression and would stop at a certain point in time where there was no more Et for the L to travel through. If there was no Et in the universe, there would be no LME, for LME requires Et to exist, and so therefore if there was no Et, at the point of Et?s non-existence the exact size and weight of the universe would be zero. The Universe would then measure zero millimetres across and its weight would be zero, wheras a millisecond prior to the non-existence of LME, the weight of the last atomic star of L to disappear would still equal the weight of all the other atoms in the universe that had compressed into this one atom. In the absence of Et there would be zero LME. This would then lead to the questions of where this original ELME came from since prior to the creation it could not have existed. This is a question outside physics and has to do with meta-physics or ?meta-ELME? since the origin of ELME is clearly outside or beyond our universe of ELME.

ELMEentary (Element mentis) Mathematics. The difference between one and zero.

One or more than one (i.e., 2,3,4?etc.) cannot come forth from zero. In ELEMentary mathematics; in elementary mathematics, there is only one correct answer to zero plus 1. The One who created the ELME must be and can only be ?spirit (i.e. meta-physical or rather meta-ELME).? The One?s existence must have preceded the existence of ELEM. The origin of ELME is meta-physical not physical. Mass is ?physical? and yet we know that before the first M existed there was L and Et; both of which are required for M to exist. In the beginning all the L of the Universe converted into one atomic star and then split into two atomic stars. First L, then M then E.

This then begs the question of what created the L and Et? Since the L and the Et did not at one time exist at all and could not have existed, the only possible explanation of where the ELME came from and of what the ELME is made of is that it is meta (above / beyond) physical, or to be more comprehensive, meta ELME. The ELME is the effect of an intelligent meta-physical / meta-ELME Creator. We cannot prove the existence of this Creator since proof requires the evidence of the five senses and since the world of the five senses is the universe of ELME and the origin of the ELME is clearly ?beyond-ELME or ?metaphysical? then we cannot offer physical proof (or ELME based proof) of the non physical (or non-ELME).

The chances of our universe appearing as it does by accident are so infintessibly small as to be impossible. If the speed of L varied even slightly, we could not exist as we do and our universe would be different. Just as no monkey could accidentally type up a Shakespearian play by banging at random on a keyboard, this universe is the result of a Grand Design by a Grand Architect; this is the One Immanent Mother Creator as I intuit Her and that is my inner spirituality and that has fuck all to do with physics. Physics is about the details of Creation; Physics is the study of the four ELME?s. I seek to understand the mind of the Creator; that is a matter of Judgement; the separation of good and evil; that is not physics. Physics is a weapon with which the few will judge the many Governmentalists and Religionists in the Final Revolutionary War of Economic Salvation. Physics is the details of the Creation, not the mentis of the Creator.

Can Mass convert to Energy directly.

E=MC squared in practice (say an neutron bomb for example) appears to convert Mass into Energy. However if we again consider the Light from our sun travelling through for millions of miles and only when it hits M (Mass) such as a concrete slab on earth does it seem to us to convert into E (Energy / Heat). A good comparison to visualise the micro universe would be to compare the atoms to the suns in our universe. The sun is like an atomic star and the space between the suns is like Ether. I am not suggesting however that the space between the sun and the concrete slab is empty of Mass. Obviously there are atomic particles such as Oxygen (which is also an ELM atomic star) that it will first collide with on entering the atmosphere prior to hitting the pavement and this Oxygen will also heat up due to the collision of Light with the Mass that is the atomic star of Oxygen. It is clear that the conversion of L to E occurs irrespective of whether L hits a solid object or a liquid or a gas, all of which are M (Mass), though the particles are less closer together in a gas or a liquid. It is clear that since the same laws of physics apply to the micro universe as to the macro universe, that when the L is released from an atomic star, just as it is with the sun and the concrete slab on earth, this L does not convert to E until it hits another M (i.e., another atomic star). So when the Hiroshima bomb detonated, did Mass directly convert into Energy without first becoming Light? It did no such thing. It is clear that Mass (condensed Light) released Light first, and then this converted into Energy only when the Light hit another atomic star, just as it is with the light of the sun and the concrete on earth. Therefore Mass cannot directly convert into Energy; it must first convert into Light. This is not to say that the atomic star has no Light. The atomic star is like a tiny sun and it constantly gives out light just as our sun does, however we cannot see this light because it is too small. The Universe is made of Light. Mass is condensed Light. Energy (heat) is released only when L collides with M. Does the atomic star give off heat? If we were the same size as an atomic star and we stood in front of it, would it be like standing in front of the sun and when the L hit our body, would it convert to E and would we be carbonised? Unfortunately it is not so simple. If we stood in front of a molecule (a group of atoms such as H20), we would see that there were three stars not one, but if we were very far away the molecule would appear to us as if one sun, just as distant galaxies appear to the naked eye like the tiny dot of a sun. We must then ask the question of what the atom is made of. Rather than using terms such as quarks and leptons, let us just say that the atom is in fact a collection of much smaller stars, and the same laws of physics apply to these stars. So what are these sub-atomic stars made of? These sub-atomic stars are like small galaxies. They are actually a collection of much smaller stars. However the sub-sub-sub (wherever this ends) source of the Light which is the basis of Light would have to release ?only? Light. It could not be ?hot.? There would be no heat since heat (E) only occurs when L collides with M (a concentration of L) and there would be no M, since M is an effect of the concentration of Light in an atomic star and we are speaking of the root cause of all atomic stars in the entire universe. This One Light Source of the Universe could not be hot (No E and No M). So is there no heat on the surface of an atomic star? Of course there, however this atomic star only seems to be like a star because we are too far away to see the sub-atomic particles (i.e., the smaller atomic stars that the atom is made up of. Asking what the atomic star is made of is like asking what the sun is made of. The sun is made up of small particles of mass that are converting to L and then to E when L collides with another M. Similarly the atom, just like our sun, is made up of much smaller atomic stars much like the particles of M on the sun that convert to L. That is not only the reason why the sun does not burn out, but it is also the reason why the atoms and the sub atoms and the sub-sub atoms do not burn out; there is no other possible explanation unless we refer to magic instead of physics and I for one do not believe in miracles; E=MC squared cannot be changed unless the Creator changes it and if this occurs none of us would exist and the universe would cease to exist.

ELME is not the Creator. Miracles are impossible.

The ELME has been created. No person can change the speed of light in the Universe and no person can alter the fabric (the ELME) of the universe. Miracles are thus impossible, even for the Creator, or the universe would not exist as it does. The Apocalypse and the miracle of the feeding of the 7 billion, or however many remain after the Final War will not be a miracle by religious definition but will be scientifically explainable. I seek to evoke only what is possible, not what is impossible. What is actual is possible. E=MC squared is actual not possible. Apocalyptic War against the Governmentalists and Religionists (i.e., the chaff for the fires of the Final Holocaust) is possible and what is possible shall become actual by the future application of militant free will; if that is not morally justifiable as the will of the Creator then She must be evil.

The problem we face with converting L to M.

Let us say that a million years ago on a distant star, M converted into L and then into E when the L met other M?s. The L flies out all around the universe and we see only a tiny part of the L and we see it a million years later, wheras E in the form of heat would be mostly felt only by planets that are within a few minutes journey at light speed from that sun, and this E would appear when L hits M on a planet and converts into E. We on earth however could see this L from this sun that was created a million years ago by the conversion of M into L and we could place this million year old L which still exists today in the present, into a series of mirrors (a lazer) with no moving parts and we could generate E. This is a million years after the conversion of M to L. The ELM cannot be created or destroyed; it can only be transformed; the Lazer does not create L or E, the lazer only releases dormant E by the intensification of L. The L that we have from our lazer is simply not enough to create M, but we ?know? with absolute certainty that it is possible. To convert the L to M would require us to gather together all that L which has been flying out around our universe for a million years; we simply cannot do that; we could only convert that L to E if the L met with a solid object and to do this we would have to place a giant sphere of M around that sun in that would be a million light years from the centre of the star to the edge of the sphere (i.e., the radius), then we would have to find a way to convert all this E back into M, without losing a single unit of E in the process. Impossible though it may seem, we know that L has converted to M in the process of creation and it is only a matter of time before the conversion of L to M becomes a reality in popular physics. What is actual is possible.

The 1000 year revolution of Light is as far as I am concerned initially about military victory over the Governmentalists and Religionists and their total and merciless annihilation, however after their defeat and their mass executions (Holocaust), it is about limitless free E. Another aspect, which to some physicists is a ?conspiracy theory? regards passing through the ELME from one point to another in real-time beyond light speed and I will also deal with this matter in this essay.

In the beginning there was the Light?

To restate / summarise. If we hold up a magnifying glass to the sun it is clear that after travelling for millions of miles, that the L converts back into E when it meets M and that L and E are one and the same and interconvertable. L to E is obvious to us but in addition we know that the conversion of L to M is possible and actual in the process of creation; the acceptance of the possibility of us converting L to M is also demanded by E=MC squared.

A concrete slab left out in the sun in will have a higher temperature than the temperature a meter above the slab and than the temperature in space 1000?s of miles up, even though that area of space is closer to the sun than the slab. If we place that concrete slab 1000 miles up in space with or without a lense in front of it, L will still convert to E and the slab will be warmer than the surrounding temperature in space. This is L to E conversion. If we point a telescope at a distant star and direct this light through a series of mirrors (i.e. a Lazer) as the ancient Egyptians did, this apparently small amount of L created millions of years ago will then re-convert into E in the form of heat. What is missing from the pyramids in Egypt is the giant moats of water that surrounded them; that is not a conspiracy theory but a fact. These moats were not ornamental. Light produces Energy (Heat). In a nuclear power plant, water is used to cool down the reactor. In ancient Egypt, the pyramids had channels which let in the L from distant suns. If we pass L through a series of lenses and reflectors, L can be converted back into E. The Egyptians were Light scientists, not merely Religionists and Governmentalists. Light and Heat is the secret of the pyramids; they were not merely tombs for the burial of dead tyrants; the ?tomb? theory expounded by the British museum is a conspiracy theory in the fashion of ?Elvis is still alive.? People may believe what they want but Elvis is dead and the Egyptian ?tomb? theory is worthy of ridicule (it is ridiculous). The purpose of the Pyramids was the generation of Heat from Light.

When M converts to E on our sun, people on earth can point up, many minutes later and say that L is coming from a certain direction and so forth. That L can be converted to E is common knowledge. That L can convert back into M is not a conspiracy theory any more than E=MC squared is a conspiracy theory. The people who believe that L cannot be converted into M do not fully understand the implications of Einstein?s EML equation. They are not physicists, they are religionists and doubters and they do not understand the process of creation.

Light can be converted into Mass.

If L could not convert into M, I as a person (the Fifth Element) would not exist.
I am the living proof that L converts to M.
L, E and M are one and the same; they are interconvertable aspects of One LEM. ELME is impersonal and not the Creator.

The doubters may argue that if they hold up a magnifying glass to the sun, that they can convert L to E, but not to M.
If a tiny piece of M on a distant sun releases E, then L can be seen throughout the universe in all directions at the speed of light and even if we capture a tiny fraction of that light and place it into a lazer, we can produce what seems to us to be a large amount of E, imagine then the amount of L it requires to make a single gram of M or a unit of E. It requires huge amounts of L to create a small amount of E and it requires large amounts of E to make a small amount of M; thus converting L to M would clearly require almost unthinkably huge amount of L. If we take the speed of L and square it, most people would just consider that to be a very big number, and they would understand that 1 kg is small and that ?lots? of E was released from a small amount of M at Hiroshima and that the sun above them does not burn out because of this same phenomenon of the conversion of small amounts of M to L. The Light that was released at Hiroshima was due to the conversion of 0.6 grams of Mass, just as the Light that we see from our sun is the effect of the conversion of small amounts of M. It is clear to any physicist watching the film of the Hiroshima detonation that it requires massive amounts of L to create 0.6g of M. We thus could not create a gram of M merely with the light from a torch or a cigarette lighter any more than we could provide enough Energy to light up the City of London by boiling a kettle of water with a candle.

I takes a huge amount of L to transform into E and M. It is understandable that some will doubt that L converts to M, but we know that this is the process of Creation and that it is not only possible to convert L to M but actual.

How to convert L to M? (How to convert Light into Matter?)

We begin with the presupposition that this has already occurred or we would not exist. We do not need to ?believe? that this is possible. This is actual. This process has already occurred and we are the empirical proof of that. We can say that we know (certain knowledge) that LME is One. This is not a belief; this is physics.
The question at hand is how we as the Fifth Element (the Person) can convert L into M. In an neutron bomb M is converted to L and to E when L hits another M. If we stood on another planet just after the Hiroshima detonation, and with a telescope, we saw that L, many minutes after the conversion of M to L on earth, we could place that L through a series of mirrors and E would appear; we know that L can covert to E, but where is the M? It requires such large amounts of L to create the existence of M and through our telescope and our lazer we can only capture a tiny amount of L, and this is simply not enough to create M, and yet we know that M is just compressed L.

From the micro universe to the macro universe. From Physics to Astronomy. Passing through the Light. The Golden Gate.

Let is say that there is an atom on a planet on the other side of the universe. This atomic star contains the same LME (Light Matter Energy) as an atomic star in our finger. If we compressed all these atomic stars (micro-suns) in the universe, the amount of Et (Ether) in the universe would become smaller and smaller, but the LME would have the same weight until the point of zero Et. The atoms in a glass of ice are closer together than the atoms in a glass of water, and these are closer together than the atoms in steam, but the weight of the gas and the glass of water and the ice is the same. At some point we might have all the LME in the Universe down to 1 cubic centimetre, however if we weighed this on a scale, this would have the same ?weight? as the universe ?weighs? today, but only as long as Et existed. The LME cannot be created or destroyed, but the LME can be squashed together and amount of the Et can be reduced or increased, depending upon whether the universe is expanding or contracting, and the LME ?can? cease to exist in our universe if there was no Et..

At the point of creation, Ether came into existence. One Light became many Lights. All Light all comes from One universal Light. To say that we can travel through a device on earth and end up in a location millions of light years away is not a bizarre conspiracy theory. The Luciferian cultists who are the current narco-terrorist governmentalist mafia who own many of the world?s leading Usuryist organisations already believe this, for this belief is central to their cult?s symbolism and initiation rituals, and they are far from being unscientific; on the contrary science is put to use by these vermin for military purposes.

It is not only possible for the atoms on earth to have the same source as the atoms in a planet on the other side of the universe, it is actual. All is One. Light, Ether, Energy and Mass are One. The Four ELME?s are as if ?one;? they have One Unifying Creator, not two or three Creators arguing over physics and with different laws of physics.

The worship of L (Luciferianism). The Secrets of Freemasonry.

L is only one part of the Holy Trinity of Physics.
The Luciferians do not worship the LME / ELME, they know about it and study it just as their Egyptian forefathers who were also Religionists and Governmentalists did.

These are the secrets of Lucifer (the Light).

The ?Messiah? or ?King? of the Luciferian cultists (to cull: ritualistic killers / militants) is a person who is alive and is mortal just as we are. When he dies, he will be replaced by another king.
The poor seem to believe that a ?Saviour / Horus? will appear who will be able to wage war against the Luciferian Masters and to destroy them utterly, before they take over the world. I am merely the Judge; after me shall come the executioners of apocalyptic Judgement. After me the deluge. My militant apocalyptic will shall triumph.

Where the eagles are gathered??

Marx dedicated his PhD to Prometheus who allegedly stole the secret of L from the gods (rulers) and gave this secret to humanity, and as retribution he was tortured by eagles, and under torture he cried out that he would rather be tortured than worship an unjust god (ruler), however Marx did not possess the secrets of L, he was not the Promethean figure that he compared himself to; Marx had nothing to reveal of the nature of Light and he was an evangelical governmentalist and M-ist (Matter-ist); the first Marxist revolution (Lenin?s revolution) was financed by the world?s leading Usuryist families who are themselves associated with the cult of the eagles; they were and are today Egyptian mystery cultists and evangelical militant governmentalists and religionists not Communists (Fr. Communare: to share). Marx was not a Communist (Sharer) but rather a Governmentalist and his materialism is not even good metaphysics and it is even worse physics, it is not physics at all; it is simply not scientific.

Physics is forever. The proponents of the many different forms of governmentalism and religion shall all eventually be abandoned to their father in Hell where they belong; in terms of the time scale of history they are alive but for a blink in the eye. Their evil is but a spec of dust in the sands of the universe.
Their rule shall not be forever.

Property is Theft. Anarchy is Order. Words are weapons. Propaganda is the first stage of war.
Religion is the opium of the people.

Lucifer. February 2004.
www.luciferia.tv
The Light.
The One and Only ?ex officio? Messiah.
There can be only One.
The Fifth Element.
The Judge of Judgement Day.

For Anarchist Communism. The rejection of all unjust gods.
The 1000 Year Revolution of Light.
No mercy on they who deserve none.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleshroomydan
exshroomerite
 User Gallery

Registered: 07/04/04
Posts: 4,126
Loc: In the woods
Re: The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. [Re: Armageddon]
    #3818847 - 02/22/05 09:33 PM (11 years, 9 months ago)

Wow, that's really long man. What's the upshot?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!
 User Gallery Arcade Champion: BMX Tricks
Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,417
Last seen: 10 months, 18 days
Re: The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. [Re: shroomydan]
    #3820639 - 02/23/05 02:43 AM (11 years, 9 months ago)

basically someone took some acid after reading an outdated physics book.... Ether has become a crutch of some theories to balance out mathematically themselves


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineArmageddon
Angel of Death
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/14/05
Posts: 22
Loc: London, UK
Last seen: 11 years, 9 months
Re: The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. [Re: shroomydan]
    #3820771 - 02/23/05 03:20 AM (11 years, 9 months ago)

>Wow, that's really long man. What's the upshot?

In Summa.

The Four Elements of Physics are One. That is a fact not a theory.

Light = Mass = Energy.

That equation has no numbers in it and obviously there are three different units of measurement; what I mean is that the three are one and that the one is three, and that this is physics not spirituality; the stuff of the universe, what the atom is made of is LME. These are interconvertible; one can become the other. We have heard it said that E cannot be created or destroyed but I would say that LME cannot be created or destroyed; one can only transform into the other.

The Ether (not Et in chemistry) is the space between the atoms. It is 'not' empty. 'All' Et in the micro and macro universe is full of Light. Et 'contains' the Light which can become Heat and Mass.
Ether, Light, Heat and Mass are not separate but One. There can be only One and that is a fact.


1: Light transforms to Energy (that is obvious; we all know that already)

2: Energy transforms to Light (that is obvious; we all know that already)

3: When a tiny amount of Mass converts to Light and then meets another Mass (i.e. another atom), that is a neuclear weapon or a nuclear power station. (that has only recently been public knowledge since Hiroshima and Einstein's E=MC squared)

4: Light can be converted to Mass. Some would not 'believe' this, but this is the implication of E=MC squared and it has been actual in the process of Creation and what is actual is possible and will become possible for all physicists in the future.

Secondly:

The Revolution of the many points of Light.
Travelling through the Light in real time beyond lightspeed.

This is allegedly a conspiracy theory depicted in the Hollywood movie 'Stargate' and is a central conspiracy theory of the Masonic cult and has been depicted in their artwork for generations.

This theory is based on the One Fact. The root of an atom on the other side of the universe an atom in my finger and an atom in your finger all have the same One origin and that there can be no distance between one and one. If you have one apple, what is the distance between that one apple and itself? The answer is zero and the consequences of the One Fact (formerly the Uni Theory) are that the answer to the question of what the distance is between the root of the atom in my finger and the root of the atom in your finger are is that it is the same answer as for the apple?

Can I travel through the Light, beyond lightspeed to where you are?
Theoretically Yes, but I would require a certain device such as is the central myth of the signs and symbols of Freemasony (Egyptian mystery cultism) and I have not yet fully worked out this device but I have perfect faith that even if I do not succeed that others who come after me will succeed; thus do I seek to plant this seed into the minds of humanity.

Just as Einstein knew that E=MC squared but he could not originally construct an atomic bomb, I know that L=M=E and that they are one, but I have not yet constructed such a device that will allow me to demonstrate it.

Einstein knew that the Nazis understood the implications of E=MC squared and the consequence of that was that Rosevelt was convinced into spending billions on the Manhattan project.

In the Final War against the world's Economic Masters, the Masonic Usuryists who enslave the world and prepare for apocalyptic war, these Egyptian cultists have already long known the secrets of Light and that L=M=E; they have know since the day I was born and they have known prior to the industrial revolution and the atomic age and their Egyptian forefathers knew this.

This is the greatest scientific secret of human history and this is probably how we arrived on earth several hundred thousand years ago.

The only way to defeat the current Masters is to use the same weapons as they have; thus I have attempted to explain the secrets of Light to humanity; L=M=E will in time be universally understood. War, Revolution against all governments and the Revolution of the many points of Light is only a matter of time. Just as it was only a matter of time after the revealing of E=MC squared until there was a neutron bomb, it is only a matter of time after it is understood that E=M=L that 'travel' will occur through the Light and this has military applications of course.

What is actual is possible.

An Empire that has been created in a 1000 years can be eradicated in the twinkling of an eye; it shall always be easier to destroy than to create; in this repsect the Anarchist Communists are guaranteed eventual victory.

It is only a matter of time; whether I live or die, the Empire of the Sun shall fall.

Lucifer / Prometheus 2004.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineArmageddon
Angel of Death
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/14/05
Posts: 22
Loc: London, UK
Last seen: 11 years, 9 months
Re: The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. [Re: Armageddon]
    #3820792 - 02/23/05 03:30 AM (11 years, 9 months ago)

>basically someone took some acid after reading an outdated physics >book....

Abuse and contradiction which contain no argument and evidence to support the contradiction is not an argument but the last cry of the desparate.

A wise person speaks because they have something to say and a fool speaks because they have to say something.

If you don't accept that E=MC squared it is not sufficient to say 'I don't agree with that' or 'that is outdated,' without evidence and argument; however if you are correct, don't forget to apply for the Noble prize for physics.

If you don't accept my E=M=C and the explanation of the One fact, then you need to offer argument and evidence against that.

It is always easier for an ignorant fool to mock the wise than for the wise to explain the truth to a fool; indeed it takes a fool to debate with a fool, for a fool is not interested in the truth.

>Ether has become a crutch of some theories to balance out >mathematically themselves

That sentance makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and pure Sophistry (i.e., you are speaking meaningless rubbish by joining words together in a seemingly pretentious fashion ).

I may be casting pearls before swine and giving what is food for the children to the dogs, but let me just say that Sophistry, Abuse and Contradiction are not forms of argument (Gr: dialetic); they are the certain sign of the ignorant who wish to be seen by others as wise.

Lucifer


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineCrazyBusiness
Stranger thanyou think
 User Gallery

Registered: 02/17/05
Posts: 136
Loc: Under the stairs.
Last seen: 9 years, 7 months
Re: The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. [Re: Armageddon]
    #3820992 - 02/23/05 06:46 AM (11 years, 9 months ago)

Abuse: This uppity British know-it-all is typical of his Country, and uses big words and grand theories he probably copied from some hokey ass website to hand out the same insults he gripes about, when recieved in real English. Fuck yo' legs, bitch!

Sophistry ( do believe you've got your definition screwed on this one, has nothing to do with strings of nonsense or whatever you said, just to do with an intentionally fallacious argument in hopes of decieving someone..): Given the propensity of Einstein to abuse ground Morning Glory seeds, I believe your theory is bunk, because parts of it are based on his work.

Contradiction(I dont see how debate or argument can exist without this one): I disagree, and deny the validity of your statement.


All jokes aside, nice post, interesting theories, but I really doubt you'll find responses to your liking in a hippie dominated spirituality forum on a site dedicated to magic mushrooms.. This is classic advanced theoretical physics, have some respect for it and take it where it will be loved by all :smile:


--------------------
...in my opinion

Life's too short, man.. Life's too short. Dont hate me, and I wont put space between us. Dont lie to me, and I wont dislike you. Keep an open mind, and I'll love you.

My advice of the week(do this, you'll like it): listen to Mahogany Rush.

Representing Beatiful British Columbian classic dank. Just think, Columbia for coke, British Columbia for buds. truth


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 29 days, 6 hours
Re: The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. [Re: CrazyBusiness]
    #3821080 - 02/23/05 08:27 AM (11 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

3: When a tiny amount of Mass converts to Light and then meets another Mass (i.e. another atom), that is a neuclear weapon or a nuclear power station. (that has only recently been public knowledge since Hiroshima and Einstein's E=MC squared)

4: Light can be converted to Mass. Some would not 'believe' this, but this is the implication of E=MC squared and it has been actual in the process of Creation and what is actual is possible and will become possible for all physicists in the future.




*cringe* Einstein is rolling in his grave after hearing this...

Nuclear fission occurs when a free neutron transfers energy to the nucleus of an atom causing the atom to fracture into parts. The sum of the binding energy of the parts is less than the binding energy of the whole... the excess energy is what causes the explosion, or powers the generator.

Light is created by photons. Photons have no rest mass which is why they can travel at the speed of light.

> This is classic advanced theoretical physics

*laugh*


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineCrazyBusiness
Stranger thanyou think
 User Gallery

Registered: 02/17/05
Posts: 136
Loc: Under the stairs.
Last seen: 9 years, 7 months
Re: The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. [Re: Seuss]
    #3821087 - 02/23/05 08:33 AM (11 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
Quote:

3: When a tiny amount of Mass converts to Light and then meets another Mass (i.e. another atom), that is a neuclear weapon or a nuclear power station. (that has only recently been public knowledge since Hiroshima and Einstein's E=MC squared)

4: Light can be converted to Mass. Some would not 'believe' this, but this is the implication of E=MC squared and it has been actual in the process of Creation and what is actual is possible and will become possible for all physicists in the future.




*cringe*  Einstein is rolling in his grave after hearing this...

Nuclear fission occurs when a free neutron transfers energy to the nucleus of an atom causing the atom to fracture into parts.  The sum of the binding energy of the parts is less than the binding energy of the whole... the excess energy is what causes the explosion, or powers the generator.

Light is created by photons.  Photons have no rest mass which is why they can travel at the speed of light. 

> This is classic advanced theoretical physics

*laugh*




I didnt say he was right or wrong, I chose not to argue the point as its not my field.. No reason to scoff at me, but its all good :smile:


--------------------
...in my opinion

Life's too short, man.. Life's too short. Dont hate me, and I wont put space between us. Dont lie to me, and I wont dislike you. Keep an open mind, and I'll love you.

My advice of the week(do this, you'll like it): listen to Mahogany Rush.

Representing Beatiful British Columbian classic dank. Just think, Columbia for coke, British Columbia for buds. truth


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 29 days, 6 hours
Re: The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. [Re: CrazyBusiness]
    #3821590 - 02/23/05 12:04 PM (11 years, 9 months ago)

> No reason to scoff at me, but its all good

Not you... The joys of quick reply... my retort was meant for Armageddon.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinedr0mni
My Own Messiah
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/21/04
Posts: 2,921
Loc: USF Tampa, Fl
Last seen: 9 years, 5 months
Re: The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. [Re: Seuss]
    #3821826 - 02/23/05 01:08 PM (11 years, 9 months ago)

I really like what you are getting at. First god separated the void (made space/ether), then he said "let their be light", then he made the earth (mass), and then all the crazy shit that's been going on since (energy). And since everything runs in cycles/circles, everything is interchangable...

The only problem is that you made you post way too long, repetitive, and unorganized. After I got the basic concept I really couldn't pay attention to all that anarchy stuff, sorry. Other than that, it was very thought provoking. Thank you for stimulating my brain!

dr0mni


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineerags
Get the most outof your gourd
 User Gallery

Registered: 02/15/05
Posts: 97
Last seen: 11 years, 10 days
Re: The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. [Re: Seuss]
    #3841109 - 02/27/05 02:26 PM (11 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

*cringe* Einstein is rolling in his grave after hearing this...

Nuclear fission occurs when a free neutron transfers energy to the nucleus of an atom causing the atom to fracture into parts. The sum of the binding energy of the parts is less than the binding energy of the whole... the excess energy is what causes the explosion, or powers the generator.



Suess-
you rock.

Armageddon-
Temporal Lobe Epilepsy wherein sufferers have feelings of profound religiousity or connection to the Universe n(the one). Hypergraphia is a symptom of TLE where the sufferer writes pages upon pages of their "revelations" during the periods of seizure. Was this post your only excursion into stream of conciousness writing or are you cheast high in a sea of notebook paper.


--------------------
http://www.bumwine.com/


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineNikoK
Stranger
Registered: 03/28/11
Posts: 31
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
Re: The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. [Re: erags]
    #14581046 - 06/08/11 07:42 PM (5 years, 6 months ago)

Grand Unified Theory has several variations....

This ties in very well http://fringe-forum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=326973


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDoc_T
Random Dude
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/06/09
Posts: 42,395
Loc: Colorado Flag
Re: The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. [Re: NikoK]
    #14581050 - 06/08/11 07:45 PM (5 years, 6 months ago)

This thread did not need bumping.


--------------------
You make it all possible. Doesn't it feel good?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineNikoK
Stranger
Registered: 03/28/11
Posts: 31
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
Re: The One (Uni) Fact. The Uni (1) Theory Explained. [Re: Doc_T]
    #14581645 - 06/08/11 10:10 PM (5 years, 6 months ago)

Sometimes bumping can be fun, reminds the moderators that they aren't moderating perhaps.

Pruning would help.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

Amazon Shop for: Morning Glory Seeds, Scales

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Why evolution isn't a scientific theory.
( 1 2 3 4 ... 13 14 all )
Mr. Mushrooms 10,021 267 04/20/09 05:22 PM
by zouden
* Cultivation Theory teknix 1,287 2 05/16/10 09:50 AM
by teknix
* ****ANSWERS....**FACT** ---- Creating SOMETHING from NOTHING (nope).... . . .
( 1 2 3 all )
PhanTomCat 2,608 43 03/15/05 03:37 AM
by PhanTomCat
* Intellegent Design- a 'science' occupying the negative space of evolutionary theory?
( 1 2 3 4 ... 18 19 all )
johnm214 12,474 377 06/27/09 09:42 PM
by boygenius
* what do you think of this theory? Jive turkey 957 11 09/17/07 02:36 PM
by BlueCoyote
* Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!)...
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
Shroomalicious 6,411 107 05/03/10 03:26 AM
by Withinity
* A New Theory of the Universe
( 1 2 all )
psychomime 3,978 31 10/04/07 09:14 PM
by onlynow
* Anyone who feels worthless needs to convert to Hinduism GreenMachine 538 12 12/28/09 08:09 PM
by Icelander

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Diploid, DividedQuantum
1,685 topic views. 0 members, 2 guests and 9 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Zamnesia.com
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.226 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 14 queries.