Technical details
NOTE: Except for body characteristics, some values here may not be well established facts, rather hypothesized values based on my theories and research. However, evidence for all this exists and is
provided here and in my other works.
| Soul.name: | Amenoum |
| Soul.species.dominant: | U-1.graviton.neutrino |
| Soul.host.graviton: | U1.10C/10Be.inner.graviton.3 (SolarSystem.planet.Earth.graviton.major) |
| **Soul.orbital.inclination.to.equator: | 56.6° |
| **Soul.orbital.equator.intersections: | 60° E, 120° W |
| **Soul.orbital.semi-major: | ≈6367116 m |
| **Soul.orbital.eccentricity: | ≤0.0000016 |
| Body.name: | Ljubičić.M |
| Body.species: | homo.beta.amenoum |
| Body.properties.blood.type: | 0 (Rh: -) |
| Body.properties.eyes: | grey/blue, ≈1/5 central heterochromia with golden streaks |
| Body.properties.hair: | black (dark brown), dense |
| Body.structure/metabolism.primary: | ectomorph |
| Body.structure/metabolism.secondary: | mesomorph |
| Other details |
| Corpuscular lifetime period*: | $\displaystyle \left( 50^{+35}_{-15} \right)\pm2\,\, years$ |
| Last strong soul transformation (energy level change): | $\displaystyle \text{age}\,\, 36\pm 1\, (\text{year}\, 2017\pm 1)$ |
| Possible triggers (source deaths) of last energy level change: | Domović.J, Tilikum (lower probability) |
| Last birth date: | September 1st, 1981. |
| Last conception (body-soul coupling) date: | ≈ November 1st, 1980. - January 1st, 1981. |
| Age at next death† (soul/body decoupling): | 85±2, 50±2, 76±2, 66±2, 120±3. |
| Other: | biography |
| Plog: | Amenoum |
| ORCID: | 0000-0001-9400-0551 |
Philosophy on success
I do not want to earn and use money in modern economies because these economies are largely unsustainable and evil from a non-anthropocentric perspectives such as mine. However, is it possible to
live a satisfying life today without money and at least some of the products and services of the modern economy? Especially considering the fact that it's becoming more and more difficult to grow
one's own food? As much as I'd like to live a life independent of the modern economy, I'm not equipped to survive in the wild, and the equipment I have evolved would be wasted without the
stimulation correlated with the modern world.
For years now, I am living without having a job and without earning any money, but I'm deeply unsatisfied, mainly because the food I eat comes from my parents who still are a part of the modern
economy, thus, indirectly I am too. I am trying to grow my own food and I certainly hope one day I will be able to survive on it and live independently, but I am definitely not convinced this will
be entirely possible, let alone bring me complete satisfaction. I do not need much, but I do want to balance my material and spiritual needs.
When I was expressing polarized behaviour I had more than enough money and was very satisfied in material way, but was deeply suffering mentally. Now, it's vice versa. I really do not like this
kind of oscillation between material and spiritual satisfaction. Therefore, I seek balance, which for me defines success. And that ain't easy in a world favouring imbalance (inequality) on so
many levels.
Success is generally relative. I tend to align with the Zen philosophy in this context, where a man satisfied with his [achievements in] life has succeeded in life. A beggar comfortable asking
a billionaire for money has succeeded in life equally as a billionaire comfortable with giving money to a beggar.
Is there a satisfying solution and do we deserve it? I believe giving up on everything and simply dying, as much as it can be inviting in these times, is just an option, not a solution. I believe in
reincarnation and karma, so what's the point of dying if one is going to be born into an even bigger mess, with all previous knowledge erased? And I have attained a lot of knowledge over the
years, so it would probably be good to use it to spend the years I have left as meaningfully and as sustainably as I can. Thus, since I haven't yet reached self-sustainability, and I'm really not
comfortable with dependence, I could use some money.
The problem with modern economy, of course, is not the money itself, rather the unlimited growth and unscrupulous nature of the majority of that economy. Limiting where, how and how much money to
spend one can minimize its unscrupulous footprint on this planet (it's impossible to avoid it completely as long as one is, by paying goods and services, also paying taxes).
I do not want money for nothing. It would only be fair for those who find value in my work to give something back.
| Support addresses |
|---|
| Solana (SOL) | ⧉ | CpMfGAKMX4Mj8LScyk4aMG6gtyFfgZpzNG6XFAkUV8Hy |
| Algorand (ALGO) | ⧉ | WASLHBYEYCM24RX7ZSX3PXXDFDVTRYXGM5JMDRDQAWSCZT4KFRTRPWTX4I |
| Paypal (PP) | ⧉ | amenoum63{EAT}gmail.com |
| Home (H43) | ⧉ | 108. brigade ZNG 43, 35252, Sibinj, Croatia |
Buying crypto is easy, today it can be done even with Paypal. One can find instructions here.
Thank you.
There still exists a bank account on my name, and at this point, anything sent to that account would go to money (debt and tax) collectors.
I don't believe giving money to thieves is good even if some of it will end up in good hands, but if you believe I should be paying off this debt, here's the
account: HR7023400093216232043 (SWIFT: PBZGHR2X).
Contact
To contact me for any reason, one can use the postal address stated above.
One may also use the form below to send a message.
\ch_added
What I am and am not
I'm not polarized so I do not take sides. I'm not on the side of mainstream science, mainstream religion, or, so called, alternatives. I see myself as a messenger of
truth, or a messenger of gods of truth (I have my own definition of gods, my closest god is Earth). I would be lying, as anyone else, if I would say that my science or my knowledge is absolutely
free from religion. My science is my relative religion, my religion is relative science. I can be right, I can be wrong, but if I find my religion wrong I do not hesitate to make it
right. In fact, I strive to make this religion as scientific as possible. My religion, however, does not include worship, sacrifice or gods as absolute deities, it includes karma, reincarnation, real
and possible gods, all of which I define using scientific principles and ascribe to physical phenomena. The foundation of my scientific religion is the theory of "Complete Relativity", a universal
framework in which, I find, everything can be explained on a fundamental level. With this foundation in the background, I then explore the details of phenomena.
Any hypothesis is a quantum of religion which may be based on science. Any evidence is a quantum of science which may be based on religion. In any case, science is an evolvable and unbiased
religion. Truth is relative. How much quanta of evidence one needs to accept the hypothesis? Some hypotheses one might accept as truths with less evidence, some with more. I do not readily
accept truths with zero evidence. I seek more. But I'm not afraid to challenge truths served with plenty of evidence. Because evidence itself is relative and the
observers, in polarized society, are commonly biased. Truth can be personal as well, what one observes, the other might not have the capability to observe. This does not have to be a matter of
technology. Anyone of us is one of a kind and one of many. Some may be more of one than one of many. Of course, in polarized society, some will project the illusion of being more of one than of
many, or, vice versa. To find truth in this society, wisdom, unbiased and thorough research, are essential.
The name
I usually don't take people's names too seriously. In polarized human systems, name is just an alias for a number. That's why it usually has no deep meaning, just an illusion of deeper meanings.
Names are, however, useful constructs, and as I grew, I've used different ones for myself, depending which one was describing me the best. Thus, what is commonly considered a nickname, commonly
better represents the person behind it. Generally then, I may consider nickname as a real name, and given name as a meaningless alias.
When I was younger I called myself 'm3gadeth'. From that, one can deduce that I was a big fan of the band Megadeth, while the number 3 (inverted letter E) hinted at computer hacking
abilities (today, however, cyberspace is polluted with normal people, who don't respect any naming conventions and even steal nicknames, but whatever). From what I found out
later, the combination of number 3 and megadeth is not a meaningless coincidence, even though I did not consciously choose that combination to represent something with a deeper meaning.
Later, I was known as PaleRider, a name which reflected my calmness and cold-blooded appearance (I was also somewhat of a fan of C. Eastwood at the time) and hinted at solitude and lack of sunlight exposure.
I also used to be a big fan of AC/DC and sometimes used a nickname associated with the band. Again, I've found a deeper meaning in this (e.g., correlation with Tesla).
I still use these [nick]names in places, but mainly because I still use my old accounts at these places. My most recent name, however, is Amenoum.
Amenoum (Latin pronunciation) is a string constructed from 'Amen, of unpolarized mind'. Amen is a combination of singular and plural form (a men), used here for two reasons - vertical
reincarnation and horizontal fragmentation. One can be strongly localized mentally (mental singularity) and weakly localized physically (physical plurality), but just as a physical ecosystem may
form an individual body neither is mental singularity absolute.
Each individual is, to certain extent, extroverted, being part of a global collective and participating in evolution of its host (god), and introverted, concentrated on the evolution of a
local, inner universe (to individuals of which it is a god).
As for the name forced upon me at birth (given name), Mario, I never liked it and I always considered it meaningless. However, it does have a meaning in Croatian language and it
actually turned out to even be appropriate for me. It could be translated to English as "the one who cared". Yeah, I never had a choice not to care... For god's sake, apparently I even cared
about the name.
Declaration of independence
Declaration of independence, arrangement and conditions on relations with the human kind can be found here (HR). In short, no
one has the right to own me without my conscious consent.
Past and present lives
Here is a hypothetical list of incarnations of my soul (self). The list is based on my theories, research, experience, including studies of biographies (where possible) and any available
historical writings on the individuals in the list. I hypothesize that ages of death for particular soul are not random, rather are most likely to occur about the years of soul/body
transformation. The stronger the transformation the higher is the probability for death. The ages of transformation, at least for neutral subspecies, evolve weakly between incarnations.
Current period of corpuscular existence pulses of my soul is:
$\displaystyle \left( 50^{+35}_{-15} \right)\pm2\, years$
which means that my soul is generally oscillating between 85±2 and 35±2 homo years of lifespan, with 50±2 years being an alternative (or additional cycle in the oscillation) of
lower probability (correlated with weaker transformation).
Small deviation here (±2 years) is primarily due to differences in the rate of ageing between incarnations. In other words, biological age between incarnations of the same soul should be the same, it is the
chronological age that deviates. Other values (35, 50, 85) represent major discrete energy levels (ages of stronger soul/body transformation). Deviation can then also be interpreted as fine-splitting of the
energy levels, depending on soul polarization. Minor energy levels exist as well, which are, in my case, at 23±1 and 43±1 years, but others, less prominent, exist as well. It appears that
distance between energy levels in adults in roughly 10 years, but strength of transformation (which is generally also proportional to the probability of death) varies between them. Some energy
levels appear to be shared between different subspecies (e.g., the level at 43±1 years seems to be common for both neutral and polarized subspecies). In fact, all levels may be the same between
subspecies, it may only be the strength of transformation and the rate of ageing (which may introduce stronger deviation in chronological age) that is different. A recent study has found
two transformational ages for the general population (highly correlated with the rate of ageing), one at
about 44 years, the other at about 60 years. Note that I have hypothesized the age 43 to be a transformational age (albeit much weaker than the one at 36) for my subspecies after I've noticed
some physiological changes in myself (this was before I was aware of the study). Clearly this level is shared between different subspecies of the population. Interestingly, a different
study has found transformational
points at 34, 60 and 78 years of age. Age 22-23 is a well-know
peak of testosterone and related hormons - also known as the
end of pre-adulthood or early adulthood, so that level is globally shared as well. In a recent study it was found that significant
brain rewiring occurs on average at ages 9, 32, 66, and 83 (note that age 9 is the average age for the start of puberty).
A study on a cohort of Chinese women has found dramatic
physiological changes (ageing correlated) at about the ages of 30 and 50. This may then be interpreted as evidence that the level at 35 is shared as well, but the actual age may differ between
men and women. An even more recent study has also found big
changes (ageing acceleration) at about the age of 50. So the 50 y level appears to be shared as well. Obviously, however, significant difference exists in transformation strength between subspecies/individuals as evidenced by my own
transformation (which includes what may be interpreted as a nervous breakdown or a major psychosis) and transformations of Newton, Tesla and others that probably belong to neutral
subspecies. An indicator of this difference is the fact the both Newton and Tesla lived up to the age of about 85, which is much longer than the current world average for men and about 7 years
longer than the current EU average for men. Note that I have experienced significant ageing slowdown and even reversal at about the age of 36, which is probably what Newton and Tesla experienced as
well and what may be common for neutral subspecies. In one interpretation, the soul of neutral subspecies is polarized until the event of strong transformation at about the age of 36, when another
soul (with a different spin) couples to the body. It is then the spin anti-alignment of the two coupled souls that makes the individual neutral, and effectively asexual (assuming soul spin is
reflected in gender, two anti-aligned spins would effectively annihilate the gender). The anti-alignment, however, cannot be perfect (and it may be more complex rather than simply reduced to
spin) but it explains why adults of this subspecies are commonly single - there is no strong desire to couple with other individuals as the soul is already coupled with a soul of opposite
polarity (spin) in the same body, enabling the one to focus on other interests (e.g., science). Nonetheless, from an evolutionary perspective, genuine asexuality does not make much sense (unless
one is evolving towards a species with no need for sexual reproduction). Therefore, the asexuality in this subspecies may be imaginary at least in some cases - the lack of partnerships being a
consequence of the rarity of individuals of this subspecies. I, for example, since the transformation, cannot imagine myself living with a polarized female anymore (I tend to avoid anything with a
high potential to complicate my life or inhibit my thirst for knowledge), but that does not imply I desire solitude - I see it simply as a better option given the circumstances. After all, this
solitude is very relative, as I do have company in my own body if not in another.
In my case, or in case of neutral subspecies generally, 50-60 years may be the coded biological age of incarnations (in case of polarized population, it may be closer to the chronological age) - it is the
rate of ageing that is different between different souls. With a decreased rate of ageing in a human body, this, in my case, becomes equal to 85±2 years of chronological age. The same average
rate of ageing most likely applies to all the homo, and possibly cetacean, incarnations (regardless of chronological lifespan) of the same soul - implying that deaths at 35 or 50 years, for
example, are not due to biological maturity. In the bodies of other mammalian species (e.g., canine), the rate of ageing can be increased, reducing the chronological lifespan significantly, but the
biological lifespan probably remains the same.
The rate of ageing, in general, is probably highly correlated with the strength (and/or periodicity) of coupling of the soul to the body - the stronger the coupling the slower the ageing. This is
correlated with the type of intelligence. Higher extroversion (further correlated with higher metabolic rates) generally highly correlates with faster ageing (it should be noted though that a
difference in ageing exists on different levels - difference exists between organisms, but also between organs of the same organism, cells of the organ, etc.).
For [more] polarized souls, in an environment of changing polarization (which I correlate with the local electro-magnetic field changes), the lifespan is not as fixed.
I also hypothesize that uncoupled souls lie on fixed orbitals. The orbitals have a spin velocity equal to the standard speed of light (c) but they are also rotating and this rotation is
synchronized with Earth's body rotation. At the time of coupling (conception), the soul first collapses to a ring-form before localizing to the forming body. This then implies that all incarnations
of the same soul at the time of conception should lie at the same orbital line (ring). Sites of conception are usually unknown, however, it is usually safe to assume that the site of conception is
at, or close to, the location of birth. Birthplaces of different incarnations should all thus also lie at the same orbital line, at least roughly.
Another interpretation exist, although effectively roughly equal. It implies that the space-forming orbital consists of two entangled components. One is the angular component (which may be interpreted as
a group component of the wave), the other is a radially oscillating component (which may be interpreted as a phase component of the wave). In this interpretation the radial component is at rest
relative to the angular component (which is spinning at the speed c and rotating about the Earth's centre with the rotation period equal to the rotation period of Earth's body), but it is
oscillating radially. It is then the radial component that is [the soul] coupling with bodies, returning to the original entanglement at the time of decoupling (e.g., death). However, even in
this interpretation, although it allows deviation, most likely site of localization of the soul is at the orbital line. Note that two souls, with anti-aligned spin, could be forming the radial
component. In that case, the orbital component may be interpreted as a neutral graviton forming the local space (and having a spherical form), while the radially oscillating gravitons (souls) are
polarized components of that space (probably having an oscillating ring-like form). Spin anti-alignment of the two, however, implies no net spin polarization and should cancel the radial
oscillation as long as the two are coupled.
| Annus incarnati β (AB) | Body.name | Date of birth | Date of death | Lifetime (extra+in utero) [years] | Notes |
|---|
| -9. | Pythagoras | -573* | -488* | 85+0.75 | Physical evidence lacking. |
| ... | - | - | - | Possible cycling: $\approx 36 + 85.$ |
| -6. | Ptolemy I Soter | -367 | -282 | 85+0.75 | Stronger evidence lacking. |
| ... | - | - | - | Possible cycling: $\approx 2 \times (36 + 85) + 36.$
One possibility is Eratosthenes*** (282 BC - 196 BC)*, or alternatively, Polybius (208 BC - 125 BC)*. Marcus Livius Drusus (124* BC - 91 BC), a Roman reformer, would align well with Polybius, less likely alternative is Cato Minor (95 BC - April 46 BC) - which should be followed by 35 and 6 (possibly canine), and would probably rule out Polybius. |
| 1. | Christ.J | -5.06.03** (Hebrew 3756.04.01) | 33.04.03 | 36.82+0.75 | Physical evidence lacking. |
| ... | - | - | - | Possible cycling: $13 \times (85 + 36 + 0.75 \times 2)\, \text{homo/homo, or }\\ \text{homo/O.orca or B.musculus/homo or B.musculus/O.orca}\\+ 16.66\, \text{other animal (e.g., 2 canine).}$ One possible alternative for (85+36) is (50+35+36), e.g., 33 (1514 AD - 1547 AD) + Giordano Bruno (1548 AD - 1600 AD) + 36 (1600 AD - 1636 AD) + 6 (1636 AD - 1642 AD). Interestingly, assuming the last 6 years here are canine, the remaining 10.66 canine years together with 85.75 years would fit nicely between Christ and Galen (September 129 AD - 216 AD). Alternative to Galen is Decius (201 AD - 251 AD) and/or Claudius Ptolemy (83 AD - 168 AD)*.
Additional candidates: Justinian I (482 AD - 565.11.14) or (probably more likely) Abu Talib (535 AD - 619 AD), al-Saffah (721 AD - 754.06.08), Jafar al-Barmaki*** (767 AD - 803 AD), al-Tabari*** (839 AD - 923.02.17), al-Ma'arri (973.12 - 1057.05), Al-Ghazali*** (1058 AD - 1111.12.19), Thomas Aquinas*** (1225 AD - 1274.03.07) or (more likely) Albertus Magnus (1195* AD - 1280.11.15) or Robert Grosseteste (1168 AD - 1253.10.09), Nicolas Flamel*** (1331* AD - 1418.03.22) or (more likely) Jan van Eyck (1390* AD - 1441.07.09), Raphael*** (1483.04.06 - 1520.04.06) or (more likely) Thomas Müntzer (1489 AD - 1525.05.27) or Martin Waldseemüller*** (1470* AD - 1520.03.16) or Moctezuma II*** (1471* AD - 1520.06.29).
Incorporating some lower probability lifespans (43, 23 years): Geert Groote (1340.10 - 1384.08.20), Lorenzo de' Medici*** (1449.01.01 - 1492.04.08) - compatible with 84+85 before A. Magnus and 23+33 before G. Bruno (or 85+33+33 before Newton, excluding G. Bruno).
Possible female candidate: Hypatia (370* AD - 415 AD). |
| 28. | Newton.I | 1643.01.04 | 1727.03.31 | 84.25+0.6 | An alternative, less likely, is Frans Hals (1582* AD - 1666.08.26). |
| ? | 1727.05.31 | 1735.04.19 | 8+0.17 | Possible canine form (50y homo equivalent). |
| 29. | Watt.J | 1736.01.19 | 1819.08.25 | 83.6+0.75 | Stronger evidence lacking. A very convincing alternative is Warren Hastings (1732.12.06 - 1818.08.22) - note that this alternative would give 4.77 years (canine equivalent of 35 human years) in the incarnation above. |
| 30. | ? | 1820.06.25 | 1855.09.09 | 35.20+0.82 | |
| 31. | Tesla.N | 1856.07.10 | 1943.01.07 | 86.5+0.82 | |
| 32. | ? | 1943.11.07 | 1980.11.01 | 36.98+0.82 | Serbian/Croatian parents.† |
| 33. | Ljubičić.M | 1981.09.01 12:00±45m (CET) | 2066.09.01 | 85±2+0.82 | Lifetime here is expected lifetime based on soul oscillation (reincarnation) hypothesis, current biological age (rate of ageing) and theory on planetary neurogenesis, according to which this may be my last homo.β incarnation.
Death during what may be the last surface extinction wave (2060 - 2084), according to one model. With no deviation, the year occurs exactly at 1/4 of the interval: $2066 = \bigl[2060+(2084-2060){1 \over 4}\bigr]$Beginning of the period (2060) previously calculated by Newton (although questionable as evidence). Confirmation and details in The Solar System paper.
Assuming death at birthday, the exact date is day 243.5 in year 2066, which is equal to: $2000 + 100{2 \over 3} = 2066.666'\, years$My birth occurred on day 243.5 of the year 1981 (1981.666').
In the above, 1 year is assumed to be equal to Earth's orbital period of 365.25 days. |
Table 1: Possible example of oscillation of incarnations
* these ages are estimates, different ages can be found across different literature, real ages are unknown (e.g., ages 490-497 BC for Pythagoras death can be found in literature, common estimate for his date of birth is about 570 BC).
** -
year is certainly plausible, exact date - derived in
biography, is questionable.
*** - the birthplace is far from the hypothesized soul orbital, e.g., in case of al-Tabari, the
birthplace (Amol, Iran) is about 1500 km away from the soul
orbital, thus, unless larger deviation from the orbital is possible, plausible only if the conception site is significantly far away from the birthplace (which may not be impossible, at least in case of al-Tabari Arab origin), note that al-Tabari agrees well
with al-Saffah (interval of time between the two is 85 years), but also with Jafar al-Barmaki (36 years interval).
† - information based on [hypothetical] visions, reliability questionable.
Additional notes: Lifetimes
in utero are unknown in most cases, the values used here are estimates based on common pregnancy periods for the species.
Note that all animals here are mammals. Also note that different species age differently, with smaller species typically ageing faster, e.g., the age of 8 years in a small mammal can be the
equivalent to 36 years of human age. Hypothesized excess of 16.66 years in the cycling between Christ and Newton, for example, could represent one 12-13 year old large canine (equivalent
to 85 human years) and one 4-5 year old canine (equivalent to 36 human years). Note that, for blue whales (B.musculus), ageing rate is equal to human ageing rate. Similar is the case for O.orca.
Differences in ageing exist even between individuals of the same species (based on genetics/epigenetics). This difference should not be large between incarnations of the same
soul (as genetics/epigenetics is hypothesized to be similar), but should explain the small deviation. Human incarnations with a lifetime of about 36 years here, however, do not imply
faster ageing, rather a
premature death. Note that ages of
premature death are not random either, they tend to occur at an age that would be equivalent to a normal lifetime in
some other species present in soul oscillation (with the ageing rate difference accounted for).
Note also that, in case of extreme difference in ageing, the cycling may not be evident. In example, there are cases in the Table 1 where an 85y incarnation is followed by another 85y incarnation
instead of a 36y incarnation (or equivalent in a faster ageing species). There are two possible interpretations. Note that in all these cases the lifetime ages are estimates, it is possible then that
another incarnation exists in between the two albeit a fast ageing one (e.g., where 1-2 years is equivalent to human 36 years). Another interpretation is graviton (soul) reflection or oscillation
reset/recalibration.
- closeness to the hypothesized orbital line that passes through Woolsthorpe UK and Bethlehem on a globe (constructed using Google Earth),
- correlation of lifespan with hypothesized major energy levels associated with homo chronological ages of 85, 35, and 50 (including ±2 years deviation), where 85 and 35 years generally have
higher fitness than the age of 50,
- transformational ages (incarnations with transformational ages at 35±2 and 50±2 are considered top candidates, where transformational age is usually correlated with some kind of psychosis),
- overall fitness to the whole list of incarnations (e.g., gaps of 85±2, 35±2, 50±2 years and biological age equivalents - 15±1, 5±1, and 8±1 years - associated
with canine species, are considered most realistic),
- aligned (shared) physical and mental characteristics and anti-aligned physical/mental characteristics (incarnations are assumed to oscillate between aligned and anti-aligned
characteristics, or, generally, between aligned and anti-aligned transformations, e.g., between polarized and non-polarized personalities), where some should be invariant - eye-colour, for example, is
considered to highly correlate with the species (subspecies) of the soul (in this case it should be grey/grey-blue),
- interests and experiences (it is hypothesized that different incarnations of the same soul will tend to experience qualitatively equivalent phenomena - at least in case of aligned incarnations, the more
experiences shared the greater the fitness).
\ch_added
Soul orbital path
Fig. \fig20250102: Soul orbital path
Fig. \fig20250102 shows the hypothesized orbital path. Birthplaces of the best candidates are marked green (dark green marks a possible conception site for Tesla). Birthplaces of other candidates
for which birthplace is known and are not very far from the line are marked yellow/orange. Known places of death are marked red.
This can be explored in more detail through Google Earth.
Note that, considering a potential conception site of Tesla (instead of his birthplace) - Draganići, a line could be constructed where deviation of sites of best candidates would be ≤56.6 km. Interestingly, the
hypothesized inclination of the orbital to the equator (equal to its latitude at 30° W) is 56.6° - the same numerical value.
Is there a deeper meaning in this synchronicity? A signal that this is a good choice? One cannot be sure.
The maximum of 56.6 km is certainly a realistic value for the deviation of the birthplace from the conception site of an individual, even taking into account that a woman may be unlikely to travel
in the advanced stages of pregnancy, and considering modes of transport available over time. However, as noted before, depending on the distribution of localization probabilities, even deviation of
the conception sites from the straight line may be expectable.
Discussion on hypothesized oscillation
Most candidates in Table 1 are great thinkers/philosophers with similar personalities and philosophies, but there are some peculiar exceptions. There are also gaps for which no suitable
candidate may be found. One explanation of this is karmic oscillation on the scale of incarnations, where personality is cycling between incarnations. Consider, for example, the gaps
surrounding Newton, Watt and Tesla. Assuming the oscillation is karmic, these gaps would represent incarnations that were relative opposites of the great philosophers. It is possible that in
these incarnations, for example, the extroverted expression of intelligence is too limited (e.g., with a canine body/brain in some cases), and/or too clouded (e.g., by depression), resulting in poorer
mental performance. However, what actually are different incarnations relative to the karmic oscillation? It is possible that, in case of 85 year lifespan there are two karmic periods. One example
of this may be my own life - I have been experiencing depression until about the age of 36, but then the soul/body transformed and it disappeared. In some incarnations/periods, thus, intelligence may be
high and neutral, in some it may be high but clouded/shielded (with expression limited to limited comfort zones), in others low and neutral, or low and clouded.
In the context of karmic oscillation, interesting are the candidates such as Jan van Eyck and Raphael. Although I can appreciate art, I could never be a great painter or sculptor, and the same can be
said probably for most of the great philosophers in Table 1. Jan van Eyck here is a stronger candidate. His birthplace (Maaseik, Belgium) is very close to the orbital line and, according to what
most likely is his self-portrait, he had
blue-grey eyes (which is generally very rare as an eye-colour but seems to be shared between all candidates here for which that kind of information is available) and other facial
characteristics that seem to be shared between prominent candidates (e.g., size and shape of the nose).
It is also possible that some incarnation candidates belong to a different soul but are still entangled with the oscillation of this soul. As noted before, it is possible, and probably likely, that
the soul orbital contains two souls and, at any time, one of these souls is in a ground vertical state (uncoupled to a body). Thus, the two souls could be exchanging states between incarnations.
However, these two souls evolve together and are highly correlated, with a major difference being in the spin momentum (the two should be anti-aligned), which probably translates
to a difference between a male and a female body in the incarnations. In that case, the gaps in Table 1 may represent females and a relative karmic oscillation on the level of sex/gender.
Interestingly, I may have had a vision of the moment of death in a female body in one
of these incarnations. Furthermore, this hypothesized incarnation (Hypatia) fits well in the list of incarnations above (she died in 415 AD, probably at the age of 44±1). Evidence suggests that the cycling
of souls between male and female bodies may not be unusual. I suspect that, at least in case of neutral subspecies, gender (associated with specific soul polarization) is fixed between
incarnations, making every incarnation in the body of opposite polarization (sex) homosexual. In fact, however, gender correlated soul polarization is probably fixed in all subspecies. This implies
that about 50% of the population should be homosexual at any time. Although this doesn't seem to be the case, the rarity of homosexuality might be an conscious or subconscious illusion stimulated in
order to ensure reproduction of species. This can be compared to the cultivation of cells - reproduction grows exponentially until some peak is reached, when it stops. Decreasing fertility in humans
and the apparent increase in [the expression of] homosexuality suggest that the peak for humanity is near. What creates the illusion of heterosexuality in the anti-aligned coupling of souls and bodies? Obviously, it
must be the body, or some part of the body (possibly the sexual organ[ism]), that is affecting the soul of the brain on some level of consciousness. However, different interpretations
exist, depending on soul complexity. Apart from spin, for example, the soul probably possesses chirality. It may be that the chirality is fixed (associated with gender), while the spin (associated
with sex) alternates between incarnations. If this spin is further correlated with Earth's electro-magnetic field (not necessarily continuously, rather at times - e.g., at the time of soul-body
coupling), a decreasing strength of the Earth's magnetic field could be proportional to spin delocalization (deviation from eigenstates), effectively decoupling the spin from the body, resulting
in the dominance of chirality (gender). Thus, homosexuality in humanity will probably increase until 50% of the population becomes homosexual. The others may become infertile, or effectively asexual, in
different ways.
It should not be impossible, however, that both souls are coupled to some body at the same time. But are they going to couple to different bodies? Different interpretations exist, but it could be
that the coupling of both souls to the same body is what makes the person neutral (and effectively asexual - one reason being that the individuals of such [sub]species are rare) - which then would
be what happened to me about the age of 36.
In another interpretation, both souls are coupled to the same body from the moment of conception but in a spin-aligned state, making the individual highly polarized. The individual then becomes
neutral if the coupling transforms to a spin anti-aligned state. In any case, this transformation should be correlated with some effective trigger and that trigger is probably an event of
transformation (possibly death, more likely in stronger transformation events) of other related/entangled souls (e.g., death of a relative or some symbiont).
Transformations in general may be correlated with deaths of other souls, which are in some way entangled with the soul of the individual. Souls lying on the same orbital are good candidates for
the entanglement. Consider the case of Newton and Frans Hals. Hals died in the year 1666 AD, at the time when Newton was 23 years old, the age which I have identified as transformational for this
kind of souls. Note that Hals birthplace (Antwerp, Belgium) practically lies at the hypothesized orbital, he had
grey-blue eyes - according to the self-portrait done when he was aged ~66, and he lived up to the same age as Newton. The age at which the self-portrait was made is probably not a coincidence
either, this age (66) represents another transformational age. Apart from already noted brain rewiring at about the age 66, studies also show hormonal
changes about the age of 65, typically correlated with the accumulation of fat. Note that the numbers 22-23, 33, 43-44 and 66 are common in synchronicity events and, from my experience, one is
more likely to experience synchronicity during transformation events (where the intensity of synchronicity is proportional to transformation strength). Not only do these numbers appear during
transformation, they seem to represent the typical ages of soul-body transformation.
The truth is, hadn't that transformation been successful, I'd probably die or end up in some mental institution. While I cannot be absolutely sure that my soul is
the same soul that was incarnating in Jesus' body (or any other body in Table 1, apart from mine), I am confident that these souls were at least similar enough for me to understand them
properly. Jesus, for example, probably was a highly intelligent but depressed man. His trauma reached climax sometime about the age of 35 when he started transforming and acting like a
prophet (prior to that he was probably very shy - which can be correlated with introversion but proper interpretation is a severely limited comfort zone). Had he lived through that
transformation (he may have actually survived it, but not before crucifixion), instead of Jesus the Messiah, he'd probably be known as Jesus the great philosopher. Thus, crucifixion of Jesus was
probably a big sacrifice indeed, mostly a sacrifice of the progress of science towards the truth for the advancement of certain religion towards the illusion of reality.
Luckily for religion, reincarnation is real - even if not absolutely, so the religious get to crucify Jesus again and again. Luckily for science, crucifixion has become less deadly over
time. In the end, truth will triumph, one way or another - even if there won't be anyone to live in it. That's the apocalypse Jesus was announcing. His prophecy wasn't wrong but
it was only him who lived it back then. He lived your future at the time, even if unconsciously. It's simply a manifestation of the karmic oscillation on the level of reliability of
information. If the time has been sacrificing truth and messengers of truth, the time must come when the carriers of illusion will be sacrificed together with the disease they carry. The day
may be years or thousands of years away, but on that day
one won't have to force the word Hallelujah into Jesus' mouth. He himself will be the expression of the word.
\ch_added
Correlation with brain neocortex layers
I have previously found high spatio-temporal correlation between Earth's mantle
discontinuities (layers) and transformational events on its surface (correlated with mass extinctions). I suspect that similar correlation exists between neocortex discontinuities (layers) in
humans and soul-body transformational events. Correlation, assuming lifespan of 85/83 years, is shown in Table 2.
| layer | normalized average thickness | age interval (85y lifespan) | cumulative age (85y lifespan) | cumulative age (83y lifespan) |
|---|
| VI | 0.183 | 15.555 | 15.555 | 15.189 |
| V | 0.211 | 17.935 | 33.49 | 32.702 |
| IV | 0.109 | 9.265 | 42.755 | 41.749 |
| III | 0.296 | 25.16 | 67.915 | 66.317 |
| II | 0.113 | 9.605 | 77.52 | 75.696 |
| I | 0.09 | 7.65 | 85 | 83 |
Apparently, at least some of these represent hypothesized energy levels and transformational ages found in studies (34, 44, 78), while others can be derived from these (probably correlated with
specific oscillation between energy levels). The obtained 15.555 age can be correlated with the end of puberty (it is also well
recognized as the peak of growth hormone production), age of 33.49 with the 35±2 energy level, 42.755 with the 43±1 level. Adding the interval
correlated with layer I (7.65 years) to 15.555, one obtains 23.205 years, which can be correlated with the 23±1 level. Adding the same interval to 42.755, one
obtains 50.405 years - the 50±2 level (and the 50y transformational age found in studies). Adding 17.935 to 42.755, one obtains 60.69 - the 60y transformation age found in studies. Since these
energy levels appear to be shared between different human individuals (regardless of subspecies) and the values for neocortex layer thickness are average values (that do not discriminate between
different subspecies), these are interesting results. This suggests that 85 years is the coded biological age for humans and biological clock may be synchronized with chronology when the individual
is neutral. Thus, the biological clock is accelerated for individuals with a lifespan <85 years, and decelerated for those with a lifespan >85 years. This would explain the reversal of
ageing I have experienced about the age of 36. I was polarized before that transformation. With the transformation I became neutral so the ageing was temporarily reversed to synchronize the two
clocks, extending my chronological lifespan to 85 years.
I have always been a strong user of the brain, especially after transformation - when its usage further increased and diversified. Those who use their brains have younger brains (although it is
important not to overuse certain areas and neglect the others, which can be correlated with diseases even in young brains), just like the use of muscles results in younger muscles. The same is true
for other organs. However, when it comes to lifespan, studies
show that the age of the brain is far more important than the age of other organs. This too goes in favour of my predicted lifespan of about 85 years. Thus, in my case, just like in case
of Newton or Tesla, it is probably not the brain that will kill me, it's likely to be a failure of other organs.
Note that deviation in layers thickness and transformational ages exists between individuals. My transformation at 43 years of age (my age at the time of this writing) agrees well with the age
in Table 2 (unless I haven't yet reached the peak). However, the transformation that occurred about the age of 36 seems to have occurred about 3 years later than expected for the
average. Thus, layer V in my case (and generally in my subspecies) may be somewhat thicker than the average, and/or layer VI. Significant enlargement of layer VI though may be unlikely as it
implies unusually late puberty - it's probably more likely that, as the layer V expands, layer VI shrinks a bit. It is possible that the transformations themselves last longer in my
subspecies. The one at 35±2 years certainly is much stronger in this subspecies. It is thus possible that the events I have experienced about the age of 36 represent the peak of transformation
that started about the age of 33 (may be correlated with the rate of ageing). In any case, however, the discontinuities in neocortex layers should probably correlate with peaks.
Ageing reversals may be common for transformation events, regardless of subspecies, difference may be primarily in strength. The correlation here suggests that enlarged neocortex layers may
indicate higher potential for the rewiring of the brain in transformation events, which could translate to stronger ageing reversals in these events. However, this may also be correlated with
an increased risk of mental disorders, such as schizophrenia (which may be interpreted as corruption or abortion of the rewiring process during a transformation event).
As noted before, a recent study has identified 4 turning
points (transformational ages) in the wiring of the brain, on average, these are the ages of 9, 32, 66, and 83. This, again, confirms the above hypothesized correlation of ages with brain
layer thickness. Obiously, however, not all transformational ages involve strong changes in the brain, rather in other parts of the body - which can also influence behaviour. The found
transformational age of 9 is very interesting, as noted before, it can be correlated with the beginning of puberty, however, it also suggests the existence of the 7th layer in human brains, based
on the hypothesis above. There is no 7th layer identified in the studies of neuroanatomy, however, sub-laminar divisions do exist. Layer VI is commonly divided into two subdivisions (roughly
equal), and age 9 can easily be correlated with associated discontinuity. Layer III is commonly divided into 3 subdivisions, this can be correlated with transformational ages 50 an 60. Layer V
is also subdivided into 2 subdivisions, which can be correlated with the transformational age 22-23. Other layers are not usually divided into subdivisions.
Added chapter Discussion on, and determination of, probability.
Discussion on, and determination of, probability
I will here list the requirements for the hypothesis of reincarnation to be true and try to calculate the probability for one of the incarnations in Table 1 to be associated with the same soul as
the one coupled to my body.
Requirements
The existence of souls
The analysis of the Solar System in the context of Complete Relativity (CR) shows
that it is a large scale equivalent of a quantum system, albeit in a relatively special state (regarding scaled pressure/temperature).
Furthermore, the same paper and other articles on this website show that there is no discrete absolute boundary between living and non-living systems, all such boundaries are relative and it is
more appropriate to discuss the amount of life in a particular system and what is the ratio of externally to internally expressed life, intelligence, or consciousness.
Universe does not discriminate between physics and biology and, after all, if it is completely relative, then, for any quantum of energy, there must exist a reference frame (scale) relative to
which it is not only alive, but a complex form of life. E.g., one may consider a localized subatomic particle as an elementary point particle, but if one would have the ability to increase the resolution
of measurement, in some particular states, one would see a planet - as shown, the Solar System is the evidence for that.
And if any quantum of energy is more or less alive and it oscillates, then the only requirement for existence of reincarnation is that it oscillates in coupling with matter (visible, or real, mass).
A special mechanism (Higgs) which had to be invented in order for particles of standard model in Quantum Mechanics (QM) to obtain [rest] mass and existence of dark matter hint that coupling of
particles with real mass is not intrinsic - quanta of energy can be naked. If one interprets these naked quanta of energy as souls, reincarnation becomes a real phenomena.
There is no doubt that even human beings are particles from a certain perspective and the only requirement for them to be able to reincarnate is to have a distinct soul (mental
individuality). And if standard particles have souls (those that some still don't consider alive), why wouldn't homo particles have souls too? Indeed, I have shown in my works that they most
likely do.
Compatibility
Each soul is a relatively discrete amount of energy, it co-evolves with bodies and its coupling with species of bodies (ecosystems) generally won't be random.
Just like the [souls of] particles inside the atom oscillate, human soul will oscillate too between different energy levels.
The period of time soul spends on each level is, in equilibrium, relatively constant (evolves slowly) - incarnations oscillate between relatively fixed lifetimes.
Frequency of oscillation changes with changes in the 3rd party medium - in this case, Earth's space.
High divergence is thus expected only in events of strong evolution - transformation of species through accelerated evolution, when soul settles into another equilibrium, oscillating in a different energetic
setting (environment).
Note also that time of death is programmed to high precision, whether it is considered sudden, violent or occurring with old age. If a soul oscillates between 85 and 36 years in human lifespan, death
in the latter will likely be violent.
This would be the equivalent of standard [horizontal] energy level changes of atomic electrons in QM. In such oscillation there is no change in species (average mass on each level), however, the
state of particles (planets) in the Solar System shows that particles can oscillate in mass (lepton oscillation with localization) without changing the horizontal energy level relative to the system.
In that case (mass change), a soul will couple with different species of bodies, evolving in the same environment. Here, soul may even invert polarity (reflected in extro/intro intelligence
ratio) preserving lifespan between species, but with a large difference in mass.
Soul is dominantly a carrier of consciousness, and, thus, experiences, while the body is dominantly a carrier of physical characteristics. Compatibility for body-soul coupling will thus be
proportional to the matching of characteristics with experiences, respecting evolution of both. Bodies can carry consciousness as well but that consciousness is fragmented into micro-conscious
entities (e.g., cells). Entanglement, and effective two-way communication, exists between the micro-conscious entities and the consciousness of larger scale coupled to the body.
A soul may couple with non-compatible species of bodies in between (probability for coupling of a particular soul and body is also inversely proportional to distance in space/time between
death and conception), but such coupling is unstable, increasing probability for premature decoupling (death) - which may be synchronized with the opportunity for more compatible coupling.
Soul thus has affinity for certain characteristics of bodies - which are coded at some level (i.e., DNA).
If souls and bodies co-evolve, both mental and physical characteristics should be more or less preserved between horizontal incarnations. Although, one must take into account evolution, some
characteristics evolve weakly (especially during periods of weak evolution of the planet/environment), such as:
- blood type,
- physique/metabolism,
- gender,
- nature (e.g., extro/intro ratio) and amount of intelligence/consciousness,
- etc.
All organs have souls. Soul of the brain is the primary soul of a human being (our mentality is primarily correlated with the brain). Therefore, the soul of a brain may be considered as the soul of
a human being itself. However, this soul is obviously in symbiosis with souls of other organs and another discrete soul representing superposition of all these souls cannot be excluded.
Organs can be replaced so this superposition is obviously plastic, but I think we'll all agree that replacement of a brain with another brain would be a replacement of a person with another
person. Thus, when considering reincarnation of human souls I am primarily considering reincarnation of the soul of the brain while other souls may or may not be the same souls as in the
previous incarnation, although they are more likely to be similar (closely related) than not. Physical properties most likely to be shared between human incarnations are then those strongly
correlated with the brain but the more properties are shared between two potential incarnations more likely it is for the two bodies to have indeed been coupled with the same soul.
The most important property is probably the rate of ageing of the brain/neurons (which can be correlated with a specific lifespan or time to transformation - e.g., 36 years).
Chapter Determination of probability updated.
Determination of probability
If there is a tendency for coded characteristics and experiences to be relatively preserved between incarnations, then it becomes possible to narrow the candidates for past incarnations of a
particular soul - or, in certain cases, even identify the past incarnation.
For example, I will try to calculate the probability that my soul is the same soul that lived in [symbiosis with] the body of Newton.
I do not have access to DNA of Newton, but some data is publicly available.
Various sources claim that Newton blood was Rh negative. I do not know how reliable are these sources, but assuming that is true and that Newton's soul is currently in human body, the
probability that it is in my body (0-) is, based on
blood Rh factor alone, ≈ 1:500 000 000 (assuming 7% of 7.14 billion people has Rh- blood).
The world had 7.14 billion people in 2013. I have used population from this year as best fit due to likely increase in percentage of Rh- population since my birth.
If body and soul couple at conception, as I hypothesize, it would be more appropriate to use data for year 1981. In any case, the probability remains within the same order of
magnitude - e.g., assuming body-soul coupling occurred in 1981, the probability (with maximum percentage of Rh- being 7%) becomes at least ≈1:316 000 000.
However, I do not want to favour the year of my conception for coupling - year 2013. should be more than enough far away to reduce the bias.
Since it has to be a male body, the probability increases to ≈ 1/250 000 000.
From available data, the body type (somatotype) of Newton did not have endo characteristics, rather ecto or ecto/meso, narrowing the number of candidates by at least 2/3, to 83 000 000.
Apparently, he also had blue or grey eyes, making the probability now, in case of both having blue eyes (assuming 10% of
population has blue eyes) 1:8 300 000.
Taking into account intelligence, the population reduces by at least 99.9% of 8 300 000, making the probability 1:8300.
It is sometimes hard to tell the difference between grey and blue eyes. I always considered my eyes blue, but after careful examination, I have concluded that my eyes are definitely
grey (blue-grey variant).
If Newton also had grey eyes, and
according to
the finest portrait - he did, with
only 3% of population
having grey eyes, the probability becomes 1:2490.
Interestingly, in that portrait, there is a light grey artefact beneath Newton's left (from his perspective) eye pupil. I recently had a metal fragment glued to my eye, in the same place and in
the same eye. Even the shape and orientation of the artefact is the same. This is something I would call a meaningless coincidence 5 years ago - now, I have no doubt that it is
not, it's a meaningful synchronicity. Of course, I'm not suggesting this should be taken as evidence for anything.
There are different variants of grey eyes - they can appear blueish, greenish or dark grey. Not sure which variant did Newton had, but it appears that
Tesla, who
also had grey eyes, had the same variant as I. This is probably true for Jesus as well - according to description by Publius Lentulus, Jesus had blue-grey eyes.
Note that
Newton suffered a complete nervous breakdown about the same
age I did - age 36
±1. He had
another
smaller breakdown about the age of 50 (
Tesla did too), so
probably I could expect another
breakdown about that age too.
However, at least in these cases, I would not label the events as nervous breakdowns. The brain was simply overwhelmed by synchronicity, which I see as a part of soul transformation, triggered
or synchronized with death of an another soul.
Regardless of the source and my interpretation - in modern interpretations, both are (or would be) classified as
clinical depression (disabling disorder including breakdown). Assuming
1 out
of 20 people experience it, the probability increases from 1:2490 to 1:125.
I do not know how many people experience it exactly at the age of 36
±1, but obviously this increases the probability to at least 1:63.
Note also that this result is based on the assumption that my intelligence is equal to the intelligence 1 in 1000 people have. It is generally assumed that Newton had a much higher
intelligence (as Tesla).
Assuming my intelligence is
up there (I'd say we certainly share the same, rare, species of intelligence), the probability of my soul not being the incarnation of the
Newton's soul
becomes infinitesimal, at least if one accepts the hypothesis on reincarnation (if one does not, I'd like to see the alternative explanation for all the similarities).
Of course, it is possible that some correlation exists between variables used in calculation here (e.g., people having grey eyes may be more prone to breakdown than others), which would affect
the calculation, however, as far as I know, no such correlations have been found.
This result may be interpreted as an soul-imprinted instinct correlated with a non-natural impregnation (artificial egg fertilisation, by real homo.sapiens) of the
mother of one my previous incarnations and possible abduction in that incarnation.
I was very shy and, in many ways, different than other people, I was constantly under pressure to change, due the forced impression that I'm not healthy or normal.
Now I'm sure the source of shyness was the actual fear of people, inherited from one of my past localized forms (e.g., abused dog).
I believe I have been, up to the age of about 36, mostly living my past lives, not really aware of my current life. But then something happened and I have started transforming. This even
included some physical changes (e.g., disappearance of skin allergy I had for most of my life) and mental (e.g., disappearance of depression I had for most of my life, ability to detect/interpret
signals of synchronicity, ability to experience, what I believe are, visions of effective past/future).
As I have discovered the oscillation frequency of my soul, I now recognize this transformation as a change in energy level - effective rebirth of the soul, in this case, increasing consciousness.
As I started transforming, about the age of 36, I started working on Complete Relativity. The next couple of years were very turbulent times for me, a constant struggle of spiritual motions, finally
resulting in complete redefinition of my self.
For the whole of my life, the corrupted system with this fear infested community was trying to keep me under control.
That system has failed. This system of I, is now, fully awake and alive.
The time has come, for false in true to expire, to make way for the age of reason and gnosis, powered by truth, of light and, of nature enlightened ones.
The messenger of god = the messenger of truth
There are no absolute gods and if one can be declared as a messenger of god, one needs to define gods. Based on my
definition, I acknowledge Earth as my first god but I may sometime use the term "god" as a synonym for truth. I find the synonym appropriate - at least in some contexts, the Earth may be
seen as embodiment of a bigger truth.
I believe god has spoken directly through me at the peak of my transformation, however, god is generally relaying his messages through my works and my life.
Sometimes, however, messages spoken through the messenger may not be related to one specific god rather the whole species, or the god's own god or goddess. Therefore, such one may be interpreted
as a messenger of gods, or, messenger of truths (my scientific research and curiosity is certainly not specialized/limited to one single area or god). I see it as a role both chosen for me and
chosen by me - even if unconsciously.
Events of synchronicity are one way of communication between a god and its inhabitants, even if that communication may generally be subconscious. This synchronicity can be personal and/or
global. In any case, one who has a lot of experience in personal synchronicity should be a good candidate for an interpreter of global synchronicity. I may be one such individual.
However, any particular synchronicity event on its own often has no deeper meaning (and if it has, it's generally not easy to find an interpretation with elevated confidence, although confidence
could be growing with experience), but elevated synchronicity does correlate with transformation of the body and the soul. Increase in global synchronicity events could then be correlated either
with transformation of humanity as a whole, one subspecies of humanity, or the transformation of the planet, or - more likely, both.
Speaking of synchronicity.. We had our first detected interstellar visitor (ʻOumuamua) right at the time of my transformation about the age of 36. ʻOumuamua is a Hawaiian word, and can be
translated as a "messenger". However, I do not interpret ʻOumuamua as a messenger of my transformation, I interpret it as the messenger of the upcoming transformation of the Solar System, something predicted
by my theories.
A messenger of god, or gods, is generally also a general precursor. A precursor life of a
general precursor should include events that will be experienced by others in the future. Being precursor events, however, these should be weaker in magnitude.
In the theory of planetary neurogenesis I have predicted some global cataclysmic events in the future. As a general precursor, I should be experiencing precursors of these events too.
More information and predictions based on my precursor nature can be found in paper Journey through future.
I don't see myself anymore as a boy playing on the shore of the ocean of truth upon me. I've been sailing this ocean for a while now... and I don't see or mind how the world sees me, because, it
seems, once again, the world remains behind. In fact, this time it seems the world doesn't see me at all. But the messages of god never were for the world anyway, messages of god are for those
who truly listen what the ocean has to say...
Only yesterday I was a boy playing on the shore of the ocean of truth. Today I'm riding the waves of that ocean in an old boat of endurance built by giants in times behind me. I'm wondering
if this place is the world's tomorrow or just the sea of my illusion. It seems to me, however, that the world is the one firmly anchored in illusion, held by fear of freeing its yacht from the
safety of the harbour. Has the ship become too pretty or too big to sail, or - to put it bluntly, a religion too big to fail?
Amenoum,
deus mentis et nuntius deorum
Article updated.
Article revised.
Article revised.
Article revised.
Article revised.
Article revised.
Article revised.
Article revised.
Article revised.
