text
stringlengths 0
4.26k
| source
stringclasses 1
value |
|---|---|
OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
|
If 4/2 is the inverse operation of 2 x 2 = 4 Then it would naturally follow that 2/1 is the inverse operation of 1 x 1 = 2Allow Me to Enlighten You What does your common sense tell you about these two scenarios? What do they have in common and what are their differences?Can you see where the mistake has occurred? Both of these scenarios are identical in every way. The only difference exists in dimension alone. If they ADD, SUBTRACT and DIVIDE according to the same ratio then they must also MULTIPLY according to the same ratio, plain and simple! DIVISION The number four is divided by two, twice. and the truth is: The number two is divided by one, twice. ADDITION 2 + 2 = 4 And 1 + 1 = 2 SUBTRACTION 4-2 = 2 And 2-1 = 1 MULTIPLICATION 2 x 2 = 4 And 1 x 1 = 1 2/1 1 x 1 = 1 4/2 2 x 2 = 4is inconsistent with Although is consistent with Then it should follow that: 2² = 4 1 ² = 2 & Y et, the Math and Scientific community tells us that common sense and logic are wrong in this case because of a product of an arbitrary convention called the Identity property 2If 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Dear W orld, I have been told by many that the releasing of this truth may pose certain challenges in my life. For there are many institutions that this truth will be viewed as disruptive to their system of profit and gains. I want to live a happy and peaceful life and I pray for longevity. Not just for me, but for our entire species. Know that I would never harm myself, nor anyone else for that matter. Nevertheless, if my life has to face certain challenges so that this planet can be saved, please do not let these trials that I may have to face be in vain and pray for me as I am praying for you. Sincerely, T errence Da Shon Howard May 25th, 2019 3 Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
“I may be climbing on rainbows, but baby here goes!" It should never occur, that the square root of a given number when add-ed to itself produces a result greater than the initial number squared. For that would expose a loose thread within the fab-ric of mathematics. A “loose thread” capable of unraveling the very ground rules of mathematics and consequently insuring the collapse of any system that is based upon its foundation. Written by Terrence Da Shon Howard 1. A Treatise on 1 x 1 = 2. For 1 x 1 to = 1 creates a direct viola-tion of all Natural Law and contradicts Newton's law regarding “Action and Reaction” and the laws governing “Conservation of Energy. ” 2. A Treatise on the Platonic solids being illusions and Univer-sally a set of non-sustainable, incomplete and now obsolete geo-metric structures. All Space is curved, thereby making it Impos-sible for a Straight Line to come into existence. The platonic solids are only optical illusions. 3. Finally, a Treatise upon the previously undiscovered Geom-etry that properly defines the Magnetic field, the Electric field and redefines what we call Space/Time. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Hello, I am Terrence Da Shon Howard. I was conceived sometime during the week of June 7th, 1968. My parents might have been listening to “This Guy's in Love” by Herb Albert, because that was the number 1 song that week and it has always been one of my favorites. All of these things took place in Cleveland, Ohio but I was born on March 11, 1969 in Chicago, Illinois. That's when the rest of the world got a chance to see this Creation that I've come to know as 'Me'. There's a phrase, a vibration, that has been heard bouncing upon the lips of Mankind, this notion or 'State of Being' called: “ Being Awake”, "Woke" or “ Enlightened” as it were. I personally prefer being “ Aware”. I am a manifestation of All collected states of Matter. I am Aware of who I am. I make no excuses for what I am. Nor for my over curious nature. I accept my being and know that in order for me to occupy this partic-ular place in Space/Time. Every Wave within the Universe has to have cosigned my Existence and must likewise be “ Aware”, of my 'Being', in some Cosmic sense or another. Every waveform in this Universe flows through me and into every other waveform for that Matter... This is a book about the illusion of “Matter”. Every wave is dependent upon my Existence and my particular crest and trough, my spin, my charge, as I am likewise held together by every other wave that is. I am necessary in order for All Other Things to be, and Everything Else is necessary in order for Me to be. We are All ONE. I am a father of 5 children and a grandfather of two. I haven't any formal training in the field of Mathematics, nor do I hold degrees in any of the Sciences. What I do hold is a deep respect for All Created Things and I have spent nearly 5 decades utilizing the tools of com-mon sense, which doesn't seem to be so common these days. 4 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Through deep reflection and purposeful observation of Life and its processes, I am witness to an entirely New Cosmogony. (An under-standing of the Universe). I am not an alumni of any of the presti-gious universities that books about Math and Science are often au-thored by, yet I do claim bragging rights and consider myself to be one of the most curious beings in all of creation. I do not have all of the answers, but I can show where you can find them, and just like you, I do have questions, questions I believe that warrant truthful and heartfelt answers. I understand that many truths are hard to swallow. Like in the movie “A Few Good Men”, when Jack Nicholson, tells Tom Cruise's char-acter, “You Can't Handle the Truth!” There are many consequences that come as a result of an unbridled tongue and the truth can be quite burdensome to hear and difficult to accept at times. Never-theless, from truth we grow. Even though growing pains may be a necessary accompaniment. Truth is necessary for transparency, it is a vital component for understanding Life itself. Especially, since the future of our entire species completely depends upon it. I have spent much of this lifetime gathering countless bits of infor-mation, pieces of answers and tiny tidbits of regurgitated thought from around the Universe. I had no prejudice regarding the source of that information, whatsoever. I was only in search of absolute truth. I have read and have been read by some of the most notable people on the planet. Still I consider myself to be no greater than the simplest single cell organism and no less than a beloved Child of God. I am an Academy Award nominated actor, a self taught musi-cian, sculptor, artisan, singer, songwriter, philosopher, poet, alche-mist, a student of mathematics, and an avid chess player. I do not boast of memberships in the clubs of the elite. Yet, I do belong to one of the most influential families that have ever walked upon the face of this planet: The Human Family! This book is intended for the betterment of All Living, Breathing and Conscious Beings in this World and the Worlds to Come. All Creation is Alive, All Creation shares a collective consciousness with All Other Things. While many within our species ignore the desper-ate cries of their own conscious, they also ignore the suffering of the Other Beings that we share Our Existence with. All things are equal. All things stem from the same source, “The Creator of All Things!” “All Created Things” are also due the same inalienable rights and considerations that the Human family enjoys. We as members of this privileged Universal Family, have a responsibility to Everything within Creation. We must show it in all of our actions, as a sign of appreciation for being blessed with this gift of Existence. We should show that we are not only willing but are also happy to cooperate with All Things and are not here to compete with but to cooperate with Nature. All Creation understands innately the need for give and take, in this shared Universe, Let's go about it responsibly, please. You want to know a secret: If you know One Thing about One Thing, then you know One thing about All Things. Find the common factor and you either multiply by it or divide by it. Tyrone, Anita Howard and Me Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 5 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
DEDICATION This book is dedicated to the one true source of Light! Who has stood with me through every trial in every lifetime from creation to present, from birth to rest, to re-birth. The One who breathed life into my lifeless soul with the gentlest whisper, “I believe in you. ” “Come into Life!” This is for you! My True Love, Mira! 'Nature is a very jealous God, She only reveals her secrets when you are alone with her and she tells you in soft whispers. ' Walter Russell Soulmates 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 66 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS INTRODUCTION LET'S MOVE FORW ARD THE UNBALANCED EQUATION IDENTITY PROPERTY MATHEMATICS 101 BASIC PRINCIPLES OF MATHEMATICS CHALLENGING THE STATUS-QUO RELATIVE FACTORING AND USEFUL INSIGHTS IN DEDUCTIVE REASONING THE PERIODIC TABLE OF ELEMENTS SOUND AND ITS WAVE DYNAMICS ELECTRO-MAGNETIC WAVE INTERACTIONS ESTABLISHED LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS A BRIEF HISTORY OF BABYLONIAN LOGIC AND A GLIMPSE INTO THEIR DAILY LIVES THE CONDITIONS OF ONE THE WORLD'S DEPARTURE FROM THE GOLD STANDARD COMMON SENSE AND MANKIND'S HASTENED DEPARTURE FROM IT A CRASH COURSE INTO PARTICLE PHYSICS THE TERRYEN WAVE FIELDS THE LYNCHPIN THE COMMON FACTOR OF ALL THINGS THE FLOWER OF LIFE AND THE GARDEN OF EDEN UNIVERSAL MATHEMATICS THE FRUIT FROM THE SACRED TREE OF LIFE THE TETRA-TERRYEN W AVE FIELD THE HUNTYEN WAVE FIELD THE MIRA WAVE FIELD THE AUBREYEN WAVE FIELD THE HEAVENLY WAVE FIELD INVISIBLE STATES OF MATTER A NEW BEGINNING EPILOGUE APPENDIX-SCULPTURAL EXPLORATIONS INDEX Appendix Sculptural Explorations A NEW BEGINNING Acknowledgments Introduction CHALLENGING THE STATUS-QUO RELATIVE FACTORING AND USEFUL INSIGHTS IN DEDUCTIVE REASONING1 One A CRASH COURSE INTO PAR TICLE PHYSICS AND QUANTUM MECHANICS THE TERR YEN WAVE Fields The Fruit from the Sacred Tree of Life INVISIBLE STATES OF MATTER Let's move For ward Touch Here on Any Page to Return to this Table of Contents Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 7 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Acknowledgments I would like to take a few moments to give thanks to all the pioneers of free thinking that have forged the way for truth seekers. Who had an uncompromising devotion to a higher standard in the pursuit of Pure and Unadulterated Truth, Wisdom, Understanding, Discern-ment, Insight and Reasoning along with a deep appreciation for the Eternal Beauty and the Sanctity of Life that exists in All things. Many of them were severely ridiculed and brutally persecuted because their Vision exceeded the myopic view of their near blind contem-poraries. Nevertheless, they forged ahead facing the full wrath of the storm, while we the Children of Light who see only because of their glori-ous illumination and understand only because of their True Genius. We are the beneficiaries of their long suffering. We are the heirs of their Love, their Heart motivated and Self Sacrificing Devotion to the highest standards of Truth, Love and Consciousness. I acknowledge and recognize the achievements of Walter Russell, John Keeley, and Nikola Tesla, men beyond the cusp of Genius! Thank you for your Tireless work. Terrence Dashon Howard“My husband was very close to Nikola T esla in the last years of his life. T esla told my husband that he should lock all of his new scientific knowl-edge up in the Smithsonian Institute for he said not only was the world not ready for it, but they would crucify him for trying to give it. ” Lao Russell ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 8 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Introduction From the Beginning of Time Man's curiosity and unquenchable thirst for knowledge equipped his descendants with the tools necessary for our species to climb out of the cold, damp and barren tunnels that littered the Earth's crust. Slowly we made our way up the ladder from the bottom rung of the food chain as a resourceful species to the top of the proverbial World, where now we bathe upon sun drenched mountain precipices and all Earthly life fears our very presence. To All Creation that eats, sleeps and breaths upon this mer-ciless planet, our species is now a demigod. For it is by our cruel and heartless hands or by our benevolence that All Other Species either Lives or Dies. Why should our kind not be viewed as gods? No other species within the known Universe has accomplished the miraculous achievements that has set Mankind apart from All Other Creation. Our advancements in science, art, philosophy and not to be for-gotten the towering heights that have been scaled within the field of mathematics. All of this has been accomplished from our need to satiate one deeply rooted desire, the long-ing for Purpose. INTRODUCTION "In the ancient temple civilization of Egypt, our most ancient form of symbol, numbers, did not simply designate quantities but instead were con-sidered to be concrete definitions of the energetic formative principles of nature. " "The Egyptians called these energetic principles Neters, a word which is conventionally rendered as "gods. " In considering the esoteric meaning of Number, we must avoid the following mistake: Two is not One and One; it is not a composite. It is the multiplying Work; it is the notion of the plus in relation to the minus; it is a new Unity; it is sex-uality; it is the origin of Nature. Physis, the Neter Two. " "It is the Culmination (the separating moment of the full moon, for example); it is the line, the stick, movement, the way, Wotan, Odin, the Me-ter, Thoth, Mercury, and Spirit. " The Temple in Man-Sacred Architecture-R. A. Schwaller de Lubicz Translated by Robert & Deborah Lawlor Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 9 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
I have a purpose as we all have a purpose. We may not all recognize our purpose within the course of this lifetime but we all serve a greater purpose on a much larger, cosmic scale. It is as if some irresistible force was propelling us from within. An unquenchable thirst that was given to us at the threshold of Our Creation; the need to achieve something greater than our predecessors or contemporaries. We have a desire to leave an indelible mark upon this world and to imprint upon the next, to cheat death by be-coming immortalized through our achievements. It is as if this impetus was deliberately branded into our genetic code. Like a sub-atomic, interwoven prime directive for us to search for the Greater Truth, to recall lost echoes of conversations from the past and to reveal that which has never been uncovered. To question the path that we are presently upon and make our predictions about the poten-tial for prosperity in the future. This innate curiosity coupled with a relentless drive to-wards accuracy and rigor has enabled our species to over-come the hurdles of fear, superstition and religious fer-vor. As a result, we are now poised to inherit the Heavens themselves. At least we'd like to think so. Another interesting characteristic about our species, that I think merits commentary is the fact that our kind is the very last remaining branch of Hominids. A branch called Homo sapiens, which interestingly enough means “Great Ape”. Ironically, it has always been our ability to adapt and make adjustments in order to meet the challenges of our current needs and present circumstances that has allowed our species to evolve from our pre-human ancestors and ascend to the top of the figurative evolutionary ladder. When the climate made a drastic change 1. 75 million years ago (as professed by modern science) and massive glaciers covered most of the surface of the Earth, our entire way of life also changed. Our eating habits, hunting practic-es, even our methods of communication and likewise our fashion made the necessary adjustments. This afforded our species the ability to acclimate to almost any environment and to outlive all other hominids that were in competition for the prized position of 'Dominant Species' on this plan-et. This list includes: Neanderthals (Man from Neander Valley), Homo-Erectus (Upright Man), Homo-Soloensis (Man from the Solo Valley), Australopithecus (Southern Man) and many more who failed to adapt to the changing world and grow into the future. The last ice age called the Pleistocene Epoch, ended around 11,000 to 12,000 years ago, (according to main stream academia). Where very few species managed to survive our species thrived. 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 10 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
This “die off”, I'm sure, had a greater effect upon those with limited knowledge regarding math and science. With-out discernment of the underlying factors that make up “Cause,” we find ourselves limited to the often brutal and rarely merciful “Effects” of Nature. Imagine what it might have been like for those species more rigidly rooted in their migratory habits, to face drastic changes in weather patterns and tidal currents. Fortunately for homo sapiens, we've always possessed the ability to grow and to overcome the confines of dead and fruitless routes, allowing our species to rise above any past hurdles and hopefully any of our present limitations and future obstacles. Mankind as a whole has always understood the need to see farther than our limited primal senses and bleak circum-stances afforded. For each subject of Creation sees a dif-ferent horizon based upon their relative height, vision and their imagination. The success of that particular creature's plight and his or her entire species oftentimes depended solely upon their figurative vision. Yet, there is one hurdle that stands in Man's way, our re-lentless veneration for the ideas of antiquity and our un-bridled devotion to the doctrine of yesteryear. You see, twenty five hundred years ago (as propagated in school text books) a new concept called Euclidean Geom-etry was introduced and indoctrinated into the common World. It was based upon the notion that the World was flat and filled with linear, crisscrossing perpendicular lines. It was conceived in a two dimensional static mind set, which couldn't possibly predict the vastness of our Universe of Motion and the Super Symmetry that governs it's curved and cyclic nature. We live on a small section of a much larger temporal wave conjugation or 'phase' conjugation that we perceive as Matter but it is truly immaterial. It tells its tales of exis-tence in temporary three dimensional Space/Time dis-ruptions. A Space/Time that provides a function within this Multi-Dimensional Universe filled with curved Space that is forever changing, forever evolving in a constant tug of war between its expanding equators and its contracting poles. Scientist and mathematicians around the globe collective-ly agree that technologically we've hit an impasse in our evolution. This is illustrated by our inability as a species to keep up with the concept of Moore's Law. (The observa-tion that the number of transistors in a dense integrated circuit doubles approximately every two years. ) The world is changing and so is everything around us. Unfortunately, we have chosen to remain handcuffed to an antiquated and obsolete mathematical belief system. Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 11 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
We have put an enormous amount of faith into illogical methods and irrational practices of a flat lined philosophy. This is a line of false reasoning that is as dead today as the uninformed individuals who once believed and propagat-ed the foolish notion that the world was flat. I think the time has come for us to see the World as it tru-ly is, a Multi-Dimensional, Electrically Charging, Magneti-cally Discharging, All Shaped, Living and Breathing Being. I think it is time that the fields of science and mathematics reflect this reality. In lieu of my views towards All Things in existence and the Life force that saturates All Things in existence, I have chosen to capitalize particular words that are fundamental to Nature as a whole because these forces play a much more important role in Life than any VIP as a single person, place or thing, that has ever been venerated by Man. Lorem ipsuma 8 12345678 1234567b c d e f g h Lorem ipsuma b c d e f g h Lorem ipsuma 8 12345678 1234567b c d e f g h Lorem ipsuma b c d e f g h1 1 x This is the Truth, This is the Light, This is the WA VE. 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 12 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
For ward I encourage you not to become frightened but brace yourselves, because the things being discussed within the pages of this book will shake the very foundation of our understanding of the world. Everything that you think you know, about what you know, will be called into question. A tidal wave of refreshing truth is being released upon this dark and muddied world. You are about to embark upon a journey into a forbidden sub-ject, one that tackles a question in mathematics that has never been asked publicly. It is a subject considered so taboo, that not one paper or book has been written upon this topic in modernity. If the information in this book is heeded, then this species called Mankind will have the keys necessary for an eternally sus-tainable existence. If not, this species will suffer the same fate as the trilo-bites that crawled across the ocean floor some 500 million years ago, “Extinction!” Our species will pass away and be remembered only for our ignorance. That is of course if our fossils survive long enough for a more advanced race to find them. The truth is that everyone is just afraid of this topic be-cause of the potential consequences associated with dis-closing the true value of the number ONE. Also, the fears associated with exposing the inconsistencies that govern the current practices of multiplication, division and how these are applied to science. Unfortunately, every country in the civilized world has their economy rooted in the value that has been placed upon the number ONE and from its valuation the world calculates interest rates, salaries, tariffs, taxes, etc. All of these calculations are based upon how the number ONE is multiplied and divided. As a result, “The world's math makes dollars but it doesn't make sense. ” FORWARDLet's Move Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 13 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
So, lets start with the basic foundation of the world's ap-proach to mathematics. Academia bases its mathematical model upon a two-dimensional flat planed state of exis-tence. Even though they are aware of the fact that two-dimen-sional Space is imaginary and can't even be fabricated in our three-dimensional reality. Two-dimensional mathe-matics operates and exists only in an impossible unreality where the Universe is perceived as an infinitely flat plane that extends forever in two linear directions infinitely for-wards and backwards and infinitely to the left and to the right. In this imagined two-dimensional plane where only straight lines exist, there isn't any room for curved Space, nor any room for Time in this dimensionally challenged plane. Because the introduction of a third condition would generate the need and creation of a third Dimension. Un-fortunately, the present rules of multiplication only par-tially operate and function in this imagined world of 2d and completely fail to function in 3-D Space/Time. The third dimension is the first reality, it is the plane from which we see, hear, smell, taste, touch and interpret our world and the Universe that it exists within. Nevertheless, our means of measuring this Universe and registering it's curved and Multi-Dimensional Nature is all based upon an imaginary and physically impossible unre-ality called two dimensional Space. Scientists and mathematicians all subscribe to this im-probable scenario of existence where there exists only two planes of interaction at a given time, a place that does not exist. This 2-D virtual world is imaginary in both physics and mathematics. These two dimensions of length and width is often referred to as Euclidean Space. This Euclidean mind-set has become the cornerstone of mathematics and is the stumbling block responsible for our misunderstanding of the simple truths and the relatable beauty of the Universe. I believe that the time has come to audit this imagined un-reality called the Euclidean perspective. I believe it is time to shed some 3-D light upon this impossibly crippled and illogical misconception that has become the Achilles' heel of our species. It is time to answer the first necessary ques-tion of creation of any species hoping to enjoy a sustained existence, “How does One multiply?” Honestly, what is the proper way to multiply anything? Because there exists many inconsistencies which seem to permeate our estab-lished system of mathematics and the sciences. Lets start with one of the most obvious of inconsistencies, 'The notion that both sides of an equation should always be equal. ' 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 14 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Balance “The Keystone of the entire Structure of the Spiritual and Physical Universe is Rhythmic Balanced Interchange Between all Opposites. ” Walter Russell Balance UNBALANCED EQUATION WITH 1 x 1 = 1 First and foremost let us ask the most obvious question, is 1 x 1 = 1 a finished equation? Yes, or No? The answer is, No! Why? Because it's not even on both sides. Yes, Nature desires action but demands equilibrium. Therefore, in order for an equation to be considered finished or completed, both sides of the equation must be equally balanced. Yet, in the case of 1 x 1 = 1 we have an unfinished equation. Because we have two (1 )'s on one side of the equation and one (1) on the op-posing side of the equation. Let's attempt to balance this equation First, by making sense of it, come on let's label the relative factors: 1 x 1 = 1 We will call the first value (a) We will call the second value (b) We will call the third value (c) Remember the basic laws of common sense. If (a) x (b) = (c), then (c) must be some product of (a) and (b). Yet, in order for 1 x 1 to equal 1 the value of either (a) or (b) has to be missing from the final product of (c). Okay, let us simply apply the associative and commutative law to the initial equation:(a) (b) (c) Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 15 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
1 x 1 = ? (Add (a) to itself as many times as is indicated by units in (b) Since (a) has (1) unit and (b) also has (1) unit, then: 1 x 1 doesn't equal 1, (1 x 1) and (1 + 1) both (=) 2. And since they are both doubling their value, then it follows that they are different expressions of the same function. This is the point where the 'waves of arithmetic' and the 'waves of true and natural multiplication' converge. (a) (b) (c) 1 + 1 = 2 (a') (b') (c') 1 x 1 = 2 You see what happens when you follow the clear and expressed rules of The Associative and Commutative Law's? The equation is balanced on both sides of the (=) sign. Subsequently, each number or variable multiplied by (1) would add on to itself, most of the oth-er functions can remain the same. Some of the other ideas will find themselves unable to remain in a world of truly rational mathemat-ics. Therefore, the only logical conclusion for (1 x 1) to ever equal or to have ever equaled (1) is because someone either forgot to follow the basic rules of multiplication, or they deliberately misled an early civilization. Otherwise, there is no way to make mathematical sense of or solve for the impossible hypothesis of 1 x 1 = 1. This is a classic example of a Mathematical Fallacy. In mathematics, certain kinds of mistaken proof are often exhibited, and sometimes collected, as illustrations of a concept of mathematical fallacy. There is a distinction between a simple mistake and a mathematical fallacy in a proof: a mistake in a proof leads to an invalid proof just in the same way, but in the best-known examples of mathematical falla-cies, there is some concealment in the presentation of the proof. I hereby call, and pardon my French, “BS” on 1 x 1 =(ing) 1! On that note, I must immediately declare that (1 x 1 =(ing) 1) is a false statement and likewise, based upon the current practices in the field of mathematics 1 x (any number) would = an unfinished equation because both sides of the equation could never be equal as long as 1 x 1 ='(s) 1. Based upon the cited examples; If 1 x 1 = 1 Then a x b = a (or just b). Also, all of these impossible unrealities and flagrant inequalities must likewise be rewritten as truthful and reliable statements: a x a = a b x b = b c x c = c After thoughtful reflection (and literally thousands of hours of ob-servation coupled with 5 decades of deep and contemplative work, along with diligent studying upon the subject) all my research has brought me to the inevitable conclusion that this false concept must have been the brain child of a “god like” figure of some sort, a figure whose very finger prints left the “Identity Element/Property” for Mankind to forever stumble himself upon. Someone with whom the people possibly credited for giving them their multiplication table 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 16 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
and their geometry. A gift that for a time would set that civilization apart from the rest of the world. A multiplication table and system of calculating that would enable that civilization to rule the then known world from the time of the late Egyptian dynasty, until the Medes and the Persians brought a sudden end to their way of life. Whomever it was that gave that naive generation some 6,000 years ago, or possibly even longer, a multiplication table based on 1 x 1 = 1 and a flat view of Universal Geometry, gave those poor misguid-ed people a false axiom upon which to build our now crumbling world. A false axiom that would behave as a bumper for our infan-tile species, a tutor as it were. A false axiom that would allow for a measure of growth and productivity for a time but would inevitably lead to catastrophic failure and its ultimate collapse at the arrival of the truth. Unfortunately, for the latter generations that would eventually come to inherit this once thriving Mediterranean Metropolis, the truth would come to late. Now, for the last 6,000 or plus years our ancestors enslaved our thinking with that dogma for generations upon generations leading down to our Great Grand parents, who in like manner indoctrinated their children, who also in turn would propagate these mathematical lies to the rest of the world. Because of their wrong approach to the rules of multiplication, their systems would eventually fail because they were all built upon a faltering foundation, suffering the damages from being based upon a princi-ple of “Implied Predictability of Loss. ” You see, when 1 x 1 = 1, it is implied that 50% of the potential will be lost at their initial contact of these numeric entities. You start off with two values on one side of the equation and in the process of multiplying them one of the values goes missing and no one cares what happens to it? It is a false axiom that unfortunately for Mankind, has become the very cornerstone of our misunderstandings concerning math and the very nature of the Universe. An untruth told to a naive people by someone they placed so much trust in that no one dared to question their authority, how is it possible that there is not one cited refer-ence in recorded history where someone has questioned the validity of this clearly unbalanced equation. A blatant lie that has masquer-aded itself as the first truth of Mathematics. When it could very well be the biggest lie ever told in the history of humanity with possibly the most harmful and longest lasting potential consequences. A lie, that continues to be propagated by those who worship this false con-cept and profit from the loss of others. Why did someone find it “necessary” to put a cap on that early Mes-opotamian civilizations potential for advancement, I will not spec-ulate. Perhaps it was the best thinking of the time. As to where our civilization could have advanced had we not been misled by this false statement, again it is of no benefit to speculate. Nevertheless, we are in the here and now and we must hit the reset button and do a full “about face” concerning our approach to mathematics. In light of this exercise, I feel that it is necessary for us to throw out the false positives and erroneous results. 1 x 1 =(ing) 1 is an equation that predicts a negatively discharging Universe without the ability to overcome the radiational expanse of magnetism because ONE would have to have a negative discharge in order for it not to bond with the second ONE and a Universe made up of all discharging particles could never assemble into molecules and other more com-plex integrated systems that we experience every day. ONE would by necessity have to be a positive integer in order for the gravitational and centripetal effects of electricity to accumulate atoms of low po-tential together into systems of high potential and ultimately build this wondrous Universe abundant in its dynamic energy! 17 Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
With 1 x 1 =(ing) 2, we have a balanced equation where the laws of Universal Equilibrium and the Conservation of Universal Energy remain intact. Therefore, 1 x 1 = 1, must be rewritten as 1 x 1 = 2 Were it not for the temporary hiding place that 1 x 1 = (ing) 1 has found behind the imaginary walls of the Identity prop-erty, an imaginary fortress for any number wanting to break free from the LAWS governing the physics of our Universe. All they have to do is to claim 'SANCTUARY' under the Identity property or should we say, the false Identity property, whose towering walls have never been breeched. Why? Because they don't exist. Not just the imagined walls, but the Identity property itself, it only exists in the 2-D binary world of imaginary numbers. A world which cannot exist by definition alone. A 2-D Universe lacks the necessary stability provided by the third and fourth dimensions. A stabilizing property that is the birth right and natural consequence of the laws of “Action and Reaction”. A law that forces All Things in Creation to be hinged upon its very existence. A set of proven laws and a nec-essary consequence of Nature that is in direct conflict with the very notion of 1 x 1 = (ing) 1 calling into question the very authority held by the Identity property A “property” of mathematics that is diametrically opposed to the three Dimensional world that we've experienced every single day of our lives. Nevertheless, lets explore the ruins of the Identity prop-erty and see what relics await. 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 18 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
IDENTITY PROPERTY In mathematics, an “Identity Element” or “Neutral El-ement” is a SPECIAL element (such as 0 in the set of all integers under addition or 1 in the set of positive integers under multiplication) with a SPECIAL set of powers that enables it the ability to defy the laws of physics on two of its primary founding assumptions. First of all, concerning the number (1), in the case of (1) times itself or any other number or variable the end product is that same number or variable and that any number multiplied by a (0) equals a (0). As a result of this arbitrary rule, we are left with two false state-ments, two unnatural scenarios that makes it neces-sary for the fundamental laws of physics concerning “Action and necessary Reaction” and the laws concerning “The Conservation of Energy” to be suspended in order for this “IDENTITY” rule to exist: 1 x 1 =(ing) 1 is paramount to an (ACTION times ACTION without a REACTION) “In mathematics, an Identity Element or Neutral Ele-ment is a special type of element of a set with respect to a binary operation on that set, which leaves other elements unchanged when combined with them. ” Like a ghost or a shadowy influence upon nothing at all, yet it alters the natural course of any number it supposedly encounters. Therefore, in the case of (1) it is left without a mate, an equal and oppositely balanced condition because it remains unchanged when other (1)'s are combined or attempt to simply multiply. A state of existence that is impossible in this Universe of equilibrium. Because the rule of Nature is to first divide accumulated Matter by the process of radi-ation and expansion which is the work of Magnetism and then to multiply that which has been divided through the process of centripetal, gravitative contraction which is the office of Electricity. Secondly, on the “Identity of (0) in multiplication, any number multiplied by (0) will become a zero product. First thing; in order to multiply (something) by (something else) they must be dimensionally equal. Then how do you make (something) dimensionally equal to (nothing)? The laws of “Conservation of Energy” might as well pack up and move away because how can a (something) mul-tiplied by (nothing) cause the (something) to disappear? Remember, “Energy cannot be created or destroyed. ” Yet, in the case of multiplication, a process by which all things continue to exist and propagate their existence (0) be-haves as a black hole of the number system that gobbles down anything that comes near it. A concept that doesn't exist except in outdated science fiction novels. Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 19 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
How in the world have these two false statements been po-sitioned as the “Unquestionable God Rules” of Mathemat-ics for the last 6,000 years? How deeply has this lie been interwoven into the very DNA of our approach to math-ematics? A false axiom presented by an individual whose thoughts and ideologies have crafted our misinterpreta-tion of the Universe, which makes that person possibly the most influential person throughout all of history. We will now allow Nature and the testimony of Universal phenomena to answer these questions as we put this con-cept of the “Identity Element ” to the test, with 1 x 1 = (ing) 1 and the future of Mathematics weighing in the balance. MATHEMATICS 101 1 x 1 = 1 Or so we've been taught. We were taught around this very impressionable time that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny were also real. Yet, over the next few years we ultimately came to terms with the fact that our chimneys were far to narrow for a jolly old fellow to climb down. Also, we re-luctantly accepted the fact that reindeer (elk) do not fly nor do rab-bits lay eggs. Thus, we matured and abandoned fairytales and the need for the improbable or impossible to explain the world that we live in and our Universe. A child for his part is gullible, therefore he or she can be easily encouraged to believe almost anything that is presented to them without demanding the need for proof. Espe-cially, if it is being presented by someone that they trust and view as an authority. In like manner, the notion that 1 x 1 = 1 was drilled into our young, impressionable minds at a time when we were very susceptible to suggestion. At a stage in our development before we could begin to grasp the importance of questioning the accuracy of the lessons being taught. In stark contrast, the mind of a mature and modestly educated adult must be won over with strong and convincing argument. An argument that is based upon observed natural phenomena, coupled with concrete evidence and irrefutable fact. Every adult is responsi-ble for his/her beliefs and is equally responsible for the ideas that he or she propagates into this world. Never forget, “Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. ” How much more shall we be held accountable for an ideology that will forever affect how we measure our Universe and All Things within it? Therefore, I challenge the narrative that 1 x 1 = 1. I believe that 1 x 1 = 2. 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 20 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Why? Because: To Multiply means to make many or manifold. It means, to increase in number or quantity. Therefore, it must increase in size and quantity or it is not multipli-cation. This is the undisputed definition of the word: TO MULTIPLY You couldn't ask for a more simple and concise definition of a word. Consequently, 1 x 1 = (ing) 1 could never be a part of the “multipli-cation table” because it fails to satisfy the definition of the term, 'to increase in number'. 1 x 1 = (ing) 1 sounds more like a philosophical assertion, like Shakespeare's, “To be, or Not to be, that is the ques-tion” rather than a function of multiplication or mathematics. It should be obvious that 1 x 1 cannot equal 1 by reason of the very definition of the term to “multiply”. Nevertheless, something tells me you're going need a little more convincing than just the true definition of a word or the Unbal-anced Equation Argument, the irregularities of The Identity Ele-ment which could also be called the Jim Crow Laws of Mathematics and the 2-D Unreality Argument to change your minds concerning this deeply ingrained philosophy. After all, our entire world econo-my seems hinged upon this idea. What will it take to convince this generation that we are at least 6,000 years down a darkening path going the wrong way, completely blind to the truth? What possible argument is there to help Man finally step out of the darkness and into the light? Let's consider this: Multiplication is a mathematical operation which is governed by two laws: The Commutative Law and the Associative Law, symbolized by (a x b), (a. b), (a * b), or (ab), and signifying, when (a) and (b) are positive integers, that (a) is to be ADDED to itself as many times as there are units in (b); the ADDITION of a number to itself as often as is indicated by another number. By interpretation of the aforementioned laws along with application of those said laws we have clear and rational proof that 1 x 1 = 2. If it wasn't for the Identity Property, a property that calls for the immediate suspension of the first, second and third laws of motion. What is more reasonable, to question all observable physical phenomena or to question an arbitrary rule called the “Identity Property”? Think about it, out of all of the geniuses who have roamed this planet throughout the history of the world, not one of them have ever observed in natural phenomena an example of 1 x 1 =(ing) 1. Because Nature does not subscribe to Man's mathematics. What is even more surprising is that no other thinking human being out of all the people who ever lived and observed natural phenomena, that not one of them has ever publicly questioned 1 x 1 = (ing) 1. The Pythagoreans might have questioned “irrational numbers” but they never publicly questioned the notion that 1 x 1 (should be)= (to more than) 1. That's unfortunate, so it must stand to reason that this flawed equa-tion must have been indoctrinated into our minds before our ability to discern truth from fiction. Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 21 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
How did we come to believe this notion that an “Action (times) an Action equals a non Reaction?” And how did it become the very cornerstone of mathematics? What would happen if the “Identity Element” were proven to be false? What would happen to the institutions that are precariously posi-tioned upon its foundation if that cornerstone was to show signs of failure?BASIC PRINCIPLES OF MATHEMATICS Before we learned how to roll over or gained the ability to master the movements of our tiny fingers we received our very first lesson in mathematics. It was given to us by those that loved us, our parents who taught us how to count with encouraging smiles, accompanied by the most affectionate tone in their voices. Before we could even focus our new born eyes, our loved ones stood over us beaming with pride while they recited the first 10 numbers of our present number system. “You have 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, fingers on this hand. Now lets add the five on this hand, theres 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 fingers all together!” Then came the kisses. This was all done while they changed our diapers and lovingly rubbed lotions and oils onto our skin. Gently tugging on our hearts while counting our fingers and toes with stories of 'little piggies' that gave math and the concept of numbers a warm and in-viting place within our hearts. Patiently reassuring themselves, that we were made “Practically Perfect” with all of the necessary parts in place. We didn't know it then, but we would soon come to understand that they were simply adding one number to another number in or-der to make it a larger number. For this is the ground rules of ad-dition. And multiplication is rooted in simple addition. {Therefore, the same rules that apply to addition must apply when multiplying a set of numbers. Likewise, if we understand that multiplication is the exact opposite of division then, the laws concerning division must be in conjunction with the established rules of multiplication. Re-member the Associative law; when (a) and (b) are positive integers, that (a) is to be ADDED to itself as many times as there are units in (b); the ADDITION of a number to itself as often as is indicated by another number. ) 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 22 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
We were so proud of ourselves the first time that we counted to 100 by 1's. That was when it hit most of us, I remember thinking, “You know what, I could probably count to a 1000 if I really wanted to and if I can get to that number then I can get to any number!” What is the highest number that can be reached counting by 1 's? Thus en-tered the concept of infinity, a quantity that was unreachable by the tools of modern mathematics. It was both empowering and discour-aging, all because we learned the first rule of mathematics which was 'just add 1. ' Around that same time we learned a great trick that was like walking backwards but with numbers, it was called subtraction. Now, we felt like we were practically as smart as the adults, for we could finally calculate things at the grocery store and participate in the business side of getting the right change back after our purchases. We could now be trusted to go to the store on our own! All because we learned how to add and subtract correctly. Yet, there where certain numbers that we could not reach with sim-ple addition. Not because they were too hard... No! They were sim-ply too high for us to reach with basic addition because of the limita-tions of our flesh and our relative short human lifespans. I guess there will always be certain things that we want that will forever be just out of our reach. Like the top shelf in our closets where the Christmas gifts were hidden, or that place in the kitchen cabinets were every parent hides the sweets. The only way to get up there was to employ the use of a tool that often came in the form of a chair or a ladder. If we wanted to view Christmas early or have a taste of Easter Sunday before Mass we needed a stool to help us as-cend over whatever obstacles stood in our path in order for us to ac-quire those highly desired things. In like manner, with mathematics we needed a new tool in order for us to reach those far away number treasures. There had to be a short cut to those hard to reach figures. Like a super hero, “Multiplication” swooped in just in time to save the day! Equipped with this tool we could count to a million in just two steps... 500,000 x 2. With division we could just as easily reduce that number to a lesser value by dividing it by any other number less than itself. It didn't take long before we started to notice that addition and multiplication went hand in hand. It didn't really matter which one we employed because their sum would always be equal. The same rules applied to subtraction, it became evident that sub-traction was the basic form of reducing a number and division was a more advanced method. Nevertheless, all the numbers followed the same rules, except for two of them. The odd balls called zero and the number one, the very first number of any real value. Does the num-ber one actually have a real value in multiplication? Not according to the things that we were taught. As previously stated, the first rule of mathematics is addition, 1 + 1 = 2, 2 + 1 = 3, 3 + 1 = 4. Based upon this foundation we should be able to confidently reach any number in the Universe. “Just add 1,” right? Let's look at some of the other fundamentals we may or may not have become acquainted with in our primary classes. In view of the fact that we have put so much trust into them, I think it's only fair that we weigh them a bit. As I recall, at least a third of our primary school's curriculum was dedicated towards, the 3 R's: Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 23 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
READING, WRITING and ARITHMETIC In fact, only one of them is truly an "R", but they do make the "R" sound. Nevertheless we spent countless hours trying to master the multiplication table, memorizing the equations that govern how we are supposed to think and what we are told is the correct method of measuring our Universe. The first few sequences in the multiplica-tion table went something like this: 1 x 1 = 1 and 2 x 2 = 4 and 3 x 3 = 9... Yet, there's an immediate inconsistency within that sequence. If you look closely, one notices that in every section after 1 x 1 the sum of the numbers being multiplied becomes greater than the initial number. In the latter sequences they actually follow the expressed laws concerning multiplication, which by defi-nition means, “To make greater. ” Yet, with 1 x 1 = 1 the laws of multiplication are completely abandoned and if 1 x 1 = 1 then how do we ever reach the number 2 using multiplication? If our system of checks and balances has become so unreliable and conspicuously irregular on the ground floor regarding the very first step of multiplication, how can we ever trust the rigor and accuracy of the higher and more complex levels of mathematics that are all so deeply rooted in such a seemingly flawed foundation? We are now left with two very puzzling questions, that on the surface should be the simplest questions ever asked of an intelligent being, but for the Children of Man not one of his offspring has ever provided an ade-quate answer for either of them. Until Now! 1. What is the true value of the number 1 and how does it relate to Universal phenomena? 2. What rational number multiplied by another rational number equals the number 2? In the sequence that we just examined where 1 x 1 = 1, the number 1 seems to behave like a phantom. As if its nature is composed of an ethereal and intangible substance that doesn't interact with itself or any other number for that matter. Like a 'noble gas' of the number system. For when the number 1 is multiplied by any other number it completely disappears as if it were not there. Nevertheless, what I find most disturbing is the fact that all oth-er numbers after the number 1 are the direct descendants of that number. Therefore, if the first number behaves as a phantom when interacting with other numbers and we do not know its makeup, its nature and its relative constitution, then how can we confidently as-sign VALUE to any other number that is derived from it? Especially if its base, its root is something more ghostly than solid. 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 24 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Well, it wasn't until the 3rd or 4th grade that this question came up again concerning the accuracy of 1 x 1 = 1. Around this time we were being taught in American public schools the concept of square roots. And as I recall, it seemed like an easy enough stretch of our reasoning faculties to ac-cept the answer given to us by our math teachers that the square root of 16 was 4. When my teacher used it as an example, she helped us to appreciate its simplicity by ask-ing, “If you think about it class, what number times itself equals 16?” The class became silent but my hand flew up immediately because I had taken the time to memorize the “Times Ta-ble” forwards and backwards and I could confidently recite it up to 20 x 20! When she asked the class, "what was the square root of 4?” Well, that was when everyone else in the room raised their hands because the formula was then apparent to all. Therefore, the young man that answered that particu-lar question didn't receive any bragging rights when the teacher said that the answer was the number “2. ” From that point she tried to move on to the square root of a much larger number, I think it was 25 or was it 100? Any-way, my hand shot up like a rocket. When she called my name thinking that I was going to answer her question, to her chagrin, her star pupil, which I had been up until that moment, hit her with a doozie. CHALLENGING THE STATUS-QUO Flat vs Round CHALLENGING THE STATUS-QUO Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 25 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
I asked, “What is the square root of the number 2?” Again the room went silent, that was perhaps one of the most confounding question that any 3rd grader had ever asked her. She was perhaps more equipped to answer a question like, “where God came from?” or, “how does one turn water into wine?” That is how uncomfortable that moment felt and how ill-equipped she was to answer that simple question. A question that would define the very na-ture of my being and set me upon a course that would hold me captive for the rest of my life. I still recall the resounding silence of that fateful moment. The bell of “PURPOSE” resonated within my being! From then, until now, till time indefinite, it shall ring on forever. That's what the sound of Truth does to you! When you reach your purpose, it is like what Paolo Cohel-lo said in the opening of his international best seller, “The Alchemist,” “Once you seek out your own personal legend, The Universe conspires!” That is exactly what happened to me that day, for that moment seemed to last forever. The second hand on the clock on the wall just ticked by... So, I just blurted out, “Based on the formula given, the square root of 0 was 0, the square root of 1 was supposedly 1 but that didn't leave any numbers that could fill the spot for the square root of 2. ” I then said... The teacher stood there for a moment with a look of utter confusion upon her face and I now understand that deep “I think that somebody made a mistake with this part of math. ” 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 26 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
down inside she wanted to say 1 x 1 couldn't equal 2 be-cause of the “Identity Property” but maybe she didn't ful-ly understand the concept of irrational numbers. I'm sure that she knew the prescribed answer, but I'm not exactly sure that she believed what she had been pro-grammed to say. Mind you, she was a very conscious teach-er as I remember her. She would always take whatever time was necessary for the class to understand a complex idea no matter how long it took. That's why I was particularly surprised when she answered with, “No, that question is a bit too complicated to answer with the time we have to-day. ” “How complicated can it be?” I asked her, “It sits right be-tween two very simple numbers. ” I laughed for a moment knowing that for the first time I had stumped her. Mind you, she liked me because since the first grade I had a hab-it of asking her questions that I thought were challenging, and until this very moment she was undefeated in proving to the class that she had all the answers, but not this time. I marveled at the thought that I had finally got her with the simplest of questions. “My all knowing teacher!” I remarked with a bit of smug in my tone, “I don't under-stand how that can be a complicated question?” It's not an odd number like 3 or 5, it's an even number. The num-ber 2 was the easiest of all the numbers to memorize in the multiplication table. “How and when did it become so complicated?” I thoroughly enjoyed this moment, because for three years she was always the one who got the last word. Finally, I would win the day, my point was valid and she knew it. I suppose she mistook my out spoken curiosity as if I was mocking her or was it the devilish smirk upon my face? I didn't intend for the class to start giggling at her inability to answer such a simple question but they'd witnessed the question and answer game that she and I had played for years and she more than likely recognized that I was finally at match point and she reacted. Reflecting back on that moment, after five decades of questioning and contemplating, I now understand the painful look drawn upon her face. How do you explain to a room full of third graders the concept of “Irrational num-bers?” Nevertheless, my intentions were not to frustrate her at all, even though I did slightly enjoy it. Yet, I sincere-ly wanted to know, but: "The Road to Hell is Often Paved with Good Intentions" She thought that I was just being obstinate and that per-haps, she needed to teach me a lesson for questioning her authority. She told me, 'to get the paddle,' that hung on the wall next to the closet door, where our coats were also hung Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 27 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
and to put my hands on her desk, and to bend over so that she could swat me. As I recall, the paddle was about an inch thick, solid oak, four or five inches in width and about 18 inches long. It had a handle that looked like brass knuckle grips and there were half inch holes that were bored through the face of the paddle to help it gain speed before it hit you. (During the seventies in the American public school system, cor-poral punishment was permitted and carried out by the teachers and school faculty. ) Well, I refused to bend over that day and as she tried to grab my arm and force my 8 year old body to bend over, I yelled imploringly at the top of my lungs: “GET SWATTED FOR WHAT?!" "If the purpose of 'class' is to LEARN. Then, how was I interrupting the class by ASKING A LEGITIMATE QUESTION? WHAT'S THE SQUARE ROOT OF 2? THAT'S ALL!” In an instant her face became bright red as she became infuriated with me and sent me to the principals office, where I received three swats from him and a two day sus-pension for disrupting the math class. Which garnered an-other whooping from my father when he returned home from work and found that I was suspended because now, who was going to watch me during the day? School served then as it does now for many lower income families as a day care center rather than a place of educa-tion. On the suspension slip, under the section titled 'Rea-son for Suspension' it read; “Insubordination,” a term that I would remember because my father struck me multiple times for every letter of that word. Till this day I can recall him spelling it out but it was a word that would become synonymous with my own per-sonal empowerment. For it would ultimately embolden my plight to end abuse of authority especially regarding forced doctrine, dogma and the proliferation of false and harmful concepts that are based upon tradition alone. I suppose, the humiliation that I endured that day of be-ing almost swatted in front of the entire class for question-ing the established authority and it's so-called unbreak-able rules, must have left a lasting impression on the rest of the class. After that no one ever questioned anything that the teacher ever said. Everyone just did as they were told. It was the end of innocence and the end of the illu-sion that children could learn in a safe and comfortable environment. From that day onward, school became like a prison yard with barbed wire fences and harsh penalties for anyone who would dare attempt to scale its towers. I on the other hand never learned to fear the repercus-sions of asking questions and seeking the truth. I innately understood that the truth was not being taught inside the classrooms. The truth was self evident in all observable 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 28 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
and natural phenomena. Therefore, I set out to find the answer to and the true value of 1 * 1 = x and would not stop and until I had accomplished my goals. That was over 4 decades ago. Anyway, while at home on suspension I continued my search for the answer to that simple question that had somehow be-came so “COMPLICATED. ” I thought if anyone would know the answer to the square root of two, Einstein would. So, I opened up the encyclopedia and began to read about Albert Einstein. He never once mentioned the , although it is one of the most prolific values used in quantum mechanics. Yet, I do recall Albert saying, “Everything is relative” which I understood as, “Every-thing is related. ” I remember thinking, “Does he mean relative as in fami-ly, like my brothers are 'related' to me?” After meditating on that thought for a while as I was watching “The Super Friends” the next morning, even though my father said that, 'I couldn't watch any television because I had been suspended and was being punished and should suffer the consequences of my actions. ' Nevertheless, I knew that I was basically being punished for a crime that I didn't commit and didn't see the need to subject myself to more of an undeserved and unwarranted punishment. Actually, I had already suffered three sepa-rate forms of discipline for asking a very valid question. I felt that the days of my martyrdom was over, I had suffered enough! Therefore, when my father went to work and left me and my brothers at home on that fall Saturday morn-ing, well I rewarded myself with a nice big bowl of Apple Jack's and sat in front of the TV so that I could watch the "Super Friends". During that program I heard Superman say: “One for all, and all for One!” Why that struck a chord in me I couldn't tell you but something about (One) and (All) just made me ponder. It actually brought my mind back to what Einstein said about relativity. I interpreted his words as meaning, “If you know ONE thing about ONE thing, then you know ONE thing about ALL things. Find the common factor and either multiply or divide. ” What a rare and insightful moment that was for me still to this day. I live for those beautiful moments when the Universe hands you a particular piece of the puzzle that will ultimately become the cornerstone of your purpose in life. When it whispers the gentlest note that only you can hear, a note that will ultimately lead to the crescendo of your own life's opus. I began listening more intently to the voice that came from within, The inner voice of truth. That same voice that led each and every single one of us to this thing called Life. Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 29 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
That voice is heard more clearly within the natural world. It sings in every established system that we see, hear, feel, and taste. This Universe was built upon truth and that truth is apparent in all of its actions and its countless reactions. Everything within this Universe is connected and is of the same substance, just under different motion and pressure conditions. Therefore, Everything is “related” and is sub-ject to the same genetic and atomic laws. Everything with-in this Universe behaves according to a predetermined and predictable pattern in it's winding and it's unwinding. Therefore, if All systems are inescapably connected, then All systems are tied to the same inescapable laws that gov-ern gravitational and radiational forces. All of these forces are subject to the same math that governs and regulates its expansion and contractions. So, Spin is a common factor to them All and Spin is measurable. It appears that all three of these separate and distinct spe-cies have not only spin but a great deal more in common, especially in the beginning stages of their development, at the place we call the start also known as the position of One. Spiral Galaxies unwind into Solar systems, that unwind into Planets, that unwind into hurricanes, that follow the same exact rules and laws that govern the Galaxy. These governing laws are rooted in mathematics and mathemat-From left to right: Nobel Laureates Walther Nernst, Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Robert A. Millikan and Max von Laue at a dinner given by Professor von Laue in Berlin, 11 November 1931 If (A) is equal to (B) and (B) is equal to (C), then (A) is equal to (C) ics is rooted in the nature of the number One. Therefore, our valuation of the number One must remain consistent with Universal values if our understanding of Universal phenomenon is to be factual, accurate and ultimately ben-eficial for our species. Human Embryo Chicken Embryo Fish Embryo 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 30 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Relative factors must be taken into consideration in order for us to have a clear and objective perspective on the mat-ter. Otherwise, we will be forever subjugated by an incor-rect and dangerously myopic view of the Universe and as a result our thinking and reasoning ability will be likewise connected to antiquated ideologies which will force our species into the category called obsolete, and we will cease to exist. In other words, we will be EXTINCT! The hurricane ultimately unwinds into a myriad of other weather systems. On land one of those systems is closely re-lated to a tornado, which has the tendency of bringing the tip of that giant common factor right down to our small minded perspectives. From here on out; we will be con-sidering some of the more conspicuously obvious relative factors one by one as we continue on our search for un-derstanding the value and true nature of One. Why don't we allow the true and simple nature of the Universe as a whole to weigh in on these most important issues? I bet that after you hear their testimony, your view concerning these matters might make a considerable change. Let's see if natural phenomena either supports or contra-dicts the claims of the Identity Element? I believe that it is time to gain a bit of insight and perspective from the oldest and most reliable witness on this matter. Hell! On any MAT-TER for that matter, (All puns intended) because Hydrogen is the first visible element on the periodic table that will ul-timately unwind into every other element/substance that Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 31 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
has ever been or ever will be observed within the visible Universe. Why don't we consider the case of Hydrogen and the whole of the periodic table of elements and see how they weigh in on these matters? PERIODICITY IS AN ABSOLUTE CHARACTERISTIC OF ALL PHENOMENA OF NATURE THE RUSSELL PERIODIC CHART OF ATOMIC WEIGHTS, ELECTRO-MAGNETIC CHARGE, GRA VITATION, RADIATION, SEX, TEMPERATURE, ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC PRESSURES, V ALENCE, IONIZATION AND OTHER PERIODICITIESPhoto Credit: Marko Korošec WALTER RUSSELL-1926 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 32 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
RELATIVE FACTORING AND USEFUL INSIGHTS IN DEDUCTIVE REASONINGInsight The ability to look into a situation beyond the obvious and discern the outcome. The number One is the very first quantity of any measur-able Space. The lowest cardinal number, because half of two is one. Also, it encompasses all of the total potential energy within the entirety of what we call visible Matter. In astrophysics, this is expressed in the notion of the “singu-larity”, where everything is compressed and represented within the quantity of the number One. (singular) Now, there are many within the scientific community that would say, “You cannot equate numerical values to physi-cal occurrences. ” This is what Dr. Neil Degrasse Tyson told me. They assert that, “The use of mathematics is more of a tool for measurement and not the measurement itself. ” The ancients and nature disagree wholeheartedly! The as-sertation is that the term “Singularity” is not a literal term but more of a concept and cannot be viewed as a quantity. To be perfectly honest, the entire notion of a Singularity where all Matter collapses upon itself, and all the laws of physics breaks down is inconsistent with natural phenom-ena, and lives more in the realm of science-fiction than re-ality. RELATIVE FACTORING AND USEFUL INSIGHTS IN DEDUCTIVE REASONING "When the ancients considered the process of mathematical multiplication, their mode of calculation had a direct rela-tionship with natural life processes as well as metaphysical ones. Schwaller de Lubicz called this mode the "principle of the crossing" (we continue to symbolize multiplication with the sign of the crossing: x). " "This crossing was not a sterile, mental, numerical manip-ulation but a symbol for the process by which things enter into corporeal existence. All birth into nature requires a crossing of opposites. It can be the crossing of vertical and horizontal lines, which give birth to the square, the first measurable surface; or male and female, giving birth to a new individual; or warp and weft, creating a fabric; or light, and darkness, giving birth to tangible forms; or mat-ter and spirit, giving birth to life itself. " "Thus the vital linking up of the mental abstraction of cal-culation with its counterpart in natural phenomena gave the ancient mathematician a living and philosophic basis for his science. " The Temple in Man-Sacred Architecture-R. A. Schwaller de Lubicz Translated by Robert & Deborah Lawlor Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 33 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Yet, many within the field of astrophysics firmly ascribe to this imaginative mathematical impossibility. What is this thing called One and how can it or the concept of it be shrouded in so much mystery and controversy? The number One actually has the same foundational and patriarchal relationship with all other numbers that are descended from it, just as the element Hydrogen has with all other elements that occur after it, it just so happens to be the most abundant element within the known Universe. In view of this relationship let's compare our number se-quence to the periodic table and the elements that make it up. THE PERIODIC TABLE OF ELEMENTS In our number system, all the numbers have something in common. Every number following the number One is a product of the number One. If we were to use our human bodies as an example, we would see that the human body is a collection of trillions of cells. Some of the cells look very similar, yet there are different cells for every different part of our being. In the simplest terms and most convenient definition, a cell is the smallest component of an organism. It is self contained within a membrane and in every multi-celled organism, a number of cells work in conjunction for the benefit of the overall organism. The smallest component of a cell for the purpose of this discussion, we'll say is an atom. As each cell has a nucle-us and an outer membrane, so does each theoretical atom have a nucleus and something that functions like an outer membrane. Let's take a closer look at some of the inner structures that make up an atom. Atoms are the basic units of a chemical element. They are believed to be composed of three basic particles: protons, electrons and neutrons. Neutrons and protons are theo-retically heavier than electrons and live within the center of the atom, an area that is commonly referred to as the 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 34 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
nucleus. Every single element within the visible Universe has a common ancestry with the element Hydrogen, which is the first visible element within this Universe followed by a series of subsequent elements that all share a commonal-ity with this first child of the visible atomic world. When I was a child the Periodic Table of Elements had just over ninety two elements. Now a days, the periodic table extends into more than a hundred and twenty elements. Some of these elements can only be produced in a lab and have a life expectancy of thousandths of a second. Some of you may be asking, “What is the Periodic Table of Ele-ments?” The periodic table of elements refers to a series of mo-tion and pressure conditions that occurs with regularity or with a degree of predictability and the effects that they have on Space and Time. Take ice for instance, it regular-ly occurs with some predictability in the winter or in geo-graphic locations that are closer to the poles. Meteorol-ogist can often predict with a certain degree of accuracy in their weather forecast when and where icy conditions will present themselves. That is what the periodic table of elements does, it predicts and charts the atomic structure of elements based upon certain conditions. This could be based upon the number of theoretical protons, neutrons, electrons and so forth that it supposedly posses. Let's stick with the analogy of ice for a moment. Say for instance that you wanted to create ice? Do you have to provide water in order for ice to appear. Not necessarily, because on most occasions if you create the conditions of a cold enough environment, the ice occurs as a result. The moisture within the molecules of air collect together and freeze and 'voila', ice is served. Therefore, if you pro-vide the conditions that occur at the surface of the Sun relative to the heat, pressure and it's angular momentum (thats just a fancy word for 'its spin') the element Hydro-gen occurs. Hydrogen (in the simplest light as told by modem science) is believed to have 1 proton and Helium being the second known occurring atomic structure with-in this table is composed of 2 protons at its nucleus, per modern science. Lithium the 3rd visible atomic structure in the table is reported to have three protons. Beryllium has 4 protons and every subsequent element follows this pattern all the way down the periodic table until the very last known element. The protons that make up the Hydrogen atom can be gath-ered into an unstable configuration as is the case with the radioactive elements of Uranium which has 92 protons and Plutonium with 94 protons. These protons are always fol-lowed by an entourage of theoretical neutrons and elec-trons. They can collect together under a more comfortable setting as in the case of the element Carbon which is be-lieved to have only 6 protons. It is generally taught that Car-bon has only six neatly arranged protons, with six neutrons Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 35 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
wrapped in six perfectly organized electrons. The element Nitrogen has 7 of each of these so-called sub-atomic par-ticles, while the element Oxygen has 8 of each. Are you starting to get the picture? With this perspective in mind, lets consider the planet Mercury and its relative pressure and motion conditions being situated so close to our star. It is under the greatest pressures of any planet within our solar system. Here we have a giant ball of Iron for the most part, where each Iron atom is the accumulated sum of theoretically 26 protons carrying 26 neutrons along with 26 electrons as they tour the solar system in their collective orbits around our Sun. Twenty-six protons compressed into a very small amount of Space wound so tightly that we think of it as a different substance from its base element Hydrogen. Un-der significantly lower pressure conditions, somewhere between 141. 6 million miles and 483. 8 million miles away from the Sun and just south of Mars and north of Jupiter, the first visible element Hydrogen is freed from its con-finement of greater pressures near the Sun in the case of Mercury. Its supposed single electron can occupy a much wider orbit and exists as a free standing Hydrogen atom. Under these low pressure conditions the element isn't forced to transmute into a (seemingly) different element. Transmutation from Hydrogen to Iron is the direct result of complex motion conditions believed to be caused by 26 protons, neutrons and electrons jousting for position within a very small and confined Space. Consider what happens to Hydrogen in the case of our gas giants like Jupiter at 483. 8 million miles from the Sun and Saturn at 888. 2 million even Neptune at 2. 795 billion and Uranus at 1. 787 billion miles from the Sun. Under the lim-ited influence of lower pressures from the Sun in a more vacuous environment, Hydrogen atoms expand and be-come more tenuous in their configurations. Abounding in it's endless supply of what to the naked eye appears to be empty Space, but we know that there is no empty Space in Space. Nevertheless, under these condi-tions Hydrogen which makes up most of these planets up-per atmosphere can remain in its most comfortable state, a mono (single atom) or in a diatomic (2 atom) configu-ration. Yet, deeper into the planet the extreme pressures from the weight of the atmosphere force Hydrogen atoms to change from a gaseous state into a liquid state and even-tually form into a metallic state called metallic Hydrogen. Just as Carbon can transform from a gas state as methane, into a liquid state as oil, from there to a solid state as coal and into a more compressed state as a diamond. Likewise, all the elements adjust to their individual pres-sure and motion conditions. But do not be misled, for all of the planets and everything that exists within the Sun's he-liosphere from Mercury to the theoretical Oort cloud that borders our solar system, they are all direct descendants of the Hydrogen atom. Every single thing that we see in our 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 36 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Universe from the most distant star to the nearest moon owes its existence to the pressure and motion conditions responsible for Hydrogen. Everything visible, no matter how complex is composed of the atomic sub-structure of Hydrogen atoms existing under different motion and pressure conditions. If the Universe followed Man's rules concerning multi-plication, Hydrogen times Hydrogen would only equal Hydrogen. Then, diatomic Hydrogen would never come into being which is a precursor for water. According to academia's present believe concerning nuclear fusion, it takes 4 Hydrogen atoms to make 1 Helium atom. Again an unsustainable process. If nuclear fusion was responsible for the distribution of Matter throughout the visible Universe no other element would ever come into existence because Helium and its initial isotopes are very stable and monatomic in nature, so the Universe would quickly run out of building ma-terials necessary to form the rest of the elements found within the periodic table. This 'catch 22' is the result of Man's mathematics being rooted in the “IDENTITY PROPERTY. ” A misleading imaginative construct that negates all ob-served Universal phenomena. Just another one of those inconvenient truths that I am sure deserves some reflec-tion but we have to keep pushing ahead. There's still so much more to see on this journey towards the truth con-cerning the square root of Two and the value of One. Based upon the laws of the “IDENTITY PROPERTY” how does diatomic Hydrogen come into existence? Diatomic Hydrogen is a condition that Hydrogen is most observed in and it is not the result of them being added together. Modern science states that: Hydrogen H2Nitrogen N2Oxygen O2Fluorine F2 Chlorine Cl2Bromine Br2Iodine I2 The Seven Diatomic Elements Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 37 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
(H x H = H 2 = Diatomic Hydrogen) If, (H) x (H) = H 2 then 1 x 1 = 1 2. This is called a covalent bond, the sharing of electron pairs between atoms. They multiply their forces against each other with every polar-ization causing their effects to multiply indefinitely. Likewise, with the number One every other number with-in the number system is the number One under different motion and pressure conditions. Lower pressures allow the number One to stand alone or in diatomic pairs where it is most comfortable. However under higher pressure condi-tions the number One can coalesce into the trillions. The point is, that like Hydrogen and its subsequent elements, every element made from the Hydrogen atom follows the same rules of conduct as Hydrogen and are likewise pre-dictable based upon Hydrogens particular mass, weight, charge and its spin. Each element that is descended from Hydrogen must also follow the laws that govern Hydrogen concerning the relative Space that it occupies and its PRF or Prime Resonant Frequency. These attributes account for its consistent oscillations, it's polarizing swing from positive to negative charges and its predictability as to when it shall occur and with what fre-quency. That is why it is called ''The PERIODIC table of elements. ” Yet, the subsequent numbers that follow the number One all seem to be based on a phantom number because the number 1 will not interact with itself in multiplication and it will not interact with any other number for that matter based upon the current rules and understanding of multi-plication in mathematics. Let us take a closer look at this pathetic circumstance of "1 x 1 =(ing) 1". It is easy to see why Harry Nilsson wrote an ode to the number One in, “One is the loneliest number that you'll ever do!” Can you not feel the loneli-ness of this number? It can't even affect itself. Which means it must be void of weight, have no mass, nor measurable motion, no color, nor taste, not even a slight heat signature or any other characteristics of mea-surable dimension what so ever! And yet, every other number is based upon its constitution or lack thereof. How can this be? The logical conclusion is... “It cannot be!” In the process of writing this book I was asked by Brian Grazier, “How does any of this effect me? Why should I care whether 1 x 1 = 1 or 2? Is this just a mental exercise?” Well, let's look at it in terms of everyday mathematics, our money. “Does page 161 look like this is just a mental exercise? ( “I didn't think so either!)” Trust me, we'll get back to this. Let us address this import-ant topic one page at a time. But I'm quite sure you can Harry Nilson-One 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 38 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
ELEMENTARY LAWS CONCERNING THE USE OF GRAMMAR I ask that you please take a moment and consider this line of reasoning, if you will. If multiplication is truly rooted in addition as common sense informs us then the 1st rule of addition must be the first rule of multiplication and that first rule should always be applied. The 1st rule of addition simply put is to ADD! Like the old saying, “When in doubt, see rule #1. ” Then in all reasonableness, how can 1 x 1 = 1? The way it has been explained to us is that we are seeing (1) only one time. Well, we have a term for that don't we? It is called, “ONCE” and is defined as a (noun) and means: “A single occasion, one time only. ” So why is it phrased as a plural interaction if we are seeing (1) only one time? In long form writing it is expressed as follows “One time(s) One. ” Do you see the (s)? If we are only seeing one num-ber once, then why is there a need to add the (s) to the multiplicative indicator? The (s) indicates that it is plural, meaning “more than one. ” Why go through the superfluous act of including an-other (1) if we are only seeing a single, lone number? I un-derstand, it is hard to admit that you've been misled about something as important as this but for the sake of putting this question to bed once and for all lets be thorough. What were some of the other excuses that we were told in order to justify 1 x 1 = 1 ? I am sure that we've all heard the same explanation when we asked this question, “How can 1 x 1 = just 1? My second grade teacher told our class that, “We should imagine that you are looking at the number 1 in the mirror. ” Okay: clearly see that this question concerns EVERYONE. Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 39 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
All Visible things are composed of the properties of Light! Therefore Light is the source from which life springs and should be revered as such. This is what the equation E = MC² is ultimately illustrating, that Energy equals Mass times the velocity of Light squared. All Things are Light, Everything just happens to be Light existing under different motion and pressure conditions. In other words, depending upon the speed by which Light travels through a particular medium (The rate by which it reproduces itself) along with the density and conditions of that medium it is traveling within, these are the factors that determine its relative nature and the temporary man-ifestation in which you experience its materializing prop-erties through Crystallization. This occurs because Light waves exert enormous pressures waves upon Everything it encounters which ultimately freeze and crystallize into every form of visible Matter de-pending upon the pressure and motion conditions of that system. The Light of 4 gyroscopic waves interweaves those forms into the predictable patterns of Polarized Pressures of Light. Water can be experienced as a solid when the pres-sure is low and it is under a limiting motion condition which creates a cold enough environment for water to ex-ist in the form of ice. Under warmer conditions between 32 degrees Fahrenheit and 212 degrees Fahrenheit it is How do we see an object in a mirror? Well, a mirror re-flects Light waves, right? What exactly is this thing called Light? Light is an effect of electromagnetic radiation that falls within a particular portion of the electro/magnetic spectrum. The term (Light) usually refers to visible Light, which is visible to the orbital organ called the eye and is responsible for the sensation of sight. Without all the mumbo jumbo, Light is an illuminate sub-stance that allows us to see. According to modern science and by most estimates, humans can see about 0. 0035% of the electro/magnetic spectrum. That's less than one per-cent of the known Light spectrum, which includes radio waves, x-rays, gamma rays, infrared, ultraviolet, micro-waves..., the list goes on and on. Human Beings see only a tiny fraction of the electromag-netic Light spectrum. This means that, if Humanity took a Universal eye exam, as a species we would be considered blind! We would not be allowed to operate a cosmic vehi-cle and would also need the assistance of a guide as it were to accomplish anything that depended upon vision. Yet, we judge most of our world and experiences by what we see or in Light of this information, what we truly fail to see. Consequently, how much can we trust our view of our world and of the Universe as a whole based upon this lim-ited vision? Also, how can we have complete confidence in many of the conclusions that have been derived from results based upon our limited tools of perception? 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 40 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
represented in a liquid state. From 213 degrees Fahrenheit and higher it appears as a gas or vapor. Nevertheless, it is still two atoms of Hydrogen and one atom of Oxygen, just under different motion and pressure conditions. Likewise, Light is effected by its particular environment and affects its particular environment in concert. What may be more shocking to the reader is this fact, “Living things must consume living things”. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that since so many organisms feed directly from Light, then perhaps Light itself is also Alive! Just something for you to reflect upon. I think that I've given a sufficient enough picture of (Light) for us to continue our conversation regarding 1*1=x and how Light interacts with a mirror. In order for us to see the number One in front of a mirror we need to employ the use of Light. Well, how does Light interact with a mirror? If we were to place a candle in front of a mirror and used a Light sensor, the measurement of Light observed will be more than the Light produced by one candle. It does not measure as only one Light source we actually observe mul-tiple sources. A Light meter will show almost twice the in-tensity of Light. Any reduction if any, in the measurement of the Light's intensity is due primarily to the position of the Light meter from the mirror and the fact that no man made mirror is ever 100 percent reflective. A spectrome-ter will show two separate spectra that fan out in multiple rainbows. Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 41 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Again, if we are discussing Light and the unquestionable constant of the speed of light, a measurement that we are told is unchanging. Light is believed to travel faster than most things within our 3-D Universe. Due to the seeming-ly instantaneous transference of information across the electrified Universe as observed in Birkeland Currents, we know that electricity is not limited to the speed of Light, it is much faster. Yet, Light a radiative product of a magnetic interaction isn't doing so bad coming in a close second. Re-member, Radiant Light moves in the opposite direction of Electricity and Light's centrifugal expansion is at a higher ratio than the centripetal contraction of Electricity, which leaves behind the effects of gravity, as a by product! Now, if Light reflected in a mirror, proves that a mirror creates two separate effects then we are informed once more by this natural phenomena that One times One equals More than just One. Lets hear what sound has to say on the Matter. ' 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 42 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
SOUND AND ITS WAVE DYNAMICS Let's add Sound into the equation. Pythagoras has been quoted as saying, “A rock is nothing but frozen music. ” Therefore, a rock is compressed sound waves that have mass, weight and dimension. If we say aloud, One times One we have created two sepa-rate and distinct wave forms. Two separate individual frequencies that will travel from one end of our Universe to the other and will touch Ev-erything in between and will not come to rest until it has registered its frequency in Every Structure within the seen and unseen Universe. This is the nature of Everything in our Universe being connected to Everything else. When one atom polarizes, Every other atom in the Uni-verse must not only register its change but must likewise, adjust to its particular charge, spin and the relative mass of the new pressure condition. It may take hundreds of trillions of years for All the atoms within our Universe to equalize to the new pressure arrangement. Picture in your minds a pebble being dropped into a lake. Regardless of the size of the lake or the size of the pebble that disturbs its surface, the pressure waves that are created will fan out in all directions until they eventually reach the shore, at which point the pressure waves will begin their journey back towards the center of the initial disturbance. Even if the ripples are invisible to the naked eye their jour-ney is still the same. If two pebbles are dropped into the Lake they will produce two separate pressure waves that will behave the same as the initial wave traveling to the edge of the lake and back to the center again. Well, in the case of sound waves, the 'Lake' is the fabric of Space and the pebbles are our voices. Frequency never stops until it has registered its vibratory information into All Things in existence. Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 43 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Its wave lengths and amplitude may become so low that it is imperceptible to the human ear or by any other means of Man's measuring devices but it will continue its journey until time indefinite. Continually displacing Every atom in its wake until it reaches the edge of our atmosphere at which point it interacts with our electromagnetic field, pressing against it and likewise affecting all systems that our electromagnetic field is connected to. How do we know this? Listening to the radio waves that make up the background noise of the visible Universe, the so-called “white noise”. A very respected member of the scientific community disagreed with me on this point, his remarks were, and I quote: “FYI: Sound cannot travel across a vacuum of Space. Ra-dio waves, in spite of their name, have nothing to do with sound. ” (Dr. Neil de Grasse Tyson) What he failed to recognize is that the so called vacuum of Space is not a vacuum at all. It is filled with the most wonderful vibrating pre-atomic geometry that I will be in-troducing to Mankind at the end of this book. Nevertheless, common sense should inform the reader that Electricity/Gravity winds All Things together tightly, so tightly that there is No Thing that stands by itself alone. All Things touch All Other Things. Consequently, when One Thing vibrates All Other Things touching it vibrates. Hence, sound does travel through Space, it reproduces it-self by means of converting its energy into another wave-form. The facts are that sound waves convert into pressure waves which interact with the electro/magnetic pressure waves of the Earth and that of our Sun and that of the Cos-mic radiation flowing into our solar system. Therefore, Every thought, word or motion that we make is conducted to Every Other atom within our Universe. For All Things are truly One! Something that should not be forgotten is the undisputed fact that in the process of even saying “1 x 1” the sound waves that are formed have a butterfly effect upon Every-thing they encounter and Everything they encounter shall be forever changed. Just to be clear, I think that it is important for me to in-form the reader that sound is Light waves slowed down. If you wanted to see the color of any particular sound? All you have to do is continue doubling the frequency of the sound until it resonates within the visible Light spectrum. Like Einstein said, “Everything is Relative. ” He wasn't sim-ply speaking about relative positions to some event. It can actually be applied in this way, “All Things are directly re-lated to All Other Things!” 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 44 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Sun, surfing the solar wind at speeds so fast that its effects can traverse 93,000,000 miles in 6 minutes depending upon the magnitude of the Coronal Mass Ejection (CME). That solar wind is filled with highly charged magnetic par-ticles that travel from our galaxy to other galaxies and are converted into electricity through the pressure conditions of plasma tendrils called Birkeland Currents. Something that should not be overlooked is the fact that the Earths atmosphere is 78% Nitrogen, 21% Oxygen, 0. 9% argon, and 0. 03% Carbon dioxide with very small percentages of other elements, so even though the air we breath may appear to be clear and empty, nothing could be farther from the truth. All Space is filled with Matter there is no vacuum. The Matter is either visible or invisible but it is there. Since sound and Light are but longer or shorter wave forms of the same wave field then the effects of sound does “travel across the so-called vacuum of Space” by the same vehicle that the energy from Light waves travel. It is estimated that we can listen to sound waves that be-gan as explosions with such intensity and consistency that they register in the form of radio waves from the furthest parts of our early Universe. Sound waves that have been traveling across the Universe for billions of years. It is all relative to the length of the wave, the shorter the wave the higher the frequency. If the frequency is high enough it reveals itself as Light/Life. The longer the wave, the lower the frequency and low frequencies produce the sensations that we experience as audible sound. I cannot blame Dr. Neil de Grasse Tyson, the Astrophys-icists who made the comment that “Sound waves don't travel through the vacuum of Space,” because his line of thinking is a common mistake made by modern scientist as a result of being misled by their limited vision. They are often fooled by this misconception because you cannot see the things that make up the so called 'vacuum of Space' does not mean that there is an actual vacuum, a Space with nothing in it. For example, if we used a Geiger counter in whatever re-spected room we find ourselves at the present moment, the sensor would register the ambient radiation with and audible “click. ” This would signify the amount of radioac-tive particles/waves that occupy the Space and the Geiger counter would click, a little. Yet, if we turned one on just outside of the Earth's atmosphere, the clicker would go crazy! That's because all of that so-called empty Space, that “vac-uum” that Dr. Tyson spoke of is actually filled with count-less sub-atomic radiating particles streaming from our Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 45 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that by simply ut-tering, “1 x 1” we create two separate and distinct wave forms that will still be vibrating billions of years from to-day. Consequently, regarding sound waves and vibration: 1 x 1 = 2 ELECTRO-MAGNETIC WAVE INTERACTIONS Then again, it could be argued that, “We are only thinking or imagining 1 x 1. ” If so, let us now consider how thoughts are formed in the mind and lets examine the hidden processes by which our brains do this thing called "thinking". 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 46 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
As information is funneled into the brain through various receptors located on the human body and are analyzed as thoughts, they are re-born as newly formatted electrical impulses. These impulses are different from the state by which they entered your sensory organs, because now they have been transmuted by your brain's narcissistic editorial process. It interprets All Things according to its own im-age. Thoughts are generated inside a neuron (as told by mod-ern science) as an electrical impulse (a frequency) that travels along the axion where it encounters a neural trans-mission fluid after which it is converted into electro/ chemical energy. Afterwards, it is carried through that fluid on a wave in its chemical state until it reaches the dendrites of a neighbor-ing neuron where it converts again into electrical energy. Within this process of electrical energy being converted into chemical energy and back again into electrical energy a measurable wave field is generated and with each conver-sion that wave field intensifies. The simple act of thinking or imagining “1 x 1” creates a large enough impulse that it can be measured through EEG's (Electroencephalograms). EEGs are measurements of voltage fluctuations from elec-tric wave motions within the neurons of the brain. Brainwave frequency is measured in hertz in the same manner that musical tones are measured. Therefore, if you think “1 x 1” you have created two separate wave forms (two separate songs) of continually converting energy that travels from the brain, through the skull, and out into the Universe where it can be interpreted by simple electronic measuring and monitoring devices. Those 2 thoughts about the multiplication of those 2 num-bers creates 2 separate wave fields that will transfer their wave amplitude upon Everything in existence until Time Indefinite. Therefore, even the act of thinking, “1 x 1” creates at least 2 equal and opposite consequences. Each of them will have both a positive charge and a negative discharge which in turn will have at the very least two separate and distinct consequences that will double into: 4 and then 8, 16, 32, 64, etc. Do you see my point? Everything is affected by Everything else! There aren't any isolated states of being where Anything exists within a vac-uum without the consequence of Multi-Dimensional chain reactions. Likewise, even the act of thinking 1 x 1, the con-sequences equal at least 2. Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 47 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
ESTABLISHED LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS If we were to take into consideration Newtons third law of motion, which states: “For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. ” For if 1 x 1 ever equaled just 1 then two forces or substanc-es will have interacted without any reaction. Therefore, ei-ther Newton's Third Law is fundamentally flawed, or 1 x 1 must equal at the very least 2! I'd like for you to take particular interest in Newton's idea's concerning Mass and its attraction to other objects of Mass. Within these concepts rest another obvious proof of 1 x 1 = 2 in Nature. Gravity which directly correlates to the Mass of an object (as taught by modern science) is represented through values in our current number system. Examine for instance the tedious process of collecting data and the arduous task of processing that data. Do you recall how the human mind collects bits of informa-tion from multiple forms of stimuli? It is initially routed from the sensory organ to the thalamus where it is con-verted into electrical impulses. Those impulses are then converted into chemical structures that represent the data. Remember that a chemical is composed of elements A small section of the Veil Nebula, as observed by the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 48 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
and each element has a particular mass and mass is de-termined through a consideration of force. In Newtonian terms F=ma. Nevertheless; if, “1 (mass) x 1 (mass)= only 1 (mass)”, then there wouldn't be any such thing as the electrical effects that have been labeled as gravity to initially accumulate the Matter into a MASS. In fact, it would create the oppo-site effect of gravity for every mass would effectively repel every other mass. Our entire Universe would never come into fruition. Therefore, in order for there to be the affect of gravity: “1 x 1” must = (equal) at least 2. PURE LOGIC AND TRUTH Let's approach this problem from another logical perspec-tive. By making the numbers 1 x 1 = 1 we reduce the num-ber [1] to a lesser value than[0] zero. Because zero [0] is the only digit (number) that when multiplied by itself the sum could remain the same be-cause the number doesn't really exist, it is a placeholder that holds no value. The number [1] is valueless if it does not affect itself or even a [0] zero Space for that matter. For if you multiply “1 x 0” it equals [0], which in itself is a direct violation of the laws concerning the “Conservation of Energy. ” The law states that, “Energy cannot be created or destroyed,”... 'lt can only be transferred or transformed into another state'. This is what we have observed in natural phenomena. This is reality! So, how can SOMETHING times NOTHING equal NOTHING? How can SOMETHING just disappear because it encountered a NON THING? The very notion of this impossible scenario suggest that if one was to travel too far down a plane, at some point that individual will encounter the end of that plane and enter into a Non-Space. A Non Space, a place where the laws of the Universe cease to exist as per the Idenity Prop-erty (lol). Anything foolish enough to venture past that Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 49 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
point will themselves fall into an abyss or a place of Non-Space. Because that is exactly what [0] is, an empty Space. This line of reasoning is undoubtedly a hold over from the days of ignorance when primitive Man believed that the world was flat and that if one went to far past that forbid-den edge they would fall into the Nothing World, a place where nothing exist. A dangerous consequence of having the World's Mathematics, Sciences and Economy based upon SUPERSTITION AND FALSE AXIOMS! Again, we have a conspicuous example of mathematics vi-olating the very laws of physics that it vehemently claims to uphold and swears, 'through mathematics the beauty of the natural world is expressed in all of its equations. ' Every wave must follow the wave that proceeds it, unless that wave is acted upon by another wave. This is a law made by Nature. Here's my point, if every number that follows the number [1] is a product of the number [1], then shouldn't those subsequent numbers which are nothing more than a col-lection of many [1]'s behave like the number [1]? Since the number [1] is in fact their progenitor, their patriarch, the object of their reflection and the very foundation and na-ture of their entire being, should not those reproductions of the number [1] be susceptible to the weaknesses and strengths of the number [1]? Again, how can the descendants of the number [1] or even a mass of congregated [1]s have a different constitution than their base? When any number interacts with (0) it behaves like its phantom patriarch the number 1, meaning it completely disappears, another impossibility. All of these inconsistencies expose our lack of under-standing upon the subject because our “understanding” at present is apparently based upon a number of no real measurable value. The only THING that can interact with NON-THING and become a NON-THING is a NON-THING! Nevertheless, the multiplication table corrects itself after falsely stating that one times any number equals itself. It immediately recognizes its folly and completely changes its tune when it reaches the numbers (2) and greater. Let us examine this conundrum from another angle. Lets approach it in reverse... If we were to ask the question: “What is the square root of 4?” The answer is 2. 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 50 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
If you multiply 2 x 2 it equals 4. Also, if we add 2 + 2 it equals 4, it doesn't equal more or less than 4. Pretty simple, right? And it should be that simple because remember “When in doubt, see rule number 1 “. We were taught in elementary mathematics that in order to check our answers when using multiplication it is some-times necessary to “add our results and see if the results are balanced. ” Well, let's find the RECOMMENDED VALUE of the square root of the number 2. In other words, what number times itself (as suggested by the mathematic community) equals the number 2? If you have a calculator handy it will help in this process. The computer represents the square root of the number 2 as:... A brilliant mathematician named NJ Wildberger raised an interesting argument regarding this (... ) that occurs at the end of the last number presented. If I may, I shall paraphrase his insightful observation. He said; “(Is this a correct answer? (referring to the irrational number sequence above that ends with the (... )) Does it give you the square root of 2? No, It gives an approximation of what academia would like for you to be-lieve the square root of 2 is. But in all truth, no mathema-tician has ever given the solution to the root of 2. That is what the "... " represents at the end of the last num-ber in the computer's 'irrational' program. It means that if you wished, you could extend the decimal out to the 100th digit or you can shorten the decimal chain and put the ( ... ) right after the 1. 414 and the answer would still be a flawed assumption. It doesn't matter where you put it, because it is and will always be an assumption. It's simply not true and yet it is presented as absolute truth. That approximation only predicts a flat, 2 Dimensional non-existent unreality. A straight lined approximation of a 3 Dimensional curved Universe that is filled with tangible curved Multi-Dimen-sional pre-atomic existing geometry that has never be-fore been revealed. It is over saturated with intersecting spheres of pulsating and polarizing systems of energy. For the sake of rigor and accuracy, let's calculate this num-ber to the 15th decimal. Let us add it to itself... 1. 414213562373095... + 1. 414213562373095... 2. 828427124746190... Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 51 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Well, thats odd, because adding the square root of 4 (the number 2) to itself, equals the number 4. Yet, when you add the 'suggested' value of the square root of 2 to itself the sum of those numbers added togeth-er are more than the initial number squared. The sum of these numbers is 2. 828427124746190... The resulting number is so high that it could be rounded off to the number 3. How can something like that ever make any logical sense? 'It is important to note that it has been an accepted anomaly for this kind of phenomena to occur with every number less than 1'. This is what Neil De Grassi Tyson said to me regarding this conundrum. For example: the square root of 0. 64 = 0. 8 (a number larger than the original). 0. 64 ² = 0. 4096 (a number smaller than the original). and of course 0. 8 + 0. 8 = 1. 6 NDTyson From a logical standpoint this looks more like, proof of failure rather than proof of success. Look at how convo-luted these results are. Try to imagine the desperate cir-cumstances necessary for this kind of hypothesis with such flawed results to be deemed acceptable in pure mathemat-ics. Especially, considering the fact that the results are in direct violation of any observable natural phenomena and call for the laws governing Conservation of Energy to be suspended in order for any of these functions to occur. Lets not forget that all of this takes place in the imaginary world called Euclidean Space, the flat non-existent world of 2-D, where everything is make-believe. Nevertheless, for argument sake Dr. Tyson, we are not dis-cussing the square root of the numerical values between 0 and 0. 9999... (a value less than 1) We are examining the square root of the number 2 which does not fall within the margins of this so called excepted anomaly. If we remember one of the primary things that we learned from our earlier lessons in mathematics is 'That an object or Number must be equal to the sum of it's parts it cannot be greater than it or less than it. ' Therefore, common sense alone informs us that 1. 414213562373095... cannot be the square root of 2. It's not 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 52 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
only an irrational number it is borderline delusional. If a psychiatrist were to give a clinical diagnosis for this number and this 'identity crisis' that it is suffering from it would be diagnosed with a Schizo-Associative disorder with acute hallucinations and delusions of grandeur if it believes for one moment that it could have ever been the root of 2! Because the sum of those numbers added together becomes greater than the initial number squared. It is as absurd as the thought of one of Cinderella's step sisters breaking the bones in her foot to try and force her oversized paw to fit into that delicate glass slipper made for a Princess. No mat-ter how badly she wanted to be Cinderella, and regardless of how desperately her mother wanted it for her, it simply wasn't reality. When I was 14 years of age and was struggling to grasp a concept in class. My teacher, Mr. William Tisdale gave me an acronym that I believe is perfect for this topic of con-versation. He used the phrase: “K. I. S. S!” Which means, “KEEP. IT. SIMPLE. STUPID!” It made me laugh at myself to reflect on how complicated I was making things. In like manner I believe that modern mathematicians have completely complicated a simply reality. Consider this line of reasoning: The square root of the number 4 is 2. 2 x 2 = 4 (not a fraction less) and 2 + 2 = 4 (not a digit more) Did you notice, in these simple steps that the final sum of both mathematical processes from either using multipli-cation or addition, the resulting number is greater than the initial number? In fact it doubled. All of these effects occur billions of times per second, within each and every act of expansion and contraction in the observable Uni-verse and have been studied and documented as observ-able phenomena in Nature. If we consider the Fibonacci Sequence of 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55... which follows the Multi Dimensional expansion ratio of Ev-erything in the Universe. Be it Light waves, sound waves, waves upon the ocean, the growing of leaves on a branch, our DNA chain, any and all things made of Hydrogen at-oms, they all expand and contract in like manner. This sequence is as old as Time itself as even Time follows this pattern where the sum of the two proceeding num-bers equals the next number in the sequence. Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 53 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
That's funny, even Time expands and contracts! You'll also notice that the very first action in this Universal sequence is to double itself and that doubling occurs within the pri-mary steps of a system which is manifested in the relative value of the number [1]. It should be crystal clear by now that Everything, even number sequences follow the under-lying rules regarding expansion and contraction that Ev-erything else within the Universe follows. All except Man's rules regarding mathematics and his ap-proach to multiplication. Man's laws are completely con-trary to the laws that Every other system within this Uni-verse follows. Not to be forgotten is the Doubling Sequence, of 1,2,4,8,7,5 {just a friendly note to the reader} The Pythagoreans believed that there was no greater number than the number 9. Therefore, if they encountered the num-ber 16, which is the next number in the doubling sequence following the number 8, they would add 1 + 6 which as you know equals 7, then they would double the 7 equalling 14. Next, they would add 1 + 4 equalling 5 and the process would continue. Interestingly enough, this process even works back-wards in the divisible direction. The Doubling Sequence which accurately predicts period-ic expansion and contraction of Multi-Dimensional Space was famously used by Nikola Tesla in all of his work. Point Josh Rokman Mandelbrot set No. 102Marc Rodin's Torus Coil The Solfeggio Codes Tesla's 3,6 and 9 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 54 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
being, the first Action of every Interaction is to double it-self. Let's consider the insight gained by the law of fractals also known as the Mandelbrot set. Wikipedia gives this defini-tion: “A fractal is a natural phenomenon or a mathemati-cal set that exhibits a repeating pattern that displays itself at every scale. It is often referred to as an expanding sym-metry or an evolving symmetry. " Fractals differ from other geometric structures because of the way in which they scale. DOUBLING the edge lengths of a polygon multiplies its area by four, which is TWO (the ratio of the new to the old side length) raised to the power of TWO (the dimension of the Space the polygon resides in). Likewise, if the radius of a sphere is DOUBLED, its volume scales by eight, which is TWO (the ratio of the new to the old radius) to the power of three (the dimension that the sphere resides in). Notice the continued running theme in Nature's law of doubling in its initial steps. Consequently, if Everything within our Universe employs this process of doubling, shouldn't the mathematical operations that describe these natural processes follow suit? The square root of 4 is 2. The number 2 goes into the number 4 twice. Because 4 is divided by two twice. Well, 2 is divided by 1 twice. The number 4 follows the number 2 and must take its lead from that number and the number 2 must follow the rules established by the number 1. The true Universal value of the square root of the number 2 is 1. Unfortunately, there are many out there that have built their “pain body” personas and their entire academic ca-reers upon the false and forced dogma that 1 x 1 = 1. Also they have insisted that the square root of 2 is an irrational number and will fight tooth and nail to remain in its doc-trine. In view of this unfortunate reality, I offer two short examples of irrefutable evidence that requires only rea-soning and a limited amount of discernment. If you input into a calculator the number 2 and ask for its square root the calculator will give you this answer: [1. 414213562373095... ] If you multiply that number by itself using the computer or the calculator it will give the programmed number of [2] as its answer. Yet, if you multiply the computer calcu-1. 414213562373095 Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 55 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
lated value of the root of two by itself by hand the answer is very different... 1. 414213562373095... x 1. 414213562373095... = 1. 999999999999999861967979879025... Which in no way shape or form is equal to the number 2! For with the constant expansion of Everything within the Universe and with each step of the Doubling Sequence, this 1. 999999999999999861967979879025... trails further and further behind the trajectory of the real number 2 as it expands and follows the Fibonacci Sequence in its nev-er ending journey towards the edge of our Universe and back! Trust me this is just the tip of iceberg regarding the the mathematical fallacies of the square root of two. Stay tuned. Although this number may be sufficient for approxima-tions here on Earth and may even work for travel to and from the near Earth planets within our solar system. Yet, if our species is going to advance enough for interstellar and intergalactic travel this kind of approximation would result in a traveler being millions of light years off course. Therefore, it behooves Mankind to make the necessary adjustments now regarding how we calculate the square root of 2 which happens to be a value that is incorporat-ed quite frequently in quantum mechanics, especially in the Higgs dynamic and mass terms, which is part of the Standard Model Lagrangian. The CERN collider whose primary purpose (on paper) is to identify and isolate the illusive Higgs boson and other theorized sub atomic parti-cles, relies upon the true square root of 2 for its purpose to be realized and cost over 13. 25 billion dollars to build and 1 billion dollars a year to run. It would be such a waste of time and resources for all of that to be based upon a false approximation. (The Higgs boson is a theorized elementary particle in the Standard Model of particle physics. It is the quantum exci-tation of the Higgs field, a fundamental field of crucial im-portance to particle physics theory, first suspected to exist in the 1960s. ) Accuracy is very important especially when we are dealing with the very nature of one of the founding fathers of our number system. The closest (even) number to the number 2 is the number 4... And the square root of that number is 2. A very simple number. A rational number. Cern's Large Hadron Collider 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 56 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Also, 2 x 2 = 4 without stretching or rounding it off. In truth, the Square root of 2 has never been given by aca-demia because: 1. 999999999999999861967979879025 Is “CLOSE, BUT NO CIGAR!” We must be the most naive and gullible of intelligent spe-cies in the history of the Universe. I can understand Primi-tive Man accepting this standard practice of multiplication before the invention of decimals, but not a technologically savvy and advanced group of Homo sapiens such as our-selves capitulating to something this blatantly ridiculous and inaccurate. Our current practices of multiplication was actually in-herited from the ancient Greeks, who stole/borrowed it from the early Mesopotamians, who developed this system some 4,000 years ago. Lets take a moment to consider what the average day was like for the Babylonians and examine some of their other means of handling minor and com-plex issues. For the sake of comparison, in the hopes that we may reason on the idea of how many other practices of that ancient clan in Mesopotamia did the ancient Greeks also borrow and implement into our modern world. A BRIEF HISTORY OF BABYLONIAN LOGIC AND A GLIMPSE INTO THEIR DAILY LIVES Babylonians weren't that tall on average, they were more wide and girth in nature. It has been reported that they called themselves “The Dark Haired People” because they had darker eyes than their neighbors, darker hair and darker skin. Most of the clothing they wore was made from animal by products. Therefore, they had a certain pungent smell to foreigners, primarily because the region was quite warm and rather dry and woolen garments retained heat. As a result, perfumes, incense, fragrances, and oils were very common articles of trade that were imported and manufactured by the inhabitants of that ancient city. The historical city of Babylon was located where Iraq stands Credit: Mostafa Samir Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 57 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
today, a land also known as Mesopotamia which may give the reader a better visual perspective of the climate and the difficulties that one might encounter being forced to scratch out an existence in such an arid and inhospitable environment. The entire population had a responsibility to contribute to the prosperity and welfare of the city. They lived un-der a socialistic form of government, they did not trade in currency but incorporated a system of bartering. Ex-changing food or livestock, wool, tools, jewelry and what-nots. In return for their dedication and sacrifices the government made sure that everyone had food, clothing, and suitable housing. It seems as though they had a very successful socialist society for quite some time. The family structure was more traditional in nature than that practiced by most modern day families. Arranged marriages, stay at home moms, father worked while boys were schooled and girls remained home with their moth-ers learning the art of “home making”. BABYLONIAN MEDICINE Babylonian medicine was governed by the: “Code of Hammurabi”, Dated 1800 BCE. The code carried with it some rather harsh penalties for medical and surgical therapeutic failure. There is no clear indication that the physician actually understood anything related to the real nature of the ail-ment they may have encountered except in the more ob-vious cases or even the true function of the organs affect-ed. Among the long list of available remedies, a few like oil for stiff limbs, or milk for stomach troubles, salt peter and crushed ostrich shell for kidney stones may have been beneficial, but some of the remedies employed seem to be entirely valueless. This may even have been realized at that time as indicated by the seeming indifference with which the physician moved through a long list of medications, shifting from one to another for the same disease. Therefore, while these tablets have revealed a wide range of observed diseases and an extensive list of herbs and minerals in the physician's pharmacopoeia, there was not a systematic fund of knowledge of the human body and neither was there any rational consideration of disease. The causes of disease and the application of remedies, as conceived by the physician, were so intertwined with belief in supernatural forces, that a rational understanding of the organs and functions of the human body was not like-ly or even possible. It is evident that primitive folk med-icine, with All of its superstitions completely dominated the medical teaching of the ancient Mesopotamians just as such superstitions suffused their general outlook on the Natural World. Ancient Babylonian knowledge of anatomy, physiology, 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 58 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
and pathology was therefore extremely limited and un-der these circumstances, the contributions of Babylonian medicine to later medical science cannot be said to have been important. There is little to no evidence of its cul-tural crossover into other civilizations except, perhaps that of India. Our own knowledge of Babylonian attain-ments is limited by the fact that not a single Babylonian tablet on surgery has survived long enough for modern science to reference. We cannot however, doubt the ex-istence of such treatments being employed in early Bab-ylonia, especially in view of the legally recognized and regulated position of the surgeon in Babylonian society of the 20th century B. C. E. MATHEMATICS The Babylonian system of mathematics was sexagesimal, or based in a numerical system rooted in the number 60. Among the Babylonians mathematical accomplishments were the determination of the square root of 2 incorrectly to seven places. The Babylonians where also credited with the invention of 2-Dimensional geometry, better known as Euclidean Geometry. So, here we have one of the cul-prits for the idea of irrational number systems and for the confusion related to the existence of straight lines. They both have their roots in a culture that is synonymous with (Babble) “confusion. ” Now it becomes a little more clear: as to how and why the Greek Euclid came up with Euclid-ean Geometry: he borrowed it from the Babylonians who also borrowed many of their concepts regarding mathe-matics and geometry from the Egyptians. CALENDAR The ancient Babylonians used a calendar with alternating 29 and 30 day months. This system required the addition of an extra month three times every eight years, and as a further adjustment, the king would periodically order the insertion of an additional extra month into the calendar. Interestingly enough, this is where the idea that a circle has 360 degrees comes from since they believed there were 12 months in a year and the average month had 30 days in it. Thus, 12 x 30 = 360 Yet we now know that there aren't just 360 days in a year and likewise, there aren't only 360 degrees in a circle. Armed with this knowledge it would be foolish to believe that the irrational value given for π by academia is a cor-rect value based upon this dreadfully faulty foundation and false approximation. This value could never have come close to the true number of degrees refracted in a circle. As can be seen by the Babylonian calendar system, they were a civilization that was quite used to making adjust-ments to mathematical quantities as needed by the cir-cumstance. In academia they call this “fudging. ” There Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 59 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
were no absolute truths in their approach to numbers or the measurement of Space and the things that occupied it. A process still employed by modern mathematics and sci-ence today. I guess the fruit doesn't fall far from the tree. ASTRONOMY Among the sciences, astronomy and astrology occupied a conspicuous place in Babylonian society. The zodiac was a Babylonian tool, perhaps borrowed from the Zoroastrians of great antiquity, foretelling eclipses of the Sun and moon. Observatories were attached to the temples and reports were regularly sent by astronomers to the king. The stars were numbered and named from an earlier date and we possess now tables of lunar longitudes and observations of the phases of Venus. Great attention was naturally paid to the calendar, and we find a week of seven days with a five day work week. We haven't even begun to mention the animal sacrifices to their many gods, nor their cruel and unusual treatment of criminals and captives which included decap-itating prisoners and playing 'kick ball' with their severed heads. Needles to say, the modern world had the good sense to recognize that most of the practices and methods employed in the daily life of early Mesopotamia would not be useful in today's technologically advanced and purportedly more evolved world. Yet, we have made the mistake of adopting a faulty system of mathematics from an extinct civilization. The question still remains, why hasn't anyone over the last four thousand years, and I am talking about some of the most gifted, thinking, men and women who have ever walked the planet, ever questioned the inconsistencies re-lated to the square root of 2 and the true value of 1? It seems incomprehensible to imagine that these inconsis-tencies have escaped the notice of such an amazing group of Intellectual Geniuses. Individuals who have been vener-ated by Man for hundreds upon hundreds of generations because of the many contributions they have made to the world of science as a result of their mental prowess. A pow-er so strong that they have held a remarkable influence over Man's thinking for over 4 millennia. Yet, not one of these 'cerebral giants' bothered to question the blatant and apparent impossibilities concerning 1 x 1 = 1 and the Square Root of 2 being 1. 414213562373095... How sad for Mankind. We are not only Cosmically blind, but severely mentally challenged as well. Unfortunately, here is another one of those inconvenient truths concerning the square root of two that deserves the immediate attention of the mathematic community! 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 60 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
THE SYSTEM AIN'T BROKE, ITS FIXED! Finally, I believe it is important that we drive the point home that there is a deliberate untruth woven through-out the fabric of our mathematics and is embedded within the programs that run our calculators, computers and our smart phones. If you were to input the number 2 into your calculator and ask for its square root, you will receive the answer that we've mentioned numerous times before: If you square that number (x2) the calculator will tell you the answer is 2. But if you add that number to itself or multiply it by 2 the result is: 1. 414213562373095... + 1. 414213562373095... 2. 828427124746190... Surprisingly, if you cube this result of the Square root of 2: (1. 414213562373095... ) ³1. 414213562373095According to the calculator you'll get: NOW WAIT A MINUTE! THATS THE SAME ANSWER THAT YOU GET BY ADDING THE NUMBER TO ITSELF! 1. 414213562373095... + 1. 414213562373095... 2. 828427124746190... How is it possible for a number whether rational or irra-tional to have the same exact value when being added to itself or being multiplied by two as it does when that num-ber is cubed? The only other number in like manner is 0 because it is a Non-Number. Can this be a mistake? The truth is 1 x 1 = 2 And 1 x 1 = (ing) 1 isn't multiplication, it's a fabrication which is also known as a mathematical fallacy. 2. 82842712474619 Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 61 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
OBSERVATION FROM WITHIN “Irrationality in the field of mathematics is a major prob-lem within the subject. Our approach to irrationality doesn't work. Most senior mathematicians are aware of this at some level but they would rather not address the issue and acknowledge it. Many junior mathematicians and most students are blissfully unaware of the problems. Nevertheless, the problems are serious, they are deep and they effect many things. They weaken mathematics and they make it much less beautiful than it ought to be. ” NJ Wildberger In other words, they choose to ignore the 800 pound go-rilla in the room! Truth is absolute. It doesn't waiver or meander through the meadows of Time. Truth is dependable, reliable and consistent, it is trustworthy and always right! It holds the line under all circumstance and the rule of Universal law and established order is built upon its foundation. We have seen the end result of blindly following the es-tablished standards set out by the practitioners of this convoluted logic in the examples from our programmed calculators regarding the root of 2. Where the square root of a given number times 2 becomes greater than the initial number squared and that same square root of a number Credit: Universal Pictures 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 62 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
when cubed becomes equal to the same value as when it was multiplied by 2. First of all, who are the people that dictate and set the pre-requisites for how the Natural Universe should be counted and how it multiplies itself? Who are the individuals re-sponsible for the 'Identity Element' which could very well turn out to be the single greatest stumbling block ever placed before Man's already precarious path, next to the institution of false religion? Shouldn't Nature and the natural events that occur with-in the Universe dictate the rules of engagement regarding our understanding of its functions? Shouldn't the observ-able Universe have the final word on how we measure its systems and account for its weights and balances? Irrationality in numbers occurs in many places in our es-tablished system of mathematics. Nevertheless, the most famous and well known examples are the ratio between the circumference of a circle and its diameter, π, and the square root of 2. Where the Pythagorean theorem postu-lates that: a² + b² = c² This unfortunately corners mathematics into a stalemate of reasoning because the side and the diagonal of a square become incommensurable. Each instance of irrationality surfaces when a straight line is used to define or merge with curved Space. The term “Irrational” means to be without the faculty of reason, deprived of reason, without or deprived of normal mental clarity or sound judgment! For 4,000 years Mankind has approached the concept of defining our Universe with these “irrational” arguments coupled with his attempt at measuring it's working func-tions with impossible and impractical tools. These misconceptions have prevented Man from properly viewing the orderliness and the working dynamics of this wonderfully creating Universe. Because of assigning prop-erties to the structure of the Universe that do not exist, our approach to mathematics has led our sciences into an intellectual and technological quagmire. A quicksand as it were, of misguided concepts that we have built our entire understanding of the visible Universe upon. The entire concept of the platonic solids and straight lines are themselves incommensurable with the visible Universe and are non-sustainable structures in logic and in practice. For if our Universe were constructed of these rigid linear bodies Everything in it would collapse upon itself! Our Universe is a living and breathing entity that expands and Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 63 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
contracts with every polarization in regular and predict-able cycles. Unfortunately, the Pythagorean theorem, Euclid's Assumption, the axiom that there is no rational number a/b satisfying [(a/b) squared] and the very nature of Euclidean geometry fails to satisfy the needs of the fields of mathematics and the physical sci-ences because it does not allow for either contraction or expansion of the Universe at any scale. Go ahead, don't be scared, touch 'em, if you want to see where they come from: Flower of Life & Platonic Solids Animation It all began I believe, with the invention of the platonic solids, whatever these structures were called when used by the Egyptians, Assyrians or the Babylonians before the Greeks is not important. What is important is that they were followed by Archimedes' truncated solids, then came Kepler's pentagonal solids. All of these are beautiful works of art that share a limited symmetry consistent with Man's designs. Our modern day buildings and the cities of old were all built upon these non-sustainable geometric struc-tures along with all of the wonders of the ancient world. I use the term 'invention' because that is exactly what they are, 'Inventions from the minds of Men. ' It is of no conse-quence that these relics of the past have been venerated by Mankind as a “discovery” of Universal shapes, but in all truth, not one thing in the Natural Universe reflects their static design. The Pythagorean theorem which is one of the most im-portant theorems in mathematics is rooted in this unre-ality. The theorem that there is no rational number a/b satisfying (a/b) squared is also rooted in this philosophy. Platonic solids were born on paper and the math that de-scribes them dies when it leaves the margins of that paper. Deuces are wild in two dimensional Space and anything can happen in the land of linear giants and flat horizons. Yet in Universal Mathematics, Space begins in curved 3 dimensional wave conjugations and is reasonably understood. Therefore, all of Creation, espe-cially thinking Man, can enjoy and find supreme delight in its Super-Symmetry. Tetrahedron Hexahedron Dodecahedron Octahedron Icosahedron 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 64 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
With all of that being said, if it can be proven that there are no straight lines in the visible Universe, then all the-orems and postulates based upon these imaginary and philosophical lines would have to be abandoned and the door would be open for the introduction of a new line of reasoning, something that is not considered to be: IRRATIONAL or “deprived of mental clarity and sound judgment. ” (Right?) Let us ask a few questions then, “Where does a straight line come from anyway?” Are there any straight lines in Space? Are there any objects whose trajectory is on a straight linear path? The answer to the last two questions is, NO! There has never been, nor shall there ever be a straight line in this curved Universe. Regarding the origin of straight lines, the concept of a straight line was invented in the minds of Primitive Man before his ability to comprehend the curvature of Space-Time. It is an illusion fabricated by man's limited sense of sight and propagated by the, [WE PEOPLE] the “trustees of knowledge and higher learning. ” Do not forget that Homo sapiens can sense only a tiny fraction of the total “light” spectrum. Therefore, Academia's stumbling about and their false predictions regarding Space and Time is understood. The same show of compassion that one would have along with a certain level of sympathy for a society of children, rela-tive infants on a cosmic scale, born blind, attempting to build a model of the Universe. I personally do not blame modern nor ancient academia for attempting to make sense of their world. As a result, we have gained some ideas about structure, design and an awareness of the need for there to be an underlying symmetry of structure that dictates the geometry of All Things physical. Nevertheless, the geometry that they've invented, the pla-tonic solids, fail to truly grasp nor does it define the under-current of super symmetry that exists in All Things. They only define static structures which only exists within the confines of academia's mind. They are incommensurable with the curved functions that govern All Matter. Unfortunately, our present system of mathematics is based upon linear projections that exist only in two dimensional Space. A Space that does not exist. A Space that is imag-inary. A Space that was initially invited as a temporary “mental exercise. ” In order for mathematics to correctly represent the physical Universe we must think and calcu-late it's proportions in Multi-Dimensional curved Space/ Time. Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 65 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
I challenge anyone to show me a true straight line in this curved Universe! It has been theorized in calcu-lus that a significantly short line segment in a curved Space can be shown to be indistinguishable from a straight line. [Not to be forgotten is the fact that cal-culus is a child of Euclidean geometry which is based upon 2-D imaginary and non-existent Space. Therefore, 'calculus' doesn't carry any (pardon the pun) weight in 3D Space/Time] Yet, that theoretical straight line would be infinitesimally small, so small that it would be impossible to see even if we could experience 100% of the total Light spectrum. Also, the illusion of that theoretical straight line would disappear immediately following any projec-tion from its segmented point. In view of the fact that all things in this Universe is in constant motion it makes the true creation of a straight line not only improbable but an impossibility to say the least. The Creator of the Universe could not make a straight line, that's why ALL SPACE IS CURVED! Yet, Man in his ignorance introduced the impossible no-tion of a straight line into the field of mathematics and it has proven to be his proverbial Achilles' heel till this very day! Let's tug on this loose thread for just a bit and see what unravels. If it can be proven that there are no straight lines in the Universe, what would happen to all structures and theo-rems that are based upon these presumed straight lines? If there are no straight lines, how does a polygon come to exist? And if there are no polygons that create polyhedrons with straight lines, how does a platonic solid ever come to be? And if there aren't any straight lines, how does a trian-gle come to be? And if there aren't any true triangles, how does an isosceles triangle come to be? And if there aren't any isosceles triangles, how does a right angle come to be? And if there are no right angles? Then how does the Py-thagorean theorem ever come to exist? And if there is no such thing as the Pythagorean theorem? Then there never comes into existence the ratio of the side of a square to the diagonal of a square because there aren't any such things as squares either. Also, if there aren't any such things as triangle's? Then the irrational number for π doesn't exist either. “Newton's first law of physics which states that a moving body left to itself moves on forever in a straight line with a uniform velocity, is not in conformity with the laws of motion. In this Universe of varying pressures, all masses floating 'in Space' con-stantly move in the direction of their changing potentials. This direction is always spiral. All motion being spiral, all direction being curved, and all pressure planes being conic sections, elec-tric action cannot proceed directly north from south in a straight line, but must progress toward north in a spiral direction. ” 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 66 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
As told by Walter Russell, in his book “The Universal One. ” Published in 1926. 'All energy in the Universe is expressed in motion and all motion is expressed in waves and all waves are a function of a vortex and all vortex functions are curved. ' There are no straight lines in the Universe. Therefore, there aren't any straight lines in Universal Mathematics. When will Mankind say enough is enough and begin again with a new math that is built upon truth and a conscious society who desires a more evolved understanding of life and of All Living Things? A true and reliable new math that will usher in a new understanding of this remarkable Universe. I believe that it is clear that two dimensional perspectives and conjecture about irrationality concerning Multi-Di-mensional Matters will forever be incommensurable and shall always produce dissonant values within the field of mathematics. Remember, “There are no straight lines!” Therefore, all axioms based upon the Platonic solids and linear reasonings are flawed and are a mathematical falla-cy. Also, the formulas in use today do not account for the con-stant simultaneous contraction and expansion of our Uni-verse and of everything within it. Therefore, most of them are flawed because they are rooted in a false understand-ing and a misconception regarding Universal phenomena. There is a dire need for a better understanding about the Conditions of Matter that correctly represent our curved Universe and its curved Universal ratios. Man must abandon his misguided beliefs in the imagi-nary straight lines first and foremost, then his mind shall be free to realize that the shortest distance between two points is that of a curved condition. Nevertheless, in order for Man to comprehend two sepa-rate things, I believe we must first understand the mean-ing and the true value of One. Yet, before we can recog-nize the value of One we must first discern the conditions under which ONE comes to exist. Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 67 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
THE CONDITIONS OF ONE I hope that I have demonstrated how important it is that we fully understand the structure of One and see it in its true light and magnitude. On a grand scale One is the ac-cumulative product of All Things combined, yet it is also the smallest reflection of the Whole. Albert Einstein called it a “quanta” in 1921, and also re-ferred to it as a “quantum”. We exist in Multi-Dimensional Space/Time where the basic fundamental states of exis-tence and perception are expressed in 3 Dimensions and they are height, width and depth. Yet, we cannot perceive or even begin to measure either of the 3 expressed Dimen-sions mentioned here without the position from which we observe the intersection of these planes. A position that is in and of itself a separate and distinct Dimensional plane of Space /Time. Consequently, there are at the very least four necessary Di-mensions for anything to exist within the visible Universe. Four equal and opposite pressure conditions compressed within a singularly locked position. Each one of these Di-mensions applies a Force upon each other and Space/ Time as Newton expressed so superbly, “Every action has an equal and opposite reaction,” likewise the unseen Mat-ter that occupies Space and Time is being corralled and compressed by these inertial planes pressing upon one an-other. 1 One THE CONDITIONS OF ONE 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 68 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Light was the fastest known substance within the visible Universe until Birkeland Currents indicated that informa-tion in the electric currents traveled at speeds far supe-rior to light, but light was a good speed to go by. In fact, through light we observe All Things. Therefore, it is only fitting for us to illuminate this subject and the structure of One by its characteristics. Because of the extreme curva-ture of Space/Time, light waves will ultimately curve back on to its original position finishing a circuit. Light waves fan out in all directions, and when they have expanded as far as the curvature of Space/Time allows and begins to circle back towards its beginning, the collection of those closed circuits forms countless ripples of stacked spheres. Two waveforms or planes may cross each other's paths but that creates intersecting wave fields that we call a vesica piscis. Three may cross at the same juncture and that is called a tri-vesica piscis. Nevertheless, when the 4th wave field or Light wave meets, at that juncture something new and remarkable occurs. A living wave conjugation is creat-ed, where a recognizable point of life becomes measurable. That point of life when scaled out will show the place where 4 bubbles or spheres have come together. Where their wave fields or planes intersect a second shape is born, a curved sided tetrahedron that I call a Tetra-Terryen Wave state. The general system that is created where 4 equal and oppo-site expanding spheres intersect is what I call the All Shape. I believe the All Shape is the proper geometric representa-tion of the reflection of one. TETRA-TERRYEN ALLSHAPE Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 69 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
It is clear to see that all planes overlap in this Universe of curved Space and potential. All potential is interlocked with past and future potential. Just as each ripple in a pond is connected and shaped by its previous and subsequent ripples, where these waves meet and interact is the point where Space/Time becomes measurable. All visible Matter in the Universe occurs within the con-fines of the vesica piscis of interacting and intersecting planes. ALL THINGS ARE ONE! At the core of All Things within the visible Universe, the laws that govern the element Hydrogen dictates the ge-ometry of its consequential by products and shapes. Its Dimensions are of 4 inertial planes and 4 vertices where three of the inertial planes intersect with the 4th plane acting as a respective base from which the vertices arise depending upon the relative angle from which the struc-ture is being viewed. This is what the tetrahedron was supposed to represent but it is missing one crucial factor, curved exterior and interior angles. The concave inertial planes represent the centripetal, contractive, gravitative and electrically charging functions of this geometric structure, whereas the 4 vertices account for the centrifugal, magnetically ra-diating and negatively expansive aspects of All Matter. All Matter is both expanding and contracting as per the Universal Prime Directive of Existence. All Matter must be congruent with all other Matter: meaning, “Everything has a common denominator and can be reduced to its low-est term. ” Find the common factor (quanta) and either multiply or divide. “Expand or contract by said ratio. ” The common factor of our Universe is the structure of “One!” Once we are acquainted with the true attributes of its na-ture, ALL THINGS become as ONE THING. This is a series of AIIShapes intersecting upon a plane. The wave field that they create will ultimately become the fabric of Space Time. 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 70 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
ONE LAST MOMENT OF REFLECTION Let's recap: 1) We know by definition alone that to Multiply means, “To make many or manifold; to actually increase the num-ber or quantity. ” Therefore, it must increase in size and quantity, or it is not multiplication. Consequently, 1 x 1 = 1 could never be a part of the mul-tiplication table because it fails to satisfy the definition of the term to 'multiply'. So, by definition alone we have clear and rational proof that 1 x 1 can never equal just 1. We also know that 1 x 1 =(ing) 1 is a false answer because the associative and commutative laws were not properly followed which left an unfinished and unbalanced equa-tion. Also, the “Identity Property” has thus been shown to be based upon an uninformed biased and arbitrary preconception that has no relative value in light of ob-served natural phenomena. 2) Although it is an acceptable phenomenon in the math-ematic community for the square root of a number less than 1 when added to itself to be greater than the initial number squared... We are discussing the number 2 and its square root when added to itself should never exceed the initial number. For that would be highly irregular and completely unacceptable, even in the loose fitting Cosmic Microwave Background All Things are One! As Hermes never tires of telling us, over, and over, and over again, the One Thing and the One Mind are One. He means that mind and body, Soul and Spirit, male and female, positive and negative, Above and Below, are all One. All sexes, all races, all species, all life is One. All life, all death; all heroes, all villains; all angels, all demons; all gods, all devils are One. Unless you find this One within you, "what the alchemists called the Stone" you cannot escape the continual dance of becoming that is duality, even for an instant. That is the message of the Ouroboros. That “All Is One” is the basis of the al-chemical principle of changing one thing into another, and alchem-ical transformation would not be possible unless everything were really One. Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 71 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
constraints of the laws of our current system of math-ematics. This anomaly is not acceptable for any thing that exists within the physical Universe beyond our flawed system of mathematics, meaning that no other system or organism within our known Universe behaves as our numeric system, where (1) is massless, weight-less, without spin and lacking of any measurable effects when it interacts with itself or any other number that is derived from it, this ultimately prevents the square root of 2 from having the natural and logical answer of (1). Remember: “An object must be equal to the sum of its parts, it cannot be GREATER than nor LESS than itself. ” This is just simple common sense! Therefore, the square root of any given number when added to itself should never exceed the initial number, if it does then we have over reached and the true square root of that number has failed to be satisfied. 3) Newton's uncontested 3rd Law states: “Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. ” Therefore, 1 x 1 = (ing) 1 is a violation of Every Natural Law regarding “Cause and Effect” within the known Universe. Consequently, 1 x 1 must = at the very least 2. 4) The Pythagorean theorem postulates that: a² + b² = c². This unfortunately corners mathematics into a stale-mate of short sighted reasoning because the side and the diagonal of the square become incommensurable if both sides are positive integers. 5) Euclidean Geometry gave birth to the Platonic Solids which were constructed with straight intersecting lines that do not exist in our Universe of curved Space/Time. Attempt-ing to describe our world and the underlying structure of the Universe by straight lines, seems as futile an attempt as someone trying to capture the complexities of the en-tire human anatomy with stick figures: it produces only a crude depiction of the true reality. Remember: 'All energy in the Universe is expressed in motion and all motion is ex-pressed in waves and all waves are a function of a vortex (a spinning whirl pool) and all vortex functions are curved. There are no straight lines in the Universe. Therefore, there aren't any straight lines in Universal Mathematics. So there you have it, five logic provoking reliable witnesses that testify to the unreasonable and illogically flawed bases that governs Man's thinking upon these matters and is also the foundation of our system of multiplication. As they say, “The proof is in the pudding” right? Well, I've served up a smörgåsbord of pudding from every corner of science, mathematics and everyday culture. All prepared fresh and to perfection. I pointed out many of the stumbling blocks that have circumvented our reasoning faculties and have held us captive through ignorance and arrogance. 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 72 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
I believe that I have shown convincingly that 1 x 1 ≠ 1. Yet, it is quite likely that many of this generation will cling to the vestiges of this lie simply because my argument chal-lenges the status quo and threatens the established order of things at present. Just as the history books continue to propagate the lie that George Washington was the 1st President of the United States when in fact John Hanson was elected the President of the United States by the Con-tinental Congress Assembled on November 5, 1781, the first of seven one-year termed presidents. Some things just never change. I understand that our entire world economy is based upon 1 x 1 =(ing) 1 and that if Mankind were to amend this one equation, it could pose significant challenges to all cur-rency based societies. All institutions of higher learning would have to reform and completely re-evaluate their understanding concerning mathematics. Also, every stu-dent might think a little less of their instructors for having missed something this obvious. Nevertheless, think of the lost millenniums spent chas-ing this conspicuous lie. We have spent the last 6,000 years shrouded in darkness concerning Universal Mathematics. Think of what could have been achieved had we avoided the stumbling blocks of the platonic solids and the irra-tionality of irrational numbers? As I said before, a future generation will benefit and they will shake their heads at this one as we do the generation that championed slavery and blood letting! Oh, I forgot, there is a another important inconvenient truth that I think I should mention concerning this inter-esting topic of 1 x 1 and what it equals. A small paradox that deserves consideration in this argument. I had hoped that by reason alone, along with a good round of sound judgment that I might persuade the minds of Man to re-think his current position on the subject of 1 x 1 =(ing) 1 and help Man return to the mental clarity that was initially responsible for setting Homo sapiens apart from the rest of the animal kingdom. I sincerely believed that if the truth was presented in simple terms with convincing argument and with a compassionate undertone, that it might stir the thinking part of the human mind to correct Mankind's cur-rent misguided course. I hope that I haven't overestimated the grasp of this gen-erations reach and that my argument hasn't exceeded the grasp of the common man and woman, who shouldn't be afraid to think outside of the parameters that has been set by the “Keepers of Knowledge. ” I hope that these men and women find my argument to be refreshing and perhaps they will comment that, “There was always something about the square root of 2 that stumbled us a bit. ” You see the 'Common Man' remains open to new ideas because their view of self is not limited to the titles or let-ters that precede or follow the spelling of their names. The 'Common Man', which I am a proud member, stands Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 73 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
armed with his common senses, always willing to sharpen his tools of discernment which ultimately will enrich his or her understanding. Having a willingness to grow and to be nourished by new concepts concerning our ever changing reality, this is the underlying force that could very well pro-pel our species into a promising and never ending future. Yet, the cup of those unwilling to grow past the dried up streams and empty wells of yesteryear is oftentimes filled to the rim with stale, recycled, and regurgitated axioms of bygone days. Their minds and hearts are contaminated with the elixir of traditional thinking, indoctrinated with antiquated reasoning which prevents them from sipping fresh, clean, unadulterated water and possibly quenching a 6,000 year old thirst for truth and understanding. Therefore, I feel that it is my moral duty as a father and grand father to present the truth about the square root of 2 and the true value of 1 to this generation and expose this loose thread to the Children of Light! For those hard headed individuals, I have saved this proof for you. If you will recall, the square root of the number 2 as prescribed by mathematicians and programmed into our computers is 1. 414213562373095... And if you multiply it by 2 the result is 2. 82842712474619... Also, that 1. 414213562373095... when cubed gives us the same answer as if we added it to itself, 2. 82842712474619... Well, oddly enough, this 2. 82842712474619... is also the square root of the number 8. Now this seems a bit convenient doesn't it? How about this guy for a “Utility Player” Mr. MVP of Mathematics? How in the world can this irrational number fill all these missing Spaces? Could it be from Krypton, like Super Man? Lets put it to the test and see if it weakens. It doesn't budge? Holy Crap! This is "The Number of Steel!” Any number above the value of 2 in which you perform the same sequence of actions, by the 7th consecutive cycle the number balloons into the trillions. Any number below the value of 2 is reduced to an exponentially small value within the same number of sequential steps. Point being, all numbers should change drastically when The Square root of 2 Cube it or multiply it by 2 you get: Divide it by 2 you get: Cube it again or multiply it by 2: Divide it by 2: Cube it or multiply it again by 2:1. 414213562373095... 1. 414213562373095... 1. 414213562373095... 2. 8284271247461894... 2. 8284271247461894... 2. 8284271247461894... Lorem ipsuma 8 12345678 1234567b c d e f g h Lorem ipsuma b c d e f g h Lorem ipsuma 8 12345678 1234567b c d e f g h Lorem ipsuma b c d e f g h 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 74 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
cubed and divided, and again, cubed and divided, either in-creasing in quantity or decreasing, within a few predictable steps. Yet the square root of 2 when cubed returned to 2. 82842712474619... two hundred and sixteen times and could perhaps continue in this programmed loop until in-finity! This must be the most magically, marvelously, enchanting-ly blessed and perfect equation that has ever been written. Or perhaps the biggest and most hurtful lie ever told... What ever the purpose of this manufactured number that masquerades as the square root of 2 and the reasons behind the creation of this irrational loop, I don't know and I will refrain from speculating or partaking in conspiracy theo-ries concerning things for which I am not in the loop. Yet, we all have a responsibility to teach our children the truth, and this loop is not the truth. It is a mathematical fal-lacy and unreality that lacks the ethical benevolence of the sweet fabled stories that we fantasized about as children. Stories that taught us the lessons of compassion, mercy, human kindness and integrity. Any self respecting teacher, professor or institution of learning that would continue to propagate such a blatant unreality without investigating these matters should be ashamed of themselves. For their crime is against the innocent and against our entire species. Well, I'll put it this way, “If you mislead One Soul in this life then you have to pay for that Soul. ” For every Soul that is misled by your actions, you have to pay for that Soul a multitude of Lives filled with the collective karma from all the refractive waves that you are responsible for generat-ing. Its like a heat seeking missile sent with a GPS heading in-structing it to “return to sender. ” Think about the karma from mis-educating billions of children. Yet for now, the fairytale of the phantom number 1, the most popular and most (impotent) number within the whole number kingdom along with the square root of 2, its trusted companion that lives free of board from all re-sponsibility of Universal Law, will continue to defy logic and reasonability for a short time more. Actually, only till the end of this book. Because, even now a Day Star is Rising and the Sun is soon to overtake the darkness of night and the Light of truth will spread multiplying across the Heavens. Ushering in a New Spring where the truth will take root and all the num-bers we love will live happily ever after. My Mother and Father taught me that, “If you break something, you have the responsibility to fix it. ” Well, I didn't break mathematics, I only reported a malfunction in its system. Yet, I did offer the solution to the problem Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 75 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
and hoped that my suggestion would be taken seriously. Nevertheless, for over 4 decades I've tried to reach the soft tissue of Mankind's petrified and hardened hearts and have been met with nothing but ridicule and insults. Therefore, I hope that a future generation will Stop, Look and listen to their hearts and hear what the truth is saying. Which leads me to something else that my parents taught me: “You don't start something unless you intend to finish it!” So, here goes: I have spent a number of pages, review-ing many of the laws that have helped countless others including myself to reason upon the foundation of logic, which is always anchored in truth. I have also pulled at some of the loose threads that I believe has made the fab-ric of our understanding of the Universe tattered and full of holes. I sincerely believe that this book will help Mankind to have faith in the value of One, once it is fully understood and embraced by our reluctant world historically so resis-tant to change. In view of the fact that we have entered the winter and perhaps the last season of our species. As de-scribed so definitively by Robert Lawlor in "The Geometry at the End of Time". Yet Spring is near and with it comes New Light and a fresh perspective to help raise the number 1 to the magnitude of its worthy glory! The Glory deserved of the Progenitor of all Numbers and the Children of Creation. I have spent a considerable amount of time breaking down and tearing apart the foundations of the platonic solids. And who knows, perhaps these concepts of straight lines were necessary for a species such as ours when we were still struggling in our infancy. Seeing that we live in a 3 Dimensional perspective, maybe this stage of our evolution requires 2 dimensional steps and the illusion of straight lines act like bumpers in a bowling alley until our species can handle the curve of a ball and the incredible dynamics that come with its spin. The Apostle Paul, in his first letter to the Corinthian Con-gregation in chapter 13, verse 11, encouraged the Children of Man to continue growing in their understanding with these words, “When I was a child, I used to speak as a child, think as a child and reason as a child; but now that I have become a Man, I have done away with the traits of a child. ” We have a responsibility to ourselves and to future genera-tions to clear away the stumbling blocks and to remove the training wheels so that we can advance to maturity. For a few millennia and perhaps even longer 1 x 1 = 1 has stood as the foundation stone for Man's short sighted con-cepts regarding linear constitutions which gave rise to our present system of mathematics. A system that has its base rooted upon the platonic solids. A system that has allowed Primitive Man to describe our Universe in stick figured ge-12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 76 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
ometry with only two dimensional perspectives. Yet, that's not all it has allowed. It has left Mankind vulnerable be-cause we didn't know the truth about how our currency is at risk of being miscalculated. While writing this section of the book I asked a colleague and studied mathematician to turn his well honed insights onto the subject of the square root of 2. We had only recently become acquainted over about a year's time and had spent a considerable amount of that time discussing the abandoned and untraveled corridors of the foundations of geometry and physics. In the course of our sometimes very heated debates we developed a mu-tual respect for one another which ultimately culminated in our becoming friends. He had been a staunch supporter of the square root of two being an irrational number and had stated numerous times in the past that, 'perhaps the craziness associated with its value was an inherent quality of the root of two'. Well, in all fairness, I asked him to point that sharpened sword of truth towards 1 x 1 = 1 and the root of 2. It took the entirety of the year for him to accept this challenge. I asked him to: “Question the foundation and the supports of everything that he believed in to see how strong his foundation could truly become. ” This was his response: “I suspect foul play, as the notes I composed are nowhere to be found. However, I took this opportunity to reposition my voice and the result pleases me! I hope this suits your needs my friend. :)” Just as the symbol 2 signifies the combination 1 + 1, the symbol for the square root of 2 satisfies the equa-tion x*x = 2. On a larger scale, the history of human numbers has largely been the journey from concrete reality into the imagination. Does this equation have a solution? Can it? We have repeated this cycle in our passage from the natural numbers to the integers, introducing negative integers; in our passage from natural numbers to pos-itive rationals, introducing ratios; in our passage from rational numbers to algebraic numbers, introducing roots; in our passage from algebraic numbers to real numbers, introducing limits; and in our passage from real numbers to complex numbers, introducing solu-tions to the equation x*x =-1. So great is history's momentum that we take these number systems as universal truth. Why? Indeed, any mathematician with an understanding of category theory and abstract algebra would object to the spe-cial emphasis placed on these particular systems. They are useful in some applications, and are fallaciously applied to all situations. If you would but open your Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 77 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
eyes, never again would they close. Society's strict ad-herence to the artifacts of number history strikes the enlightened as suspicious. How did the square root of two come about? We must journey to the time of Pythagoras and his followers. Flat geometry was beginning to sprout in Western minds. Of particular importance was the right triangle: a triangle with orthogonal edges, meet-ing at a “right angle”. What we now call the Pythag-orean theorem was being explored, and a simple sit-uation was laid out: consider a square with sides of unit length. If its sides are of length 1, then what is the length from one corner to an opposite corner? The Pythagorean theorem states that this diagonal D should satisfy the equation: D*D = (1*1) + (1*1) Here we see the genesis of defect, an assumption that would be ignored for thousands of years. In trying to solve this equation to find the value of D, the value of 1*1 was taken to be 1. But what of the unit that I previ-ously called “length”? The products of a unit length with another unit length must have units of area. A choice was made, and then taken to be arbitrary. This could not be further from the Truth. What happened here? It would help us to use mod-ern language. Credit should be given to the great Her-mann Grassmann. This man worked to clarify the as-sumptions and language of the physicist of his day. By his contemplations, multilinear algebra arose. In laying the foundations for this formal system, he was the first to contrast the algebra of linear Spaces and so also the first to suggest nonlinear algebra! Today, Grassmann's work is called geometric algebra. It has become a mainstay in modern physical theories, and only recently have people begun moving outside of the boundaries exposed by this brilliant soul. Grass-mann recognized that vectors cannot be multiplied naturally or canonically. A choice must be made to equip a vector Space with the structure of an algebra. Had the Pythagoreans accessed this perspective, they would have realized that 1 length may be an area of any chosen unit! Sure, setting this product to be 1 unit of area seems natural, but this is only because we have grown ac-customed to this convention. Studying the universal properties of Grassmann algebras, alternating alge-bras, and Clifford algebras-these all being categorical 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 78 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
quotients of freely generated tensor algebras-illumi-nates the student and reveals the great deception that we have allowed ourselves to slip into. Whether this series of events was orchestrated or ma-lignant is for others to determine, but I can speak with certainty on the status of our numeral and coordinate algebras. They are curious artifacts, and we are ants toying with scraps of the Logos. If the square root of two satisfies: x² = x*x = 2 then our arithmetic conventions allow us to simply write it as: 2(1/2). In this way: (2(1/2))2 = 2(1/2)*2 = 2(2/2) = 21 = 2 Thus: (2(1/2))3 = 2(3/2) = 2(1+(1/2)) = 2*2(1/2) The cube of the square root of 2 is equal to twice the square root of two. That is to say, the square root of two is also a solution to the equation: x³ = x+x = 2 *x. Such equations are unnatural, and our investigations of the Cosmos will dissipate so long as we project this archaic system upon it. Finally, my fellow mindless puppets, (and believe you me, I say that with great compassion, for I am with you and have been with you from the beginning), we have reached the bonus round and boy do I have a doozie for you! I said that our entire world economy was rooted in a math-ematically flawed foundation of 1 x 1 = 1, which I believe was successfully demonstrated in the opening pages of this book. I also stated that there was a "loose thread" which was capable of unraveling the very ground rules of math-ematics. One of those ground rules was the Euclidean 2d perception of reality. Another is Academia's beloved "Platonic Solids". As pre-viously stated there is a very real and immediate danger that this loose thread, if pulled, could cause the collapse of our global economic infrastructure and possibly bring the entire world of science and mathematics as we know it to an ugly and violent end. If you don't believe me and you think that this is all just a Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 79 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
THE WORLD'S DEPAR TURE FROM THE GOLD STANDARDmental exercise, go ahead to the next page. As Rafiki said in the Lion King: "It is Time!" It is time to finally face the truth and continue our neces-sary audit of our incredibly flawed monetary system that is linked to our misunderstanding of Universal Mathematics. 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard THE DISTANT PAST UNTIL 1971 1971 UNTIL THE PRESENT 80 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
THE WORLD'S DEPARTURE FROM THE GOLD STANDARD Money can't be multiplied, or can it? Money can be multi-plied by a number, but can it be multiplied by itself? If you can remember some of the earlier lessons from el-ementary school, we learned everything has a common denominator and can be reduced to its lowest terms. In the field of Mathematics this means that Everything has a relative numeric value and once that value has been de-termined, that substance or condition of Matter can then be made equal to All Other substances or conditions of Matter. In other words, if the monetary value can be made equal to the number it's being multiplied by, and you can successfully eliminate any and all distinguishable differ-ences between the currency and the integer, then in all truth, money can be multiplied. We are essentially multiplying one electronically generat-ed number by another electronically generated number, in theory. This process of equalizing differing values is one of the very first lessons we are taught regarding fractions. You must first make the things being multiplied or divid-ed, dimensionally equal? Yet, in order to do so you must do the work necessary to convert them. This process of conversion is when we align the things that you are trying to manipulate. We have to first place the values in relative dimensional order, from that point forward the number being multiplied or divided can then be manipulated at will. For instance, in order to multiply 1/5 times 3/10 either the 1/5 fraction has to be converted to the dimension of the 3/10 or vice versa. The moment that you've successfully completed the con-version both fractions become fair game and can be multi-plied or divided by each other. This is also true concerning money or currency. You might say that paper money or currency isn't just a col-lection of imaginary numbers though, nor is it a set of virtual arbitrary fractions. One might define money as being a convenient representation of some inconvenient real physical asset. Therefore, how can one multiply a real physical asset? To be perfectly honest with you, our dollar is not linked to a real physical asset. Our paper money isn't a convenient representation of anything except that of a very vivid imagination because our currency is no more valuable than the paper that it is printed upon. Try to comprehend this simple but irrefutable fact; ever since the U. S. dollar was taken off the Gold Standard it has effectively been based upon a fiat monetary system, a THE WORLD'S DEPARTURE FROM THE GOLD STANDARD Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 81 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
virtual system, an arbitrary system with imaginary values. The dollar is no longer anchored to a real and specific as-set. Therefore, there aren't any real safeguards to prevent financial institutions from manipulating the currency that is held within its virtual safes or anything preventing per-verted governments from over printing money which is essentially the art of multiplying money. When the dollar was based upon the GS (Gold Standard) it was relatively impossible to multiply money. I mean, you couldn't just wave your hand and magically cause the gold in your reserves or precious metals that the currency rep-resented to instantly increase in number. The GS helped to regulate the growth of the economy because in order for the economy to grow the gold supply at the reserves or banks had to likewise grow and unfortunately, gold mines couldn't produce enough gold to satisfy Man's insatiable greed. It also served in the capacity of a gate keeper re-garding inflation because the value of the dollar was root-ed in a solid and trustworthy foundation and couldn't bal-loon out of control. Nevertheless, in 1933 when Franklin D. Roosevelt closed down the U. S. banks and then re opened them 10 days later, the financial world would never be the same. He issued a mandate stating that all US citizens should turn in their gold and gold certificates to the treasury department if they wanted to receive a favorable exchange rate for their value to be paid out in US dollars. From the 350,000,000 dollars worth of gold that was collected from that govern-ment decree, Fort Knox was founded. From that moment onward, the United States Government began its slow but steady departure from the Gold Standard. By 1971 when President Nixon signed the Executive Order officially tak-ing the US off the Gold Standard the rest of the world would soon follow and before long all of their respective currencies became based upon a virtual monetary system commonly referred to as a "Fiat" system. An electronically fluctuating system that is represented by 0's and 1's as part of a binary program. A potential money laundering pro-gram ensued that has more in common with a Play Station or a Game Boy than Fort Knox because its value exists only within the imaginary walls of a computer generated pro-gram. Now instead of the dollar being tied to a specified quantity of gold, silver or other precious metal the value of a dollar is based upon fluctuations of confidence that exists within the financial markets as prescribed and set by an "Unelect-ed Central Banking Committee. " This is why the financial world is so vulnerable to the possibility of a dollar being multiplied in pennies, nickels, dimes or in quarters where each one of these currencies gives a completely different value for the same calculation of a dollar times a dollar. Remember, "EVERYTHING has a common denominator and can be reduced to its lowest term. " So, now that there is literally no difference whatsoever be-12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 82 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
tween the dollar or the integers that it is being multiplied by, there is nothing to prevent a dollar from being mul-tiplied by another dollar. When the world governments ceased to base their currencies upon hard assets, at that moment all currency became nothing more than virtual digital markers which represent nothing within the real world. These digital markers can now be multiplied and divided in the same like manner that one multiplies or divides any other imaginary number that exists within a computer generated program. In all truth, this problem was brought up over 160 years ago by Richard Dover Stater who also provided a SOLUTION which was never incorporated. And it could have helped us avoid this quagmire that we find ourselves in today. From 1855: THE DECIMAL SYSTEM, AS A WHOLE. DOVER STATTER Reference Link THE DECIMAL SYSTEM, AS A WHOLE, IN ITS RELATION TO TIME, MEASURE, WEIGHT, CAPACITY AND MONEY, IN UNISON WITH EACH OTHER THE author of this little pamphlet wrote a letter on the Decimal System on the 1st of November, 1855, to the ed-itor of the Liverpool Albion, which was inserted in that paper on the 19th of the same month, the substance of which is the base of the present. The Decimal System has been considered lately in re-lation to money matters solely, without any other con-templation what ever, some beginning with the present sovereign, and others again with the present penny, as a base for a decimal system. Now, neither of these, as we shall presently see, has a definite base for a system to rest upon; in fact, a base so fixed would mean anything or nothing, and we might as well fix a base from a piece of coal or a lump of anything for a standard, as the present sovereign or penny piece. As there are other transactions in daily use equally as important as money, even commercially speaking, it will be as well to contemplate the question as a whole system, in its relation to Time, Measure, Weight, Capacity, and Money, and all, if possible, to be in unison with each oth-er. This is what we want, then-a base for a decimal system in relation to one commodity, money; but also in relation to the daily trans actions, to time, weight, measure, capac-ity, and money, all in unison with each other ; and this is far more preferable than the absurd one of beginning a system from a base that has no meaning. Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 83 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
X ? =Since the penny is no longer based upon the hard asset of gold and is now based upon an imaginary value that is equal to a virtual value of the integers or numbers then it fol-lows: X =According to the rules of current Mathematics and Multiplication X = According to the Laws of Universal Mathematics According to a calculator a penny times a penny 0. 01 x 0. 01 = 0. 0001 This is 1/1000 of a US Dollar. Is this the valuation given to us by the banks when we deposit our money? And is this how our interest is calculated? X /gid00066 /gid00024/gid00016/gid00014/gid00012 /gid00021 /gid00018/gid00025 /gid00022 /gid00019% /gid00026 /gid00023 /gid00020/gid00087 /gid00017 /gid000150. 0001 Does a penny times a penny equal one penny based upon the rules of multiplication? Or does a penny times a penny equal 0. 0001 based upon our current decimal system. A val-ue so small that there isn't even a currency circulated for that amount by the US Department of Treasury. All calculations shown here are reasonable forms of multiplication but which one remains consistent with Observed Universal Phenomena? How would you like your money calculated?Now that I've explained one way that money can be multiplied and some historical examples, would you like to see what could be possibly taking place behind the hidden walls of the financial world? 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 84 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
A nickel times a nickel equals what? A nickel is equivalent to five pennies. Then a nickel times a nickel should also equal a quarter. A dime times a dime should be equivalent to 10 pennies times 10 pennies 10 pennies times 10 pennies is equivalent to 100 pennies which is equal to a dollar But a dime times a dime equals a penny according to a calculator... 0. 10 x 0. 10 = 0. 01 How would you like your money calculated? How would you like your money calculated? X X X XXX X? ? 25 = = = = === = = X /gid00066 /gid00024/gid00016/gid00014/gid00012 /gid00021 /gid00018/gid00025 /gid00022 /gid00019% /gid00026 /gid00023 /gid00020/gid00087 /gid00017 /gid00015 /gid00066 /gid00024/gid00016/gid00014/gid00012 /gid00021 /gid00018/gid00025 /gid00022 /gid00019% /gid00026 /gid00023 /gid00020/gid00087 /gid00017 /gid000150. 0025 0. 01A nickel times a nickel according to the calculator is (. 05 X. 05=. 0025) Again a value so small that there is not a currency circulated to represent it. 100 Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 85 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
THE PLAIN AND SIMPLE TRUTH As you can clearly see, for all of our unfortunate lives, and for most of Mankind's chaotic existence upon this planet under the false banner of a civilized society we've been, (If I may borrow a phrase or two from the legendary civil rights leader, Malcolm X), we've been misled, bamboozled, we've been had, hood winked, conned, taken advantage of, taken for a ride around the proverbial block, taken to the cleaners and we've been taken to the bank, literally! The British just so happen to have a phrase that they use to describe someone who is short sighted and a tad bit slow when it comes to finances. They call it being " Penny wise and Pound foolish. " Unfortunately, that describes 99. 9% of the past and present populations of the world. Nevertheless, the Proverbial "Buck Stops Here!" All pun intended. X X X ORX= = =? /gid00066 /gid00024/gid00016/gid00014/gid00012 /gid00021 /gid00018/gid00025 /gid00022 /gid00019% /gid00026 /gid00023 /gid00020/gid00087 /gid00017 /gid000150. 0625What is a quarter times a quarter? A quarter is equal to 25 pennies. Therefore a quarter times a quarter equals 25 pennies times 25 pennies, which equals 625 pennies which is. $6. 25 USD. Yet a quarter times a quarter according to the calculator is. 0625. (. 25 X. 25 =. 0625)25 How would you like your money calculated??? Lorem ipsuma 8 12345678 1234567b c d e f g h Lorem ipsuma b c d e f g h Lorem ipsuma 8 12345678 1234567b c d e f g h Lorem ipsuma b c d e f g h 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 86 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
Daniel 2:31-35 31 “You, O king, were watching, and you saw an immense image. That image, which was huge and extremely bright, was standing in front of you, and its appearance was terrifying. 32 The head of that image was of fine gold, its chest and its arms were of silver, its abdomen and its thighs were of copper, 33 its legs were of iron, and its feet were partly of iron and partly of clay. 34 You looked on until a stone was cut out, not by hands, and it struck the image on its feet of iron and of clay and crushed them. 35 At that time the iron, the clay, the copper, the silver, and the gold were, all togeth-er, crushed and became like the chaff from the summer threshing floor, and the wind carried them away so that not a trace of them could be found. But the stone that struck the image became a large mountain, and it filled the whole earth. Source Credit: Watchtower Me speaking at the Oxford Union &"War" from "Shine through it" Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 87 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
John 16:12,13 12 “I still have many things to say to you, but you are not able to bear them now. 13 However, when that one comes, the spirit of the truth, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak of his own initiative, but what he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things to come. The TRUTH Will Set you Free Truth: (noun) 1. a transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality. 2. that which is Irrefutable and in accordance with fact or reality. COMMON SENSE AND MANKIND'S HASTENED DEPARTURE FROM IT In the process of writing this book I've had the pleasure of conversing with literally thousands of people from virtual-ly every corner of this world and from almost every walk of life. Categorically, 9 out of 10 persons when asked the ques-tion, "What's a dollar times a dollar?" Their initial centers of cognitive thought, the place that is ruled by common sense answers the question with a shy confidence of, "Two!" Then there's always a slight pause as the confidence in their overall common senses begins to fade because we were taught to ignore what is common to us. At that point we make a desperate attempt to correct our mental mathe-matics, searching the visual cortices of the brain hoping to find a mental picture of the problem written upon a chalk board, or table, or in a publication of some kind, search-ing desperately out of fear that we could possibly answer a question this basic, wrong. You can almost hear their heart rate surge as they search for the correct answer. Then, with a little less certainty they seemingly whisper: 12 = 2 Terrence Da Shon Howard 88 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
"Yeah uh... 2. " "Right?" "No, its 1 ?" "Isn't it?" "Its 1 ?" Then they abandon the challenge with, "I don't really know math. " How sad? For this question should be the simplest of questions. The correct answer should roll off the tongue with certainty and authority, not insecurity and self loath-ing. When you first read the cover of this book, do you recall how your mind processed the initial question? Can you re-call the conundrum that this simple question raised within your own mind? If the question was, "What is 1 x 1 ?" The mind could have easily regurgitate the indoctrinated answer that's been drilled into our subconscious through-out the course of our lives and it would have sputtered out the prerecorded answer of "1 ". Because this question regarding "What is 1 x 1" means noth-ing to you, it lacks a physical relation to you or your life because mostly it is an imaginary calculation, but when a monetary value is attached to it, the entire game changes. We begin to question the end result. Instantly, the answer that we give matters. It transforms the question from a non-existent and irrelevant state, into an immediately rel-evant and almost defensive material state because cash/ currency is how most of us sustain our existence. Remember, that knee jerk reaction that we spoke about, that someone initially experiences when asked a question concerning the resources that sustain their existence? Well, Malcolm Gladwell referred to this reaction in his book "Blink" as a 'blink' moment. That, 'gut' feeling that screams from within telling you that, "Something smells a bit fishy. " That instinctual survival response that has been sharpened and honed by hundreds of millions of years of a dramatic life and death saga. A story of untold misery, heartache and unbelievable triumph that has shaped the selfish gene. Insuring its survival over thousands of millen-nia. A determined gene whose will shall outlive our present human form of concentrated conditioned states of Matter and will ultimately fulfill its Universal purpose of bringing All Things into balance. You are the present physical man-ifestation of that spirit like force, that gene who continues to live and has managed to do so because of the uncom-promising Nature that resides in that mental state we call our sixth sense. A State of Being that cannot be bullied by the dogma of consistent messaging, because this mental Terrence Da Shon Howard1 x 1 = 2 89 | OTOET_PREVIEW_061_JANUARY_11_2020.pdf |
End of preview. Expand
in Dataset Viewer.
README.md exists but content is empty.
Use the Edit dataset card button to edit it.
- Downloads last month
- 0