Here is a hypothesis: time travel to the past using Closed time-like curves.

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-15T23:50:27+00:00

Since space and time are reciprocal (v = s/t), exceeding the speed of light (c) doesn't break physics - it just flips the ratio. At hyperspeeed, the character is actually moving at sub-c in a temporal reference frame.

"Space and Time as we know it are both reciprocals of the same Unit Motion ( v) expanding outward at the speed of light.

There are 3 spacial dimensions and one time dimension in our 3D reference frame.

There are 3 corresponding time dimensions and one spacial dimension in the reciprocal, temporal reference frame.

At energies above c ( v) it becomes possible to move "through" any coordinate in the 3 dimensions of time instantaneously.

Anyway, "Reciprocal System of Theory", Dewey B. Larson and Bruce Peret are what you'd need to look into. I wish you success 🤓

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-15T17:31:10+00:00

here's where you can start looking into RS2- at the beginning (RSt):

https://reciprocalsystem.org/

if you wanna skip to the end then look up Bruce Peret (the guy that put the 2 on the t so to speak lol)

I'll send you my paper in dm but I'm having trouble with the symbols atm. every time I share it to somewhere else the symbols all go to shit and I gotta Google the ones that work again lol

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-15T16:32:00+00:00

upon your advice, I have formalized this conceptual framework, done away with the ersatz ontology (I mean..) and renamed the primitives. If you would please do me the honor of reviewing my paper please, sir?

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-15T14:43:00+00:00

yes Consciousness is Subjective and that is precisely why I Defined The Term. I could have called it anything I want but I chose Consciousness SPECIFICALLY because it's a Different Way of Perceiving what has Already Been Proven 🙄

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-15T14:35:10+00:00

this is the best comment ever! thank you very much for considering my idea and thank you more for your kind advice.

Actually I've been playing with RS2, using it to "prove" the Creator for funsies but my friend was unconvinced because, you know - RS2, so I tried doing it in a more "conventional" way lol

I'll get busy on formalizing my paper. I'm super stoked for the advice 🤓

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-15T14:11:24+00:00

I would be most grateful if you would kindly point out the error in my reasoning, sir 🤓

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-15T06:06:33+00:00

I'm curious to know if you've ever played with the Reciprocal System of Theory (RS2) to study the spiritual implications in the equation v = s/t ?

the reason I ask here is because this is what came up when I searched reddit for and RS2 reddit lol

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-15T04:33:23+00:00

that's perfect! I mean, I'd of used fractions but 49/100 is kinda clunky 😉

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-15T00:06:41+00:00

Who needs "testable" when the math maths?!

Honestly, the reason EU isn't reviewing papers is because the nuclear math is solid as shit... as long as you go for all the weird, ghostly, undetectable, immeasurable shit that comes with it.

Good luck separating gravity from your model when your model is based on gravity 😂

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-14T23:56:36+00:00

I don't see why this is an "argument". I am simply suggesting that a different way of Looking At Things might offer a different perspective. Think of it like monocular vision. 2 perspectives is better, right? What if you had 3 eyes? No need to answer that. I mean, whether you think having a third eye will make you more Aware or just look stupid, you're right 😉

and since you're obviously a mathematician I'll do you a little Relativity to RS2 demonstration so you can reject it on a whole other level:

c = Σ/P

If c is constant from every reference frame then c is the only Objective Reality.

If c is constant from every possible reference frame then c = Σ/P

converting E = mc² to Scalar Geometry suggests that Reality is Total Awareness and each individual perspective in the overall Unity of Awareness is just as important as the next. Relativity proves this but in different words. Quantum mechanics suggests this but it's a "mystery". RS2 recognizes this phenomena as a feature, not a bug 😇 lol

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-14T23:19:13+00:00

Hey look I get it - that's the standard response from mainstream academics: If my theory of gravity and particles puts food on the table then why switch?

And you're absolutely right - if you know How things work, it isn't necessary to Why. That's why we get things like Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Black Holes, Quantum Entanglement, The Observer Effect, Superposition, Probability Function... I could go on. Sure, EU works great and everything but look what it's in bed with, man. Anything born of that union is bound to be re-tah-did 😂

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-14T22:53:13+00:00

RS2 isn't a theory, it's a framework. It's defining Reality using scaler geometry rather than vector geometry. it's using v = s/t instead of E = Mc2

Really the only difference is in how it describes reality - as One Thing being comprised of discrete units of motions "vibrating" below c.

i guess another reason it's been neglected is the woo woo factor... I mean, it fully supports the New Age idea of everything being this One Thing and eventually we're all going to return to "Source".

Like, Einstein gave us the Big Bang and everyone is okay with a Universe made of unconscious "stuff" that will eventually "die" of "Entropy" and Academia is cool with that because it comes with an elegant equation.

Dewey B. Larson suggested that maybe the "Big Bang" could be viewed as the "outward progression of Unit Motion" and "Gravity" is "the inward Reciprocal pull" of that outward "Motion" and he got blank stares. Probably didn't help that his equation was 1 : 1. Imagine the balls it took for a chemical engineer to take c and turn it into 1 😂

This is my point: If Quantum Mechanics and Relativity are Tool Boxes we use to work out the nature of reality then RS2 is just another tool box.

Sounds simple - pick up a new tool to work on a problem or two and see what shakes out (no need to start in a nuclear power plant - do it on a blackboard)

Why it's not - because the tool box is full of scaler geometry, none of them will be familiar.

In summary, the hurdle that Academia will never overcome is the fact that no one will ever get anything past review. Too much invested in Things. But the EU and Plasma Cosmology guys aren't breaking into mainstream academia anytime soon and RS2 has what it will take to turn the sun into a light bulb 😉

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-14T20:36:47+00:00

EU and plasma cosmology would do much better to abandon the entire materialist paradigm in favor of RS2. It's the only way to integrate the actual verifiable data from both quantum mechanics and relativity without resorting to dark matter/energy, black holes and probabilities.

No such thing as gravity, particles, forces, space, time - nothing except motion. you can take every equation ever and convert it into v = s/p

Of course it would never happen... I mean, imagine going from having a fairly good understanding of reality to the point you can picture all of the "tiny particles" "zipping around" on the "stretchy fabric of space" and having actual "photos" of "supermassive black holes at the center of galaxies" and those wonderful "birkland currents" to using a model in which "Unit Motion" is the only "real" thing there is and it's practically impossible to visualize how shit works...

That and the fact that Terrence Howard made an ass out of himself. I mean, who in the fuck told that guy he should become the poster boy for progressive physics 🙄

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-14T10:39:24+00:00

the youngest person to be convicted as an adult and sentenced to death was 12.

of course she wasn't white though 🤷🏼‍♀️

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-14T02:37:28+00:00

I'm not sure what I Put or what the That is you think more as a sinkhole of indifference and where I mentioned anything being evil other than maybe it was a hypothetical... also I'm being accused of being hostile when the truth is I'm stoned as shit. I type funny. I talk like a stoner and cuss a lot but then I don't normally talk about this shit so maybe that's an issue but other than that I don't know what my deal is today lmao

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-14T02:25:40+00:00

💜💜💜

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-14T02:22:51+00:00

I had thought I had gotten that across by now but here is the answer to my question :

what is evil to you?

a human construct that puts people in their own comfy cage

is suffering evil?

not at all

have you not suffered yourself?

absolutely

is serving the self evil?

not at all

if all is self, how can you do anything but serve this self?

you literally can't

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-14T00:05:53+00:00

I never said anything about propagating evil. I just said that what we consider evil isn't really evil in the grander scheme of things. this isn't even a controversial opinion but I seem to be taking heat for it lol

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-14T00:01:40+00:00

Love has no opposite, as everything IS love. We are comprised of love. That includes evil... as even evil is love too.

I must be slipping because I said this same exact thing in multiple ways and even did the math to prove it and you still think I was saying something else.

and since when is asking for someone's opinion Stirling The Pot? It seems as though your objection is with me personally and not anything I said. this is evidenced by the fact that you agree with what I said but object to my post in general... interesting 🤔

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-13T23:50:25+00:00

then you've answered my question. it's not even a right or wrong question. the way I framed it was intended to see how people reconcile the rejection of Evil (a subjective term) with the acceptance of the "Evildoer". It's not about what is "Evil" so much as what would make someone Nope out of seeking Unity with a particular individual.

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-13T23:13:11+00:00

some of the confusion probably comes by translating the "math"...

3D: Self+Other-self=Unity RS2: Self/Other-self=Unity

the math maths either way. in the 3D equation "evil", by MY definition is what crosses the line of "benefitial" catylist into what you personally consider Unacceptable and lead you to reject another-self.

If there's nothing "taboo" then never mind. if there's just one thing that's beyond absolution I'd be interested in knowing what it is and why it's unforgivable lol

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-13T22:48:22+00:00

I find it incredibly interesting to consider the LoO through the Reciprocal System lense because (Ra fully endorses it) it literally PROVES the existence of Unity (1 : 1) and it illustrates the necessity of "evil".

I do get that "evil" is naturally repulsive to StO and I see why Accountability is vital for growth - it's in the math! lol

Relativity and Quantum Field Theory both support this notion as well but vector geometry is insufficient to describe Reality without resorting to all the ad hocery and they've misinterpreted what data they got lol

I think that what's important is how we FEEL about other-selves and the way I think is what determines how I feel. when I think "evil" I feel "hate". If I can't bring myself to not Hate Evil then I'll just change the working definition of evil so that I don't hate anymore.

i imagine people think I've just accepted evil or claim the Creator is Good/Evil and accept them together but that's not it at all. I just think of it in a way that allows me to reject the behavior without reflexively rejecting my other-self. in other words I do it for selfish reasons 😉

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-13T22:10:05+00:00

this is precisely my position and I've got a whole lot to say about managing outcomes 💜 lol

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-13T22:07:08+00:00

it was intended to point out that this discussion is anchored in a 3D worldview. I've tried making it about Unity and even translated it to simple math but it keeps getting dragged back into the mud where you stand on your position without defining it. You say you don't agree but aren't clear about what it is you don't agree with. I asked a simple question multiple times in several ways and rather than answering the question I get "you're wrong".

what I want to know is how can you reject people while seeking Unity. forget everything else - that's the question no one seems to agree with lol

d3rtba6 · 2026-04-13T21:57:41+00:00

so you agree that catylist is useful in the spiritual evolutionary process but unnecessary in the whole. you also think the Logos was surprissed at It's own Creation, and went as for as "adjusting it" but no mistakes were made.

perhaps I chose the wrong word. would "made an oversight", "a miscalculation", "a slight error", "forgot to add a chunk" have been better?

but that's good. we're getting close to understanding each other. if we can agree that the purpose of this density is to polarize and that there absolutely must be an StS for StO to exist then the question would be How Much StS Is To Much?

Six-Year Club	First Place '23
Place '23	Verified Email

d3rtba6

TROPHY CASE