Tag Archives: Google

Atlantis and Heavy Stuff

A “grid of streets” on the seabed at one of the proposed locations of the lost city of Atlantis has been spotted on Google Ocean.

The network of criss-cross lines is 620 miles off the coast of north west Africa near the Canary Islands on the floor of the Atlantic Ocean.

The perfect rectangle – which is around the size of Wales – was noticed on the search giant’s underwater exploration tool by an aeronautical engineer who claims it looks like an “aerial map” of a city.

The underwater image can be found at the co-ordinates 31 15’15.53N 24 15’30.53W.

Last night Atlantis experts said that the unexplained grid is located at one of the possible sites of the legendary island, which was described by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato.

According to his account, the city sank beneath the ocean after its residents made a failed effort to conquer Athens around 9000 BC.

This would be one of the most important archeological finds in 100 years if this proves to be true. Mainstream archeologists would be forced to rewrite history; from the Sumerians and Egyptians to the present.

Of course there will be those who poo-poo this as natural or fake.

Grants and tenures will be on the line here.

Google Ocean: Has Atlantis been found off Africa?

_________________________________

The Heavy Stuff:

[…]

THS, when mentioning different entity types,  wasn’t referring about the internet speculation (with some added  fantasy perhaps) that multiple alien races are here, permenantly,  in Earth’s biosphere and are probably interacting with humans (some say dozens of races). No, what THS was and is referring to  is `spaces’* (entities) which do not have an equal `basis’ of `common reality’ grounding – compared to a human. (Wordy, THS knows, but we will get much more specific in a bit.) Let THS attempt to explain:

[* Remember, much of the Phillips Phenomenology (PP) positions `space’ as a characteristic which must be actualized for an event to occur. The PP describes `different types of spaces’ – and where they occur.]

Type One – Aliens/Entities

(Real & Travel In Craft)

Type One Properties —> Real `physical’ alien – in the same manner that a human is `physical’ . A being with a birth, and, on-going, contiguous,  `space-time’ reality – rooted in our same human perceived outer reality that we as humans consider a  `common consensus’ – considered by all to be called our `real’** ontology. Type One Aliens are beings that do NOT exceed the speed of light for travel and are beings that travel by craft. They are beings that do not need to `become objective’ to reveal `their reality of space’. They would be beings as trapped in our common reality as we humans are.

**[In other words, if a class of 100 college biology students were asked in an auditorium classroom if any of them thought the lecture was a `being dreamed’ as opposed to being experienced while awake – all would KNOW it wasn’t a dreamstate. (Then again with college students who knows, right?)]

Comment – To humans at our 2009 level of consciousness, these Type One Aliens are the most real and `humanlike’  of all alien types. `They’ will probably have arms, legs, a head, be able to communicate with each other – etc – humanlike characteristics of which humans can identify. Nevertheless, `aliens’ of any sort are inherently scary to most humans, of course.

However, type one beings that travel `anywhere’ in the universe ONLY below the speed of light – can be assumed to be rare; very rare – in ANY one particular location, including Earth. That said, being very rare – in a near infinite universe – does not mean non-existent or impossible. Indeed, while of low probability to be at any one location in the universe – this would be the alien/entity type MOST likely to have an interest in living planets like Earth.

But, would such beings, Type One beings,  be so focused as `being here’ only in the last 60 years? (Or would it be another type of the four entity/alien choices THS will review?) Wouldn’t such type one beings be just as likely to have been here, around Earth, for at least the last few hundred million years? You know, coming and going at will over the millenia – perhaps staying on occasion for eons.

Could we really expect that more than a  handful would be `around’ in any given era like ours? (If they did `stick around’ how many `aliens’ would they need to have a sustainable population?) Could we really expect a huge increase within a short period of 60 years, that we seem to have experienced,  from beings that use  `moving craft’ in a `galaxy’ context? (If there has been such an increase in the last 60 years.)

Indeed, the idea of a sudden increase in `this type’ of alien – a type one alien/entity – just seems unlikely, logically. Why? Well, first, T1 beings living below the `light threshold’ would not even have knowledge of mans recent advancements – outside of a 60 year light cone. Could there really be a significant number of civilizations within 60 years that have humanlike entities that have crafts that go a significant % of the speed of light? And who would want to come HERE if they did have such `slow’ `interstellar’ craft? It simply seems unlikely.

———————–

This is the most intelligent breakdown of the “types” of  “aliens” that permeate our cultures and world consciousness.

Some, like the author mentions, do have some science behind them, like the ‘solid’  creatures who appear and disappear at will. This can be explained by advanced nanotech, or beamed telepresence via quantum entanglement.

Either method requires knowledge of quantum physics well beyond our own, akin to ‘magic’ or ‘supernatural powers.’

Aliens/Entities Quantified – Are There Four Types?

____________________________

 

Microsoft and the Google-Plex: Space Race of the 21st Century?

 Are Microsoft and Google in a space race? We think they are. Their rivalry is also, we believe, a precursor to the next great post-Internet technology boom: space exploration and development…

Microsoft just released its new Worldwide Telescope, which will access images from NASA’s great fleet of space-born telescopes and earth-bound observatories such as the future Large Synoptic Survey Telescope, partially funded by Microsoft founder Bill Gates, which is projected for ‘first light’ in 2014 in Chile’s Atacama Desert -the world’s Southern Hemisphere space-observatory mecca. The 8.4-meter telescope will be able to survey the entire visible sky deeply in multiple colors every week with its 3-billion pixel digital camera. The telescope will probe the mysteries of dark matter and dark energy, and it will open a movie-like window on objects that change or move rapidly: exploding supernovae, potentially hazardous near-Earth asteroids and distant Kuiper Belt objects.

So far this particular ‘Space Race’ is confined to ground based telescopes using advanced viewing software. I predict in about 10-20 years Google/Microsoft will be conducting virtual reality tours to Solar System planets and moons utilizing more evolved versions.

This could happen faster than actual physical explorations by robots or humans.

Microsoft vs.Google: New Masters of the Universe?

_________________________________________________________________________________

Times Online UK has this to say about NASA’s Phoenix Mars Lander:

…for Nasa, however, the biggest question of all is whether the Phoenix will reach the surface safely.

Its landing system will use descent engines for a controlled touchdown rather than making an airbag-cushioned landing.

This method allows for a larger payload of instruments but is more prone to failure and has seen serious losses. It has not been used successfully on Mars since 1976.

Almost half of the space probes sent to Mars from the past 40 years have failed to reach their targets for one reason or another.

This includes all probes, American, old Soviet, European, etc.

That’s quite a few. And the fact the landing system on Phoenix hasn’t been used since the Viking Landers over thirty years ago doesn’t inspire much confidence in NASA’s skills.

Nasa life-hunter closes in on Mars

__________________________________________________________________________________

More goodies other than space tours from the Google-Plex:

Google is billing Android as “a software stack for mobile devices that includes an operating system, middleware and key applications.” Some may call it Google’s answer to the iPhone, and for a long time it was already billed as “the iPhone killer,” long before the software development kit was released.

The Android is going to be a very open platform, where anyone can affect changes. Whereas before, wireless companies had a large amount of control over the phone and its software, with the introduction of Apple’s iPhone, things have been shook up: Google plan to take that a lot further with Android.

Android’s openness has been put through the wringer over at MIT though, after Massachusetts Industry of Technology professor Hal Abelson asked his computer science student’s one question; what do you want your cell phone to be able to do?

Like the Esso/Exxon ad of the 1960s-1970s, “Put a tiger in your tank”, the ad of the early 21st Century is going to be, “Put an android on your phone”.

The Google-monster might be onto something here. People now are disconnecting from landlines and are using their cellphones exclusively for calls, messaging and ‘Tubes surfing. Especially in countries that had no previous telephone infrastructure, this technology is wide spread. The ‘Android’ will only cement this.

The Google-Plex/Cloud-Hive Mind is coming!

MIT Students Demonstrate Potential Power of Google’s Android for Mobile Phones

Thanx today to The Daily Galaxy

Just Google for Nuclear Fusion

Dr. Robert Bussard, the inventer of the Bussard Interstellar Ramjet who passed away last fall was a life long advocate of nuclear fusion energy and worked diligently to make it come to pass, was working on a method of nuclear fusion that converted hydrogen and boron directly into electricity, leaving helium the only by-product of the process:

This is not your father’s fusion reactor! Forget everything you know about conventional thinking on nuclear fusion: high-temperature plasmas, steam turbines, neutron radiation and even nuclear waste are a thing of the past. Goodbye thermonuclear fusion; hello inertial electrostatic confinement fusion (IEC), an old idea that’s been made new. While the international community debates the fate of the politically-turmoiled $12 billion ITER (an experimental thermonuclear reactor), simple IEC reactors are being built as high-school science fair projects…

Dr. Bussard will discuss his recent results and details of this potentially world-altering technology, whose conception dates back as far as 1924, and even includes a reactor design by Philo T. Farnsworth (inventor of the scanning television).

Can a 100 MW fusion reactor be built for less than Google’s annual electricity bill? Come see what’s possible when you think outside the thermonuclear box and ignore the herd…

The following is a Google vid that shows Dr. Forward giving a lecture in November 2006 about his fusion process and how it would meet Google’s present and future energy needs.

In fact, the Defence Department was funding his research, the Navy I believe. After his death there was speculation the funding would be pulled, but as of this posting the project is still funded until the end of this fiscal year.