China Breaks Entanglement Record & Some High Octane Suspicions

Banksters
Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
June 26, 2017

If you’ve been following the development of crypto-currencies, cyber-security, quantum entanglement, or financial clearing, you’ll want to take notice of these articles shared by Mr. T.M. and Mr. J.K., for China has crossed another threshold on the path toward satellite-based quantum entanglement communications systems, and therefore, toward a much more secure means of financial clearing:

Breakthrough: Entangled photons transmitted more than 1,200 km

China Shatters “Spooky Action at a Distance” Record, Preps for Quantum Internet

Note that this was achieved in satellite-to-ground communications, an important “proof-of-concept” demonstration. The goal of course is to use entanglement as a basis of secure – almost uncrackable or unhackable communications. While it’s still a long way from “sub-space communications” on the old Star Trek series, the use of lasers in the communication has now set a record of the receipt of entangled photons to 1200 km, or approximately 745 miles. The next steps in the technology tree will be to demonstrate (1) satellite to satellite transmission at large distance, then (2) satellite to satellite to satellite and/or ground, and then to begin to increase the amount of data to the point that it would resemble the data carrying capacity that financial clearing networks need: stability of transmission, minimal loss, and ultimately, secure and “unhackable” transmission is the goal, for these are essential to a stable financial clearing system in the 21st century.

That is China’s real goal: to emplace such a system, and thereby, to outflank the US-SWIFT system of financial clearing.

This in turn will require the ability to defend those satellites from ground based and orbital platforms (and a similar capability is required for the US, and anyone else with large space-based asset commitments: France, Japan, Germany, the UK, India, Russia, and so on). In other words, space weaponization is coming, and it will be multi-polar in nature, unless unforeseen events or developments nudge things in the opposite direction.

But as I read this article, a new though occurred to me, and I want to share it today by way of some high octane speculations, or rather, high octane questions or suspicions. I’ve been covering stories such as this on this website for some time now, and over time, I’ve begun to notice a pattern emerging. Perhaps I am mistaken, and noticing a “pattern” that really isn’t there, simply on account of my “selection bias” or the “selection bias” of the many people of this community who are kind enough to notice stories and articles and pass them along to me. The pattern is this: that in all such stories of quantum satellites and entanglement experiments, or “entanglement distance” records, the story seems to be about China. And this raises the question: are the other space powers completely overwhelmed? Are they not performing such experiments? And if not, why not? And if they are, where are the stories about them? In short, I cannot imagine that the USA, the UK, France or so on, are about to concede to China the sole monopoly on space-based quantum entanglement communications systems, yet, we see virtually no stories about such systems in development by those countries.

More importantly, I have a “suspicion” – a suspicion only, since I’ve not seen anything to suggest real evidence – that this is all very deliberate. We are told, of course, that entanglement and quantum computing systems would be virtually unhackable. But I have to wonder if, in the laboratories of agencies like DARPA (the Diabolically Apocalyptic Research Projects Agency, as we refer to it here, following a suggestion of Mr. J.B.), they are already into second generation experiments on this phenomenon and technology, and if, perhaps they have found, or at least, theorized about, ways around it.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Manipulating Nothingness

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
June 22, 2017

Ms. K.M. sent this article this week, and I have to blog about it, for it seems that some physicists are making the claim – not yet totally sanctioned by other physicists – of being able to manipulate the vacuum, and hence the vacuum (or zero point), energy itself:

Physicists Say They’ve Manipulated ‘Pure Nothingness’ And Observed The Fallout

Before we get to why I had an “oh my!” moment when I read this, and to my high octane speculation of the day, consider the following paragraphs:

Then, in 2015, a team led by Alfred Leitenstorfer from the University of Konstanz in Germany claimed they’d directly detected these fluctuations, by observing their influence on a light wave. The results were published in Science. 

To do this, they fired a super short laser pulse – lasting only a few femtoseconds, which is a millionth of a billionth of a second – into a vacuum, and were able to see subtle changes in the polarisation of the light. They said these changes were caused directly by the quantum fluctuations.

It’s a claim that’s still being debated, but the researchers have now taken their experiment to the next level by ‘squeezing’ the vacuum, and say they’ve been able to observe the strange changes in the quantum fluctuations as a result.

That sounds weird, but in a vacuum, space and time behave in the same way, so it’s possible to examine one to learn more about the other.

Doing this, the team saw that when they ‘squeezed’ the vacuum, it worked kind of like squeezing a balloon, and redistributed the strange quantum fluctuations within it.

Now, in case you missed it, let’s boil all this down to two basic ideas:

(1) there is an energy in absolute vacuum, which is known by a variety of names; zero point energy, quantum fluctuations, vacuum energy and so on;

(2) that energy can be observed, or accessed, when one changes the pure “shape” or geometry of the vacuum itself. Indeed, viewed a certain way, the particles of physics are “changes of geometry” in the vacuum that are stable for some period of time.

Let this all sink in for a moment: scientists have found a way to “change the shape’ of the vacuum itself, and hence, have observed and accessed the strange and hitherto inaccessible world of that “quantum vacuum fluctuation.”

There is, so to speak, a purely abstract – non-physical – topology to the way even the vacuum – pure nothingness – behaves, and this is manipulable via shape. So the claim  – which, let us note for the record, is still being debated by the scientific community reacting to this experiment – is to have achieved the God-like power to shape nothingness itself. For most people, this will seem at once a contradiction of religion and the ultimate testament of the folly of man. In point of fact, for certain versions of religion, man is a “co-worker” with God, even in his own salvation, and there is no real limit placed on what that “co-working” entails, even, perhaps, to the cosmological scale. (For those interested in the details, it is part of the communicatio or circumincessio idiomatorum). While this experiment is only a first, small step, it is also a gigantic step in terms of the implications, for it is suggesting that the vacuum is directly engineerable – as some have been maintaining for decades – via its shape or geometry. Indeed, it recalls the pyramid research of Ukrainian physicist Volodimir Krasnoholovets, and his co-authored papers with topologist Michel Bounias.

It also recalls that disturbing statement in the Babylonian war epic, the Enuma Elish (and yes, I persist in my opinion that the epic is a war epic and not, pace academia, a creation epic), that after a colossal war and the destruction of the planet/god Tiamat, he “remeasured the structure of the deep“, of “the abyss”.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Shocker: Some Things Are Learned For Their Own Sake; Not For Application

Lightning Bottle
NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
June 21, 2017

At college a few lifetimes ago, one of my earliest experiences was reading Yeats’ Sailing to Byzantium. Here is the famous last stanza:

Once out of nature I shall never take
My bodily form from any natural thing,
But such a form as Grecian goldsmiths make
Of hammered gold and gold enamelling
To keep a drowsy Emperor awake;
Or set upon a golden bough to sing
To lords and ladies of Byzantium
Of what is past, or passing, or to come.

At the time, in those college years, it was well understood that you learned some things for their own sake. You didn’t even have to agree with the sentiment expressed. You could appreciate the expression.

Certain expressions were aesthetic and spiritual and alive in their own way. Argument on that score was unnecessary.

What about the opening lines of Dylan Thomas’ Fern Hill? If they don’t take you off your chair, read them out loud a few times:

Now as I was young and easy under the apple boughs
About the lilting house and happy as the grass was green,
The night above the dingle starry,
Time let me hail and climb
Golden in the heydays of his eyes,
And honoured among wagons I was prince of the apple towns
And once below a time I lordly had the trees and leaves
Trail with daisies and barley
Down the rivers of the windfall light.

No one asked the student how he was going to use those words of a poem when he was working, years later, for a bank. No one asked him how he was going make the words count when he was fronting for a suit filed by a corporation. No one said he had to postpone appreciating poetry because injustices still existed in the world.

Education can expose students to glorious things they will never apply.

Yet, those things can transform their lives.

As civilization declines, an impression is imparted that there are only crises. Every event is some kind of crisis.

If that were true, what would be left over? What inner life would be possible?

What joy could be experienced for its own sake?

All of this leads me back to a theme I’ve covered from many different angles over the years. Reality, ordinary reality is not the end-all and be-all.

Art, for example, proves that.

The thrill of actual poetry proves that.

Why do I bother saying all this? Because part of what it means to have a civilization is part of what it means to be an individual: there is a profound appreciation of human creations. When that goes by the boards, when education ignores that because “more important issues” must be presented and framed and slanted, for purposes of sheer indoctrination, life-force drains away.

Elevated language taken to poetic heights is not a mere distraction.

Many years ago, when I was working at a community college, I started an informal poetry project. I brought together a small group of foreign students and taped them reading poems in their own languages (Portuguese, ancient Persian, English, etc.). I wanted them to hear the sounds of those poems, apart from their meaning. I wanted them to hear the music(s).

Now we’re talking about real diversity, not the fake imposed version. Now we’re talking about great energies that have been injected into, and fortified in, many languages by individual poets from all times and places.

Now we’re talking about the heights those cultures reached, not the depths to which they sank.

Now we’re talking about an authentic level of understanding reaching across bridges and gaps.

There is something very right about that.

Burned flowers of the field
My noon is over, growing old
Everything I have is finally sold
Sewed designs for men with money
Thinking it was duty
To watch them lead the world to war
From my little field of beauty

I wrote that poem when I was 23. It was published in 1966, in The Massachusetts Review. At the time, I was focused on the break-up of The American Dream. Soon after, I had my moment of insight, when it became clear to me that individuals and their minds and imaginations and choices could exceed the negative reach of any civilization and, at the same time, fertilize that civilization. Reality (things as they are) is not the answer; it is the lowest common denominator, which waits for people to sign declarations of surrender.

Preposterous surrender.

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com

The 11-Dimensional Multi-Verse Of The Brain

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
June 21, 2017

A couple of days ago I blogged about the discovery of “memory-wiping” enzymes and its implications for the topic of mind control. In that blog, I also made the connection between the mind and the universe, particularly the version of quantum theory called the “multiverse” hypothesis. I’ve long sensed that there is a connection between the mind and matter, and that this connection is not of the tidy Cartesian variety, where the one (take your choice) gives rise to the other. I suspect, and have suspected for some time, that the situation is rather than of a complex set of feedback loops between the two, and that in that situation, that complexity can only be described by something “not physical” in the ordinary, three dimensional sense of our everyday experience.

Thus, when Mr. M.H. shared this article this week, I took notice:

Brain Architecture: Scientists Discover 11 Dimensional Structures That Could Help Us Understand How the Brain Works

The following paragraphs leapt out at me:

Scientists studying the brain have discovered that the organ operates on up to 11 different dimensions, creating multiverse-like structures that are “a world we had never imagined.”

By using an advanced mathematical system, researchers were able to uncover architectural structures that appears when the brain has to process information, before they disintegrate into nothing.

In the latest study, researchers honed in on the neural network structures within the brain using algebraic topology—a system used to describe networks with constantly changing spaces and structures. This is the first time this branch of math has been applied to neuroscience.

“Algebraic topology is like a telescope and microscope at the same time. It can zoom into networks to find hidden structures—the trees in the forest—and see the empty spaces—the clearings—all at the same time,” study author Kathryn Hess said in a statement.

In the study, researchers carried out multiple tests on virtual brain tissue to find brain structures that would never appear just by chance.

“We found a world that we had never imagined. There are tens of millions of these objects even in a small speck of the brain, up through seven dimensions. In some networks, we even found structures with up to eleven dimensions.”

The findings indicate the brain processes stimuli by creating these complex cliques and cavities, so the next step will be to find out whether or not our ability to perform complicated tasks requires the creation of these multi-dimensional structures.

Hess says the findings suggest that when we examine brain activity with low-dimensional representations, we only get a shadow of the real activity taking place. This means we can see some information, but not the full picture. “So, in a sense our discoveries may explain why it has been so hard to understand the relation between brain structure and function,” she explains.

Talk about high octane! Let that sink in for a moment: at every moment you are thinking, multi-dimensional structures arise in your very three dimensional brain, and that’s a fancy way of saying your brain is not closed within or upon itself, but is rather an open system interacting with much higher dimensional realities that cannot be encompassed in the material 3-d world. And this is why, using a merely three-dimensional model, or, if I may be more blunt, a merely materialistic model of the mind-brain relationship, has failed to grasp the complexity, the hyper-dimensional complexity, of what is actually going on. Indeed, higher order topologies are necessary to describe thought at all: thought does not occur in the three dimensional material stuff of life solely or exclusively, but outside it, as something coupled with it. (Regular readers of my books will recognize this as what I’ve been calling the Topological Metaphor of the Medium, and its analogical basis.) For those who’ve read my books Secrets of the Unified Field or The Third Way, the name of Gabriel Kron should also spring to mind, with his theory that all electrical circuits, no matter how simple they are, are in effect hyper-dimensional machines, transducing something “down here” from “up there”.

What is interesting in this article is also the implication of the object or stimulus of brain activity: for consider what that object is, in physics terms. Even at the atomic or, better, sub-atomic quantum level, these “material” entities dissolve – if I may use that term – into packets of information modeled by multi-dimensional mathematical equations. In other words, multi-dimensionality is the bridge of perception because the multi-dimensionality is at the root of the objects themselves.

What’s coming down the pike? Well, I’ve speculated at length about this idea in our numerous members’ vidchats (along with some pretty stimulating speculations from members themselves): the next step is to find the exact nature and structure of those “feedback” loops between the “material” world and the “incorporeal” one: think “quantum neurology” and “neuro-cosmology” for a moment, and you get an intuitive approximation of how the old, tidy, Cartesian dualistic lines are breaking down. We are, I rather suspect, looking at something more akin to the old Neoplatonic spectrum of “fine gradations” from the immaterial world of forms to the increasingly “dense” world of matter.

Funny thing, too, to remember that Plato referred to all of this as “the mathematicals”. Funny thing, too, that in membrane theory, space-time is in 11 dimensions.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Monsanto quietly announces they are investing heavily in gene editing

Image: Monsanto quietly announces they are investing heavily in gene editing

Source: NaturalNews.com
Vicki Batts
June 2, 2017

Is anyone surprised that Monsanto is moving on from “conventional” genetically modified organisms to gene editing? It seems that the world’s most evil corporation is convinced that the new gene editing technology that’s been taking the globe by storm will somehow ease consumer concerns about eating GMOs.

Whether or not the difference between the two is substantial enough to assuage the many fundamental issues that surround GMO seeds, which extend far beyond just concerns about the effects of consumption, has yet to be seen. Personally, this writer feels that the alleged differences between “genetically modified” and “gene-edited” are not going to be very moving.

Dr. Robert Fraley, Monsanto’s chief technology officer, recently told Fox Business, “I see gene editing very differently [than GMOs] because it’s being used today broadly by pharmaceutical, agricultural companies, universities and hundreds of startup companies — and I think there is broad support for this science and I think that is going to make a big difference.”

Supposedly, the key difference between GMOs and “gene-edited crops” is that while GMOs rely on genes from different species (resulting in transgenic organisms), these gene-edited versions will be “generated through precise editing of an organism’s native genome,” as Business Insider explains.

Monsanto has recently announced that they would be investing heavily into new gene editing technology, known as CRISPR/Cas-9, which is a gene editing technique that essentially allows scientists to select, snip and replace certain genetic components. It’s essentially a genetic “find and replace” tool — but there are many questions about its safety.

This technology purportedly allows scientists to manipulate a plant’s DNA without having to pull foreign DNA from other species, like current GMOs. However, you may recall that this same CRISPR-Cas9 technology was used to create human-pig embryos — which are, obviously, transgenic organisms.

The use of CRISPR-Cas9 technology in crops, therefore, would not implicitly guarantee that any creations derived from it would be free of foreign DNA. The potential for transgenic creations is absolutely still quite real.

Fraley says that the CRISPR technology allows them to precisely edit a gene without having to replace it entirely. However, there will still likely be concerns about where the replacement parts for snipped genes are coming from. According to Fraley, we can expect to see the first gene-edited creations on the market within the next five years.

Megan Westgate, the executive director of Non-GMO Project, explained to Fox Business, “While these new technologies are touted to be more precise than older genetic engineering technologies, it is widely accepted in the scientific community that there can be ‘off target’ effects to the genome when the technologies are utilized. GMOs, including the products of these new technologies, have not been adequately tested—no long-term feeding studies have been conducted—and people are starting to connect these experimental technologies to health concerns.”

Fraley, like other GMO proponents, claims that the skepticism of GMOs is due to the fact that Monsanto failed to educate people about the “science” of GMOs early on. And of course, by education he means “brain-washing.” They didn’t realize that the public would be smart enough to ask pertinent questions not just about the safety of GMOs, but everything that tends to come along with them: Pesticides, herbicides, chemical fertilizers,and monocrop farming techniques — all of which can be harmful to the environment.

Claiming that there are “vast” differences between “genetically modified” and “gene-edited” crops could be seen as an exercise in semantics. The fact of the matter is that many people feel strongly about not eating food that has been modified in a lab, by humans who think they know what they’re doing. This is not likely to change just because a new label has been slapped on it.

Regardless of how you feel about genetically modified organisms, or their new “edited” counterparts, the fact remains that every person should have the right to choose what kind of food they want to consume — and the call to label these new “gene-edited” foods needs to begin before they hit the shelves.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources:

FoxBusiness.com

BusinessInsider.com

CNN.com

SustainableTable.org

The Weaponization of “Science”

Source:  CorbettReport
May 22, 2017

SHOW NOTES: https://www.corbettreport.com/?p=22774 |

“Science” is being turned into a political weapon. Not the scientific method, but the reified “science” of scientism, exemplified by the politically-motivated March For Science, the politically-biased peer review process, the politically-charged infotainment from political hacks like Bill Nye, and the politically-appointed scientific regulators who always put their corporate interests and political worldview ahead of scientific accuracy.

Study: Safety Issues Plagued 1/3 of FDA-Approved Drugs from 2001-2010 Even as President Trump pushes for quicker drug approvals

drugs
Source: NaturalSociety.com
Julie Fidler
May 19, 2017

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is tasked with making sure that drugs and medical devices are safe and efficient for Americans to use. However, it appears that the agency doesn’t take its job seriously enough, because a new study shows that nearly 1/3 of medications approved from 2001 to 2010 had safety issues years after they were made widely available to patients, and some were quite serious. [1]

The study, published May 9 in JAMAshows that 71 of the 222 drugs approved during that time period were withdrawn, required a “black box” due to their side effects, or warranted a safety announcement about new risks.

Source: Center for American Progress

Dr. Joseph Ross, an associate professor of medicine at Yale School of Medicine, says:

“While the [Trump] administration pushes for less regulation and faster approvals, those decisions have consequences.”

A 2015 independent analysis of drugs approved using the agency’s expedited approval process found that the trend of speeding approval “is being driven by drugs that are not first in class and thus potentially are less innovative.” [2]

But President Trump isn’t the first president to pressure the FDA to speed up its drug approvals.

On December 13, 2016, President Barack Obama signed the 21st Century Cures Act. The law provides speedier routes to approval by pushing the FDA to consider evidence beyond the normal 3 phases of clinical trials. The move upset many researchers who feared the law would allow the approval of drugs that haven’t been adequately studied.

Says Dr. Vinay Prasad, a hematologist-oncologist and professor at Oregon Health and Sciences University, who wasn’t involved in the study:

“I’m actually sympathetic to the idea that there are ways in which the FDA can be more streamlined and do a quicker job. The one place you don’t want to cut a corner is safety and efficacy prior to coming to market.”

According to the study, during the first decade of the millennium, the FDA approved drugs faster than the U.K.’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the majority of clinical trials in drug approvals involved fewer than 1,000 participants, and lasted 6 months or less, according to the findings. [1]

On average, it took 4 years and 2 months after the drugs were approved for safety issues to emerge. The most troublesome drugs included psychiatric medications, biologic drugs, drugs granted “accelerated approval,” and drugs that gained approval at the tail end of the regulatory period.

But drugs that were granted accelerated approval had the worst track record. Dr. Nicholas S. Downing, an author of the study and a resident physician of internal medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, says:

“The key message with all new drugs and technology is that there is an ongoing learning process that will continue through the lifetime of the drug.

Downing says that scientists need to continuously test drugs to make sure they work with a wide range of variables, and used aspirin as an example. The medication has been used for hundreds of years, yet “there are still countless new studies coming out, and we learn more about it all the time.” [2]

Read More At: NaturalSociety.com

Sources:

[1] Kaiser Health News

[2] CNN

Center for American Progress