>That moment when the Moon blocks out the Sun... But only

...

And, if that were the case, there are two possibilities to consider.

>1. Either sentient man evolved once this particular alignment had developed over time (Moon drifts away from Earth at a rate of a few inches per year.)

Or…

>2. It was engineered, and maintained, specifically to permit man to evolve!

If one stops to consider this point, it soon becomes obvious that co-incidence never was an option. It overlooks the obvious fact that the ‘coincidence theory’ has no meaning at all. It fits no ‘picture’.

And, in case you hadn’t guessed by now, everything in Nature does, if you look with an ‘all-seeing’ eye.

Of course man ‘evolved’ because of the alignment! It’s proven by our existence here at this time. It’s there, as soon as you look but, rather than trawl through boring data, allow me to continue my attempt to paint a picture in numbers and words.

Cont

>>17322676
>>Surely it’s equally suggestive that man evolved BECAUSE of this alignment!?
Stop right fucking there.

These co-incidences are substantial, yes, but there is also likelihood they are correlated without being causative. There's theory that the same theoretical asteroid that slammed into Earth at a theoretical point in time causing the theoretical debris from the collision to theoretically form into the moon may have also carried microorganisms or some form of genetic remnants that went on to produce life on Earth due to the amiable conditions once the moon helped regulate the tides and all that...theoretically. Furthermore if we take into consideration the gravitational sphere of influence the Sun and Earth have on each other it can be assumed something in between would be equally influenced by both and subsequently shaped by the invisible hand of gravity to fit like a puzzle piece in the empty space existing at a cross section. In theory.

...

The Moon is 1/81st the Mass of Earth.

(Bear in mind that science has no idea at all what ‘Mass’ is, by the way. It’s a strange brew of density, volume and weight, but they know not from whence it emanates!)

Earths orbit around the sun is 366 cycles per year.
(Viewed from OFF the planet!)

Moons orbit around Earth is 27.32 days
(When measured against fixed stars. Known as the ‘Sidereal Month’)

If there were some higher symmetry hiding in these apparently random numbers, how can we see it? A good starting point is always…Reciprocate them! See what happens!

1/81 = 0.0123456789… (A mathematician will soon spot that, in fact, the 8 does not actually appear if you use a calculator to do the math. But there is a known mathematical proof which, when applied, proves the 8 is actually in the sequence. Just accept this for now.) So, the reciprocal of 81 is the decimal number system. So what?

1/366 = 0.002732 Interesting?

1/27.32 = 0.0366 More interesting?

If you are seeing nothing, don’t let the numbers block your view. Remove all the decimal points and zeros, because they are simply scalar indicators, and notice that 2732 and 366 are reciprocal opposites.

Earth and Moon are ‘locked’ in a numerical reciprocal relationship!

..cont

In case you are thinking, ‘so what’, be aware that this fact, able to be proven by any school child, is not taught or even known to teachers of astronomy or physics. At any level!

Moon ‘experts’, quake in your shoes! Shame on you for not seeing this! You claim that the mystery of planetary orbit is not understood! Excuse me!?

>Did you ever actually look? Or did you just learn what they taught you to believe?

>I wonder, does the casual reader of this indulgence see what they are looking at here?

One of Astronomy’s greatest unanswered questions. You may think that if it were such a shattering revelation, how come we don’t know this?

You do now! But a constant underlying theme of my rambling is that this has, of course, already been noticed. Long ago.

As the number 81 (9 squared) appears in many physics field equations (Einstein included) this lends force to the possibility that this number betrays some hidden underlying order.

By reciprocating it you have seen that it generated the base 10 (decimal) sequence of numbers, of which 9 is the highest. 9 squared is 81.

File: Screen-Shot-2014-05-23-at-23.45.54.png (143KB, 611x407px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 611x407px

I actually kinda like this thread.. Keep it going.

>>17322708

cont

Why should the relative mass of the Moon, when compared to Earth, compute as a decimal sequence? Indeed, THE decimal sequence. I won’t begin to try to explain. Just accept that it does and know that the missing 8 (if you do the math on your calculator) is actually there. (If you calculate it in binary, it proves out in an amazing and revelatory way.)

Let’s return to the Earth/Moon reciprocal lock number 2732. We know that 366 is the number of days in a sidereal year, so focus now on its reciprocal value 2732. Remember, the decimal points and zeros are removed because these are only indicators of Scale. The numbers work on all scales. What is 2732?
Recall 27.32 is the number of days in a sidereal month.

But by sheer coincidence it is also:

Absolute Zero: Minus 273.2 degrees CELSIUS (Decimal scale! Base 10)
The lowest temperature in the universe at which all matter ceases to vibrate. It is the ‘Zero’ point of our reality, as measured on a decimal scale.

The Mean Statistical Gestation Period of a Human Child: 273.2 days! (10 Sidereal Months)

Statistical Average Female Hormone Cycle (Menstrual Cycle) 27.3 (2?) days!

What you see here is the resonance between the orbit of the Moon and human life cycles!

>>17322709

put on your thinking cap

>>17322712

...cont

And if you are still confused, simple geometry adds another ‘resonance’ just to make the picture a little more clear.
Ratio Pi: 4 = 1.2732
The Moons acceleration relative to earth is 0.273 x cm/second squared
Oh, and the Moon is 0.272 Earth radii…but guess what. That measurement has a margin of error which includes .2732!

Note how Pi, the constant of 3 dimensional (Euclidean) geometry, as a proportion of 4, reveals the same 2732 constant ‘harmonic’. This harmonic is nothing less than the Trans-dimensional Constant of the Universe!

If this seems unimportant, consider this.

Knowledge of Pi and other constants has enabled construction, architecture and advanced mathematics to flourish so far that it is today, arguably, the basis of our entire civilisation and technology. Imagine what might be achieved by understanding the geometry of our 4 Dimensional reality by way of this ‘new’ ‘trans-dimensional’ constant.

>>17322676
No. Don't even bother with the rest, I can already tell you're a fucking tard.

>Surely it's equally suggestive that man evolved BECAUSE of this alignment!?
No. What the fuck do you base this off of? Has no one taught you that "correlation does not equal causation"? The moon is slowly moving away from the earth. At some point in the past, the moon was able to perfectly block out the sun's disc AND the light, which would have been witnessed by the dinosaurs.

>Moon Diameter is exactly 1/400th the size of the Sun's
Moon: 2,159 miles in diameter
Sun: 864,948.7 miles in diameter
2,159 x 400 = 863,600.
Close, but no. That is a difference of 1,348 miles, which is pretty fucking far from "exactly"

>...and is positioned at exactly 1/400th of the distance between Earth and the Sun!
distance to the moon: 238,900 miles
distance to the sun: 92,960,000 miles
238,900 x 400 = 95,560,000, a difference of 2,600,000, or 2.6 million miles. How is that anywhere near "exact?" I doubt that even qualifies as "approximate".

How about you wait a few hundred thousand years, after the moon has moved far enough away that it's diameter/distance ratio actually is "Exact". Maybe use the time between then and now to learn some basic math and science, you mouth breather.

Now imagine what has already been achieved. Most of our known technology is a dumbed down spin off from more advanced military and space research.

>Pi is, of course, a Universal Constant which applies to all circles.

It is little understood but I hope to cast light on it as we progress.

It’s an ‘Irrational’ number. 3.141…..the decimal places go on to infinity. It has no ‘solution’.

For now, though, realise that 2732 itself is nothing less than an undiscovered (?) universal constant! You may begin to realise why they do not wish it to be highlighted and taught.

If you are able to meditate, do so upon these numbers and you may just experience a revelation. If you are not, learn.

You have seen how the series of whole numbers represents the expansion of electromagnetic forces in 4Space, and the reciprocal series its path through 3Space.
The former is digital. The latter, analogue

The geometry of the number 81 has some connection with Mass itself insofar as it seems to define a ratio between a planet and its moon, in 4Space, which encode for sentient life on the parent planet. 81 is 3 to the power 4!

And its reciprocal reflection is the decimal series 0-9 (including a strange quirk around the apparently ‘missing’ 8 in the series! I’ll return to this later, but wonder if a reader can see what the number 8 may ‘generate’?)

>If this all has something to do with Mass, it makes sense to take a look at Mass in nature. Matter!

>What do you think you might find?

>>17322721
>For now, though, realise that 2732 itself is nothing less than an undiscovered (?) universal constant!
You can fuck right off with that non-proof statement.

>>17322726
>>17322719

ITT :

>Your questioned are answered before you post
>Your posts are not required
>Your posts are ignored

>You are a shill

>>17322700
>A mathematician will soon spot that, in fact, the 8 does not actually appear if you use a calculator to do the math. But there is a known mathematical proof which, when applied, proves the 8 is actually in the sequence. Just accept this for now.)
>>17322712
>I won’t begin to try to explain. Just accept that it does and know that the missing 8 (if you do the math on your calculator) is actually there.

After your deceptive "math" in the very first post, I am not going to "just accept" a damn thing you have to say, especially with such a bullshit explanation of "believe me over the calculator, there really is an 8 there, I swear, trust me". How about you cite that proof you mentioned, you intellectually dishonest charlatan?

>>17322726

Absolute Zero: 273.2 degrees

Human Gestation: 273.2 days

Averge femle hormonal cycle: 27.32 days

Moon orbit: 27.32 days

Moon reciprical lock: 1/366

= 0.002732 !!!

>>17322738

it's not deceptive but...

whatever you need to tell yourself

>>17322731
I'm >>17322719 . I didn't ask him any questions besides rhetorical. My post was pointing out his flawed math displayed in his VERY first post. All I see of his other posts is tangential from his original (baseless and inaccurate) statements, and are to be disregarded until his premise is firmly established. How am I a shill for pointing out the mistakes in his math, when he seems to be trying to make some claim or proclamation based on said bad math?

One of the great questions in Physics is ‘why are there only ever a maximum of 10 isotopes of any element?’

>If you look at the Table of Elements there appear to be way in excess of 100

But look closer and you will find that many of these are unstable elements. That is, they only exist momentarily before radiating themselves out of existence.

There are 81 stable, naturally existing, elements in Nature. The Periodic table shows 83, but 2 of these are not naturally stable at all. And when you ask a Professor why they are shown, they simply don’t know. They have never thought about it.

There are 81 elements. The isotope variations, as they decrease in density, (and therefore Mass!) can only ever reach the reciprocal of the Key Note/Number 81.

This is WHY there can only be a maximum of 10 isotopes!

>>17322676
>his only happens because the Moon Diameter is exactly 1/400th the size of the Sun's

Moon diameter : 2,159 units
Sun diameter : 864,948.7 units

What the fuck is wrong with you? Why ever lie about this shit?

>>17322740
All false.

>>17322744

The math is correct +/- your math is incorrect

You, of course, refuse to address the further points because they are all correct. You simply attempt to prevent othersfrom absorbing the message of this thread.

This is /x/. We know the drill.

>>17322742
>it's not deceptive but...
how about WRONG then? Read >>17322719 again and double check the math. In OP, claims were made about EXACT ratios, and it only took some basic math to show that he was completely wrong. Differences of 1,348 and 2.6 MILLION in any way, shape, or form, considered EXACT?

Still haven't seen this so-called proof for the "lol there's an 8 there, just trust me" either.

I don't have to tell myself anything. Math isn't a matter of opinion. You can't say that 2+2=5 because "just trust me, it is", or that 2/5 is EXACTLY the same as 1/2 without showing your work.

File: theyshutitdown.jpg (30KB, 408x632px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 408x632px

>>17322750

kek

>>17322751
When two trolls go to war.....

>>17322753

Ok then, by all means waste your time in this thread and accomplish exactly nothing.

>>17322751
>refuse to address the further points
That's because entertaining them would require humoring the absurdity of the initial "point".

This method you're using is what's commonly called the foot-in-the-door technique where you start with a small lie and gradually expound upon complete bullshit once your audience has accepted a gradually increasing amount of falsehood until outright lies can be packaged inside them. This is a confidence trick, and you're a fucking con-artist.

>>17322751
>differences of 2.6 million is exact
>can add an 8 to an answer despite what the calculator says because "just trust me, it's there"
>the guy who actually did the math and showed work is the one who is incorrect

Please be a troll. Admit you are a troll and you get 10/10. I don't want to believe someone can be so fucking stupid. This isn't even high school level math we're talking about here.

According to the conspiracy theorists, pretty soon none of this will matter as much as you might think.

>>17322756
I accomplished pointing out that you don't even know how to do basic math. Go back to school, nigger.

OP here.

Likely abandoning thread because nobody can grasp the seriousness of the subject matter.

>hurr durr not 1/400

(The fact remains that we witness the eclipse. i.e. the phenomenon exists whereby the moon perfectly blocks out the sun... etc...)

>it happens
>we witness it
>we even witness blood moon eclipses
>the sun needs to be blocked just right to make the moon red

>plebs emerge on 4chan denying this phenomenon because they don't like the accompanying facts

>hurr durr hold it right there, read no further folks

>>17322759
couldn't have said it better myself.

A true scientist or mathematician would go back and correct their mistakes when they are pointed out, not ignore and gloss over them to continue on based on a faulty and/or incorrect premise.

OP, fix your initial mistakes and cite the mathematical proof you reference in >>17322700

If you can't even do something as simple as that, then nothing you say has any merit at all. I won't even bother double checking the rest of the data and math, since it is likely just as flawed as the your initial claims.

>>17322773
You must be seriously fucking retarded

>>plebs emerge on 4chan denying this phenomenon because they don't like the accompanying facts
No one is denying that eclipses happen, and the only one here who doesn't like the accompanying facts are you, since the fact happens to be that your math is fucking wrong when you are trying to make some argument BASED ON MATH

>>17322781

in layman's terms, the moon is at the exact distance and is the exact right size to allow for the perfect covering of the Sun as we see it.

OP says this is special for more reasons than usual, some of which are mathematical.

/thread

>>17322699
Hijacking OP's thread to quickly substantiate my own nonsense. Nothing novel, just something to consider.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theia_(planet)
> according to the giant impact hypothesis collided with the Early Earth around 4.533 billion years ago, later theorized to form the moon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life
>The earliest physical evidence of life on Earth is biogenic graphite from 3.7 billion-year-old metasedimentary rocks found in Western Greenland and microbial mat fossils in 3.48 billion-year-old sandstone found in Western Australia.
>Some theories, such as the Late Heavy Bombardment theory, suggest that life on Earth may have started even earlier, as early as 4.1-4.4 billion years ago.
Admittedly we're talking about gaps of time in the millions of years where anything else could serve as catalyst, still at least here if you do the math you can have a laugh.

>>17322715

My acid won't be here til this afternoon.

Trolls / haters:

It's staring u right in the face

2000/800000

1/400

>>17322700
>(Bear in mind that science has no idea at all what ‘Mass’ is,
American education.

>>17322700
سبحان الله

>>17322700
>science has no idea at all what ‘Mass’ is, by the way. It’s a strange brew of density, volume and weight
Are you an idiot?

Absolute 0 is 273.15 K.

Please leave the science out of your numerology and astrology. Science did nothing to offend you.

>>17322700
>science has no idea at all what ‘Mass’ is, by the way. It’s a strange brew of density, volume and weight

Higgs boson.

so basically you're trying to say the earth is flat

>>17322748
Pretty close desu