[MAVR (OP)]

It took almost 30 years to place description of the BOOK with its Seven Seals on 25 pgs (A4) inside the pdf file [in Russian] via link:

Enjoy the product of a mathematician mind.

[Colin2B]

This not a book publishing site.
If you have a new theory to discuss then please do so I’m sure someone will respond.

[MAVR (OP)]

I see.
So the link on the file with the new theory is here:
so as I'm not allowed to place external links here...
There are enough photos and schemes to get main idea without deep investigation.

[puppypower]

In this and other discussion forum sites your better off presenting your summary and basic ideas directly, to help create discussion and interest. Having to read a thesis, first, is too much work since most people are here casually. From this basic opening discussion some forums members and guests will follow your link to learn more. It is part of the protocol.

I am not sure of your approach to the seven seals, but I also attempted to solve this mystery of the bible. The approach I took was based on the warning, "not to take away or add anything or curses would come to you".

As I thought about it, the only way to do that would be to highlight the entire bible for all its prophesy quotes, both New and Old Testament, like a textbook. I would then need to use just these quotes; none missing, like they were pieces to a zig saw puzzle. The completed puzzle should be a type of story that had been spread out in disguise.  The warning to me, was not a warning, but a hint.

I did just that. I highlighted a King James version of the Bible, that was given to me. Then I hired a girl to type these quotes into my old floppy disk computer; pre-Microsoft.  I printed out two versions, cut up one with scissors, and then spread all the quotes all over dining room floor. Little by little, I assembled the puzzle using the four horsemen as the border/center. Each horseman represented an act in the four act drama; symbolism. The seven seals appear in the last acts.

Your experimental approach as a mathematician may be a good place to begin. I was a development engineer at the time, so my approach was more based on hunch then logic. Math may be logic first, which can be interesting.

[Bored chemist]

Or you could do the same thing with War and Peace.

Could a passing Mod please move this to "that can't be true" please?

[Colin2B]

I see.
So the link on the file with the new theory is here:
so as I'm not allowed to place external links here...
There are enough photos and schemes to get main idea without deep investigation.

If the links are to a site where this theory has already been published then it’s against the rules you signed up to to bring that theory here.
The book is in Russian which no one here will read and respond to even if you were allowed to publish it.

Analysis of mythical texts are unlikely to be of interest here.

If you want to discuss your mathematical approach to the analysis someone might show interest.

[MAVR (OP)]

Big Pardon: it's too early to discuss new theory without proper translation.
Pls., wait till it'll be done. Nevertheless anyone who wish to get the original file is welcome to write me via the forum (or please don’t try to circumvent the no link rule).

[puppypower]

Over the centuries many people have attempted to solve the mystery of Revelations. The two  common approaches are to equate these things to their own times or to the past. But these two basic approaches do not deal with all the symbolism, such as the coming of Faithful and True. That has not occurred yet.

The mystery of Revelations, in general appears to be a story of the transformation of humanity. On the surface, it appears to occur through a roller coaster ride of world wide downs and ups until the wicked are weeded out; natural/divine selection. However, for most who try to solve the mystery,  things around them in the world, remain the same and all the lasting positive changes expected never occurs. WWII was the mother of all wars but after it was over, we still have boneheads in charge. There was no lasting change in humanity beyond maybe one generation.

What I learned from my research with the brain, inner self, and consciousness, and then attempting the Revelation puzzle, was this divine drama, although traditionally externalized as an external set of world events, really appears to have been designed for an internal transformation of the individual.

You become the world in a microcosm, with various parts of you; subroutines, both conscious and unconscious, becoming the many characters that lead you through the transformation. It could be called a self induced mystical psychosis, but with a sense of direction as defined by the symbols and subroutines of transformation; update of the brain's operating system. The puzzle building was not easy and the obsession, constant focus and extrapolation, primes the pump and then triggers command lines that start the brain's gears. 

The beginning of the drama; act 1, is quite positive and can lure you in with self righteous hope and expectation. I enjoyed that part, since it was very hopeful and triggers lots of positive imagination. Once the ego is in, things get darker and darker; the ego evolves, until the drama reaches a cross roads where one has to make a choice. The choice I made was to sacrificed my new found strength and let the inner self run the transformation in ways I did not anticipate.

This choice to sacrifice control seems counter intuitive; blessed are the meek, but my ego, although very strong by this point, with certain mystical abilities, was about to head down the cliff into the darkness; ends justify the means. The choice to sacrifice and less go, makes you very vulnerable both outside; bad karma, and to the inner darkness that separates and externalizes from you. It appears connected to the symbolism of Satan thrown from heaven. What had been condoned was no longer that way. To continue was to follow the wrong example. What do you do but stop and wait and your own inner Satan subroutine externalizes; created by knowledge of good and evil; law.

I am not sure if this is the same for all, but for me the final act of the play with its many plagues, giant earthquake, etc., was connected to type of type of memory wash and purge. It was not people who died by each plague, but memory that was once thought to be good; early glory days  was seen as stained and tarnished. It had fed into the inner opposition. In the end, most of my memory was either erased or place in archive. My ego was eventually reintroduced, but as a blank slate. I was self aware as being me, but I was a stranger in paradise. It was nice and very peaceful, not being able to remember, with me; my inner essence still there, with a new view real time view on life; paradise.

The problem that arose after a few weeks was, although I had been transformed, the world around me was the same. It was hard to remain in this paradise state, since I was the only one there, and the mass mind was starting to encroach on my small natural space. I eventually felt that I needed to leave and try to build a bridge back, while doing my best to avoid going backwards to where I had been, since that same mass mind was still there; inner opposition.

Many of my ideas are unique, since I had to develop them from scratch, to fill in my blank memory. I had a strong science education, but most of that memory was archived, but my ingenuity was fine. I had to work with unknown materials that had no data, just to get started. I would work in a helical spiral from the start of the universe, to the present, trying to integrate all the connected steps of physical and biological evolution with my unknown materials. Then I would start again and evolve my ideas. Little by little the spiral evolution process seemed to unpack some of my archived science memory, so I could build a better bridge each pass; blend of both worlds. 

At this point in time paradise is a fond memory from the past. However, I am able to maintain my center by a simple life. Now I jump around the spiral since each area can be developed on its own since it is still all connected using science materials and 3-D logic.

[Bored chemist]

Many of my ideas are unique

Because nobody else believes them.

[MAVR (OP)]

The Book is rolled in S manner. We see its symbol (Ying-Yang) in many places but can't understand that from such perspective we are not allowed to read its text.

[MAVR (OP)]

That's a pity that human can see the BOOK from the side.
7 Seals are also unique. To break all it I had to fight with the Satan (666), change knowledge with Lucifer (661), enter the house of the Demiurge Jealous (333&328). I was lucky to be supported by the God of the galaxy (222).

[MAVR (OP)]

By the way I've got the best education in former USSR: I graduated an elite group of the MPTI (Moscow Physical Technical Institute) supervised by former Rector Academician O.M.Belotsercovsky. After some of my adventures I was invited to serve in the department 10003 (military parapsychology) of the main intelligence agency of the general staff of Rus Federation.

[Origin]

That's a pity that human can see the BOOK from the side.

Personally I am glad you can see books from the side, otherwise depending on a books orientation it could be invisible.  I have enough trouble loosing things as it is.

To break all it I had to fight with the Satan (666)

In a fight like that are there a clear set of rules or is it more like a street fight?  And if there are rules, can you trust Satan to follow the rules?

change knowledge with Lucifer (661)

Was that a classroom type setting or was it more like a late night loaded dorm setting?

I was lucky to be supported by the God of the galaxy (222)

I'll say!!  Think if you got the God of Galaxy IC 3104 (that guy's a goof!), the God of galaxy 222 has to be way better than him.

[MAVR (OP)]

3. Была ли это обстановка типа классной комнаты или это больше походило на обстановку загруженного допоздна общежития?
4. Я скажу!! Подумайте, что если у вас есть Бог Галактики IC 3104 (этот парень-дурак!), то Бог галактики 222 должен быть намного лучше его.

3. With Herr Lucifer I met 25th of December 2012. I also waited when a maian portal would be opened. After it did not happen I realised that I did not investigate the nature of Evil. So I wished to meet with the Lucifer. During night dream it gave me coordinates of its place. I visited him next day and had fruitful session (a report of it I sent to Vatican and they castled the two last Popes).
Lucifer is chained to a rock in dark place (on the bottom of area of Lower Worlds). The idea of parallel worlds is proved gradually with opening of 7 Seals. Actually humans are able to travel in the Universe by using the remote control which is the BOOK7Seals. Next spring (March 2013) I visited a ||world from the area of Upper Worlds. In a town which I appeared were many big libraries (one on each street) and one huge in the center.
PS During meeting with Lucifer I was lucky to be with unique knowledge (during almost 10 years I calculated the code of Eden; that time it was the third attempt of its creation). He taught me his science (hierarchy of devils and demons) I gave him an address code of the Eden. It was enough (even in addition he freed 15 millions(!) of his slaves).
4. Do not joke of the God of the galaxy. Soon He will appear on the Earth in His own Temple.

[Bored chemist]

By the way I've got the best education in former USSR

And yet you didn't learn to recognise nonsense when you saw it.

After some of my adventures I was invited to serve in the department 10003 (military parapsychology) of the main intelligence agency of the general staff of Rus Federation.

How nice for you.
Did they do research on stuff like this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Men_Who_Stare_at_Goats

Or did they realise it was silly?

That's a pity that human can see the BOOK from the side.
7 Seals are also unique. To break all it I had to fight with the Satan (666), change knowledge with Lucifer (661), enter the house of the Demiurge Jealous (333&328). I was lucky to be supported by the God of the galaxy (222).

Oh look!
Numerology.

We don't do pseudoscience here so you might as well give up.

[The Spoon]

Why is this religious nonsense on a science forum?

[puppypower]

Why is this religious nonsense on a science forum?

The human brain and the phenomena that is generates, called consciousness, is a valid area of science investigation. The problem is consciousness cannot be investigated properly by doing it  exclusively in the third person, as deemed by the philosophy of science. 

Consciousness is self awareness. It can sense things both externally and internally; self, with the internal things not clear cut, using third person tools with insufficient resolution. I can become aware of my dreams, however no third person tools can see these in the same detail as my consciousness. This topic is connected to the higher resolution aspects of consciousness and first hand experiences from inside the brain's operating system.

An analogy for this contrast of styles are computers and robots. These have both hardware and software. You cannot find glitches in the software, by looking at hardware alone. This is what science tries to do, based on the philosophy of science; third person only. To find these glitches we  need to go inside the brain's "software, to use a term lightly, and look at the coding. This side of the  coin is not about hardware. 

Science does not have a consensus definition for consciousness, since a hardware approach, alone, cannot define consciousness in a way to form a consensus. The philosophy of science reached a wall when it started to investigate consciousness. The sciences that deal with this are called soft science since they need to take liberties with the strict philosophy that has met it mach and cannot go any further. 

The ancient people appear to have been better at the software approach. They had a more ethereal view of consciousness; spirit and soul. However they knew very little about the hardware of the brain. Their approach also fell short of the target. The solution to the bottleneck is you need both the software approach and the hardware approach to address one of the last frontiers of science. All scientist uses their consciousness to practice their craft. If that has glitches in the software, is the third person science still correct? We will never know using only a pure third person hardware approach.

Let me give you an example. We live in a quantum world. Quanta are discrete states with gaps between states. Yet statistical modeling gives finite odds to all things; continuous functions,  thereby saying the gaps are not gaps; contradicts the nature of quanta. That glitch permeates much gf science and leads to false positives that often become the foundation of theory. If a group all has same glitch in they're operating system, does that make it right; collective perception?

A hardware approach will not allow us to know. This will requires a software approach.

[Bored chemist]

The human brain and the phenomena that is generates, called consciousness, is a valid area of science investigation. The problem is consciousness cannot be investigated properly by doing it  exclusively in the third person, as deemed by the philosophy of science. 

Consciousness is self awareness and can sense things both externally and internally, with the internal things not clear using third person tools with insufficient resolution. I can become aware of have dreams but no third tools can see these in the same detail as my consciousness. This topic is connected to higher resolution aspects of consciousness and first hand experience from inside the brain's operating system.

An analogy for this contrast of styles are computers and robots. These have both hardware and software. You cannot find glitches in the software, by looking at hardware alone. This is what science tries to do, based on the philosophy of science; third person only. To find these glitches we  need to go inside the brain's "software, to use a term lightly, and look at the coding. This side of the  coin is not about hardware.

Science does not have a consensus definition for consciousness, since a hardware approach, alone, cannot define consciousness in a way to form a consensus. The philosophy of science reached a wall when it started to investigate consciousness. The sciences that deal with this are called soft science since they need to take liberties with the strict philosophy that has met it mach and cannot go any further. 

The ancient people appear to have been better at the software approach. They had a more ethereal view of consciousness; spirit and soul. However they knew very little about the hardware of the brain. Their approach also fell short of the target. The solution to the bottleneck is you need both the software approach and the hardware approach to address one of the last frontiers of science. All scientist uses their consciousness to practice their craft. If that has glitches in the software, is the third person science still correct? We will never know using only a pure third person hardware approach.

Let me give you an example. We live in a quantum world. Quanta are discrete states with gaps between states. Yet statistical modeling gives finite odds to all things; continuous functions,  thereby saying the gaps are not gaps; contradicts the nature of quanta. That glitch permeates much gf science and leads to false positives that often become the foundation of theory. If a group all has same glitch in they're operating system, does that make it right; collective perception?

A hardware approach will not allow us to know. This will requires a software approach.

Did you realise that, in no way, did that address the question

Why is this religious nonsense on a science forum?

[The Spoon]

Why is this religious nonsense on a science forum?

The human brain and the phenomena that is generates, called consciousness, is a valid area of science investigation. The problem is consciousness cannot be investigated properly by doing it  exclusively in the third person, as deemed by the philosophy of science. 

Consciousness is self awareness. It can sense things both externally and internally; self, with the internal things not clear cut, using third person tools with insufficient resolution. I can become aware of my dreams, however no third person tools can see these in the same detail as my consciousness. This topic is connected to the higher resolution aspects of consciousness and first hand experiences from inside the brain's operating system.

An analogy for this contrast of styles are computers and robots. These have both hardware and software. You cannot find glitches in the software, by looking at hardware alone. This is what science tries to do, based on the philosophy of science; third person only. To find these glitches we  need to go inside the brain's "software, to use a term lightly, and look at the coding. This side of the  coin is not about hardware. 

Science does not have a consensus definition for consciousness, since a hardware approach, alone, cannot define consciousness in a way to form a consensus. The philosophy of science reached a wall when it started to investigate consciousness. The sciences that deal with this are called soft science since they need to take liberties with the strict philosophy that has met it mach and cannot go any further. 

The ancient people appear to have been better at the software approach. They had a more ethereal view of consciousness; spirit and soul. However they knew very little about the hardware of the brain. Their approach also fell short of the target. The solution to the bottleneck is you need both the software approach and the hardware approach to address one of the last frontiers of science. All scientist uses their consciousness to practice their craft. If that has glitches in the software, is the third person science still correct? We will never know using only a pure third person hardware approach.

Let me give you an example. We live in a quantum world. Quanta are discrete states with gaps between states. Yet statistical modeling gives finite odds to all things; continuous functions,  thereby saying the gaps are not gaps; contradicts the nature of quanta. That glitch permeates much gf science and leads to false positives that often become the foundation of theory. If a group all has same glitch in they're operating system, does that make it right; collective perception?

A hardware approach will not allow us to know. This will requires a software approach.

So once again you have posted overly wordy nonsense that has a veneer of science phraseology  but amounts to to little more than somebody bulshitting and crucially  does not remotely  address the point. Why post such utter crap?

[puppypower]

Let me reiterate a point I made near the end of my last post. We live in a quantum world. In a quantum world things exist in discrete states/packets with gaps between. The gaps can be crossed into a new state in zero time. These states, separated by gaps, are called quanta.

One of the mass delusions of science is connected to the overuse of statistical modeling. The reason is statistical modeling denies the nature of our quantum universe, since the gaps mean that not all options have odds. The gaps have zero probability. However, the statistical math draws a continuous probability distribution function, that does not exist in a quantum world. Even the gaps are given finite odds, which can be proven false by science. The quantum statistical curve would be a broken line.

Let me give a good example; the Covid virus. In a quantum world, some of us will get it, but since there are also gaps in this quantum world, there are those who will not get it. Yet, the delusion of statistics treats even the gaps as being vulnerable, thereby wanting 100% vaccination. That is conclusion is not scientifically based within a quantum universe.  This is voodoo science. Why is this still around? Why do think politicians love statistics? It allows them to lie, since even the unlikely fibs are given finite odds, so they can promise the moon in the quantum gaps.

Statistics was first developed, before quantum theory, at a time when science believed in continuous functions. On a positive note, statistics appears to have anticipated the gaps that quantum theory would reveal decades later. However, after quantum theory showed the gaps, statistics never fully left the world of continuous functions. It remained an approximation of a quantum world, with Murphy and others spirits of mischief able to live in the gaps overlay of continuos functions. It is part pre-quantum and part post mystical.

Quantum science has shown these gaps are empty, and they have zero odds. Yet, that retro cult of spirits in the gaps; which give finite odds to the gaps, is still a large part of what is called valid science. Science needs to police itself better and not be hypocrites. I am scientist and I left that retro place decades ago.

This is why studying the brain's operating system is useful to science. If you guys are honest with yourself and your quantum science reasoning, this will be addressed. If you have a glitch, due to this spiritual training; spirits in the gaps, this discussion will avoided.