ideas; I may be mistaken:
I sent this to a Terri Schiavo website:
U R G E N T
Everything can be new.
(Please read this in full)
Physics has collapsed into a child's game. Medical problems may not be as difficult as you think.
Appeal: for all parties to be reconciled.
Analysis of so-called "persistant vegetative state":
A newspaper article says they are "awake but not aware".
Here are some ideas:
Sleepwalking: aware but not awake (that is why they do not bump into things).
Terri Schiavo: she is ALWAYS bumping into things (metaphorically speaking). The OPPOSITE of sleepwalking!
She is walk-sleeping!
Jesus Christ has risen: and so can Terri with her husband and her family.
"Speed of light constant" in physics = "comparison of comparison". Terri is effectively travelling at the speed of light (She is detecting fine structure).
She is more aware than you know.
I will try to follow up with the detailed physics of this but:
give her water.
give her food.
Both sides reconcile in her presence.
Play her reggae music (the pattern may help). Similarly show her surfing movie. A long train ride with a window seat may help.
Insulin: when stronger: an insulin shot may do wonders. If so; let her take over as soon as possible (so she decides when to have insulin and when to eat / drink).
There are sound reasons why these things are doorways that she might walk through with you.
I can explain.
U R G E N T
Further to my e-mail:
(by the way, I have no computer+internet am sending from a i-cafe)
Physics is logic. It is about information. By translating a problem into physics patterns, you can shed light on it apparently.
IDEAS (I may be wrong):
Terri is "travelling at light speed" in my physics-mapping approach.
The world keeps unwinding.
Length contraction: "water" becomes "wata" (shortened pronounciation).
Time dilation: "wata" becomes drawn out: "waaaa taaaa".
Dropping the "t": make the "t" sound and you get a tendency for moisture to form:
by dropping the "t" this may indicate "I am thirsty".
But why say "ahh" "waaa"?
Reminds me of a book title: "A Soprano on her head".
It comes out backwards.
This is related to a so-called disability called "dislexia".
In order to get a message across she assumes it needs to be inverted (like a refracting telescope: needs an inverter for "earth viewing".) To get common ground (mutual value for the speed of light)(the physicists may not understand what I am doing) need a reflector (a mirror)(a correcting prism)(the Michelson-Morley experiment does this via phase considering).
So "waaa taaa" becomes "aahh waaa".
A message in a bottle.
Terri put the correcting prism in there because she is AWAKE!
(My ideas are open to debate)
Viewing the tapes: try play them backwards fast: you might be surprised!
Talking to Terri:
Try: say each word with gaps between them to a tape recorder (not digital).
Play it backwards and re-record it. Then record each backwards word, still backwards, in the ordinary sequence. Then play the tape to Terri very fast.
From a physics perspective it is possible she will understand you (although you might not be able to make sense of such a tape).
Terri may be like a slalom skier: twice. She may need metaphorical insulin: "insulation line": borders.
More: re quarks:
To measure: need "a" and "b" (a measurer and a thing to be measured).
To say "how much" need ratio:
a/2; with b.
three roles: a1,a2,b
Conserve this: get six roles in conservation-space (2 x 3 roles)(they all can swap: so like quakes in that "earth", that conservation land).
(Define conservation land: QED: calculate every way an event can happen: = logic: making the space most and the self-referent reference (time) least. Quantising the action as inaction (as a locally fixed background: local gauge invariance)(Higgs mechanism = gearing; supplies mass (uncertainty) by taking away energy (alternatives) so get inertia (static field)(parameters)(initial and final conditions).
If already have set parameters (feedback and feedforward) may get dark matter (hidden options when you change your perspective) and dark energy (hidden perspective when you change your options).
Six quarks for Mr. Mark.
A recent physics paper some people wrote: bring quarks close togther: get like a particle.
Quarks come from conservation of measurement: from "together apart" (room to move in measuring).
The quarks are already close togther if you continue to conserve them: (so pattern is beating: like a heart).
If have a pre-defined "close togther": have a "heart attack" (or agent "K": potassium: potential um: potential hesitation: -making loose connections here that need to be checked as information patterns).
So have fuzzy quarks with a bias. Now conservation has to take sides (as conservation also makes quarks fuzzy). Quarks fuzzy one way more than the other defines "a piece of something bigger" = a particle!
And "more one way than the other" = fertile.
Add "heart" + "heart attack" + fertility GET "a particle particle" = a reconciliation room = a confession box = mutual respect.
A sleep that is awake!
Easy physics: see the DVD "The Cat In The Hat"; see "the cat's dance" in "special features menu".
The information patterns in the dance match physics as follows:
1. The cat's groove: QED
2. The drop step: QCD
3. Cross togther: re-normalisation or Dr. Stafford's physics paper "Foundations Of Physical Reality".
4. The cat's slide: re-normalisation groups or Chris Langan's "Cognitive Theoretic Model Of The Universe"and John Cramer's "transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics".
5. The pony ride: Mark McCutcheon "the Final Theory" (mirror of Dr. Stafford's approach I think)Possibly string theory (number lines in disguise)
6. Step hop: g-factor (quantum ether dynamics)(also re-normalisation but with bells and whistles (Bell inequalities?)
7. The knee clap: maybe related to quantum inflo; possibly loop quantum gravity (set theory?)
8. Cross step finale: (peace at last) going places: x-factor: working togther for a common goal.
Physicists look with mathematics. And they see it looking back (strings: number lines)(branes: bases)(d-branes: relative bases)(p-branes: chosen base coupling)(M-theory: imaginary maths?)(F-theory: imaginary functions?)
Just some ideas for debate.