From Stan Romanek

12-30-3

 

Jeff

 

You and your webmaster have done a fine job presenting my material, looks good! I've noticed that it is getting a lot of attention. I think it might be a good idea to let everyone know I am Very Dyslexic and, unfortunately, I have been so stricken all of my life. Like it or not, I have only a 5th grade math competency level and have no idea what any of these equations or drawings mean. None. The equations everyone is viewing really did come from whoever or whatever is involved with my encounters/abductions, as crazy as that sounds. It is very frustrating for me, because I don't understand any of this stuff. I just am repeating the images they have burned into my memory. For whatever reason, I am led to believe - either by coincidence or design - that these equations are incomplete and someone out there has been given the other parts. Thanks, again, for your help.

 

Here are the equations. There are six altogether and they are numbered.

 

Stan Romanek

 

 

 

 

#1 This is the equation I was given during my first experience. It came out during the regression on July. 2002

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#2 This is the real date I was given during my first experience It also came out during the regression on July 2002 something important is suppose to happen?! It still looks unfinished to me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

#3 This is the date that was decided on after talking with Dana. Not right, either, but someone pointed out that that Saddam was captured around that date?

 

 

 

 

#4 We found this equation on September 3, 2002. Upon waking, my wife noticed alarm clock was upside down. Then we both noticed there were pens, pencils and paper in and around are bed. Lying next to me was this equation in my hand writing. I have no idea how I did it in total darkness and asleep...

 

 

 

 

 

#5 This something we found when we woke up January 5, 2003. It was drawn on the window, again in my handwriting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

#6 I drew this down after a vivid dream I had in October 10, 2003. No idea what it means. When I did this, I did it freehand and I have no idea how I drew it so straight. I tried to duplicate it again freehand and in no way can I get it this good...Strange.

 

 

 

 

Important Response To Romanek's Equation

 

From The Library

Editor@IPNcomm.org

IPN Communications

12-29-3

 

EQUATION 1:

 

Upper left corner is a "Matrix" with 2 external (Seed Key)inputs.

 

It is used to derive the next solution set. The equation for the solution set is "Mathematically Meaningless" but ... it reflects a geometric progression "Code" for selecting a desired condition from a random "Scatter Plot" indicated by the dots with one dot circled. This

is a "Similar" code set found in the Viterbi Algorithms used in modern cryptography. On each side of the vertical dashed line we see a "Mirrored Convergence" of two sets

of parabola indicating an "Asymptopic" condition (In phase by the direction of the arrows)the left condition being a frequency base of 2 while the right is a multiple of 2 (Frequency of 4 - which indicates "Harmonic" Coupling.

 

MEANING

 

Using the code set to select the desired item from the scatter plot - possibly an astral time demarcation (planet, star positions etc...), a coupling (Lenz effect) can occur a***** the date sensitive barrier represented by the vertical dashed line. The shortest distance between two points is a straight line = the circle with 2 points. This "Equivalency" reflects the curvature of Time and Space "Relative" to the distance between 2 known points (locations). The variance in baseline frequency on each side of the vertical dashed line indicates the "Asymptopic" concept of the barrier between 2 universes...Asymptopic being that "2 universes can approach but never "Converge".

Passage from one to the other is through the "Lentz like" Coupling (similar to that found in an ordinary transformer).

 

SUMMARY

 

This could be indicating a point of "Natural" convergence between our universe and another "Similar" universe. I believe the date and location are embedded in the "Code". It may be possible for a "Knowledgeable" intelligence to "Couple through" to our Time sphere at the specified location and date ... (in this concept, "Coupling Effect" is the heart and soul of "Worm Hole" theory).

 

Courtesy "The Library" in care of IPNcomm.org

 

 

Comment

 

From William Alek

To Richard Hoagland

12-29-3

I love mysteries, and this one appears to be a REAL gem.

 

What do you make of this: http://www.rense.com/general46/stan.htm

 

Now, what I see here is something rather intriguing. #1 seems to be referring to element 115, made popular by Bob Lazar. Perhaps this is some sort of transmutation of that element resulting in a current flow, or energy transduction process. The element is perhaps disassociating into electrons.

 

#4 seems quite interesting because you see the number 137 which can be found here: http://intalek.com/Index/Projects/SmartPAK/Research/Poliakov.PDF

 

137 is closely linked to Poliakov's Gravitonics, or Gravitational Electronics.

 

Going back to #4, I see a spacetime metric calculation which can be found in Hal Puthoff's paper: http://intalek.com/Index/Projects/SmartPAK/Research/jbis_final.pdf

 

On page 140 under Space-Time Metrics. Going back to #4, the metric equation appears to be coupling gravitons and vorticular motion, perhaps describing a motion through instellar media. #4 then correlates back into #1.

 

#5 is, of course, the classic gravitational inverse square law.

 

It is my speculation THEY, or THEM, are using Poliakov imaginary gravitational electron mass, and using it as some sort of Space Drive. Perhaps producing a spacetime curvature within the craft.

 

The whole KEY to this method is changing the flow of time - interesting...

Bill

The NUCLEAR VILLAGE Project

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/intalek

 

 

 

From: Richard Hoagland

To: William Alek

12-29-3

 

Subject: Stan Romanek's Mystery Equations

Bill,

I think "the Library's" interpretation is closer ....

 

These "equations" (who's 'Stan Romanek?!') clearly seem to be referring to an impending "hyperdimensional" Event!

 

Look at the last figure: that's a hypercube!!!

 

And the inset figures in it and around it, seem to refer to a particular configuration of the solar system ... when this "Event" will occur ....

 

Above, in his "equation 2," this is clearly another solar system configuration. Redundancy. But, it appears backwards to the one by the hypercube, below.

 

If this is the "date" when this "Event" is supposed to occur (which seems to involve an "interdimensional linkage" of some kind, as "the Library" suggests), then using some of the astronomical programs I have here, I MAY be able to arrive at the actual "date."

 

It actually looks familiar (from some of the work I was doing before I fell ill in November), like the solar system config in ... 2012!

 

I'll let you know what I come up with ....

 

RCH

 

 

From William Alek

To Richard Hoagland

12-29-3

 

Subject: Stan Romanek's Mystery Equations

Richard,

A friend of mine also picked that up in regards to #6. He gave this link: http://log24.com/log03/1010.htm

 

If I'm not kidding, I think that star pattern looks like one of the stars in Orion's belt (#1 & #6), perhaps related to the Giza Complex Analog in Egypt. And perhaps related to the Great Pyramid?

 

The key here is manipulating time to make the journey. Which appears to be the technical subject matter.

 

An interesting pattern in the Mystery Equations is the straight line and semi-circle as being equal. This suggests the curving of space between two points. Or, again, manipulating time. The idea here is that you don't directly manipulate space between two points, but the time it take to traverse space. You "simply" shorten the time.

 

#2 seems to be showing the position of the 7 planets?

 

#3 shows a fish in the sky, perhaps relating to constellation Pisces?

 

The solar system configuration in 2012? This is starting to get spooky??? I love spooky stuff...

 

I have no idea who Stan Romanek is? But, his scribblings are rather intriguing. I wonder who he's "connected" to?

 

Bill

 

 

Comment

From V

12-30-3

 

Here are some things about Equation 1:

 

The two things in the top left is helium; two protons, 2 netrons, with a ring of 2 electrons.

The arrow shows helium going into what would be element 115,

http://www.algebra.at/microobjects.htm. (note that it's 5f-14, not 56-14 as drawn).

 

The star that's circled in Orion's belt is Alnitak. See #6.

 

As for equation 5:

I can't quite see what's above the E in the equation.

 

The diagram is about something involving charges and magnetic fields. http://www.plus2physics.com/ecurrent_and_mgfield/study_material.asp?chapter=2

Basically the diagram would indicate that the current is flowing inside, or towards us.

 

#6:

There's a difference between the Orion in 1 and 6. The arm lengths are wrong in 1 or something. Also, the image in 6, if earth was where it was in the diagram, Orion would not look like that from Earth's position.

 

I said that star was Alnitak but the diagrams in the lower left seem to point towards two planets, around a star in the area, i don't have the name for the star, but its one of the ones in here: http://www.janis.or.jp/users/kitahara/sww/e-mitubosi.html

You see Alnitak as the lower left of the three main stars. Below it are the three minor stars from the diagram. So the medium bright star in the lower left of the three is the mystery star.

 

The symbols on the lower left do seem to show a shortening of space. But the first symbol is still showing a magnetic current, with the current coming out of the page and the force going to the right.

 

I'll get to checkin on the equations in 4 some time later, if you're interested.

 

 

Comment
From William Alek
12-30-3

 

Stan's Mystery Equations - Alnitak Star System

 

The star circled in Stan's Mystery Equations: http://www.winshop.com.au/annew/Alnitak.html

 

The ancient Jews sometimes called these stars "Nimrod", a biblical figure who was bound to the heavens for disobeying God, whence perhaps came the "Bands", or "Bonds", of Orion, which some say should be "Cords", or a "Girdle"; but the conception of Nimrod as "the mighty Hunter before the Lord," at least in the ordinary sense of that word, is erroneous, for the original, according to universal Eastern tradition, signifies "a Lurking Enemy", or a Hunter of men rather than of beasts. This idea may have led to a Latin title, Venator, for the stellar Orion.

 

It is often " the Magi", the "Three Kings", the "Three Marys", or simply the "Three Stars".

 

Influence of the constellation: ...It was thought by the Romans to be very harmful to cattle and productive of storms. By the Kabalists it is associated with the Hebrew letter Aleph and the 1st Tarot Trump "The Juggler". (The Magician).

 

http://www.glyphweb.com/esky/default.htm?http://www.glyphweb.com/esky/conste llations/orionsbelt.html

 

Alnitak is 800 light years away, and is a binary star system: http://www.glyphweb.com/esky/default.htm?http://www.glyphweb.com/esky/conste llations/orionsbelt.html

 

Bill The NUCLEAR VILLAGE Project http://groups.yahoo.com/group/intalek

 

 

Comment

From Jess

12-31-3

 

Dear Jeff,

 

It is wonderful to see the great minds bring solutions to the Romanek Equasions.

 

I would only offer into this mix of thought that F=GME4/12 appears to be Force equals Gravity/Mass/Energy 4/12 which is pretty elementary and as the diagram at the bottom of this equasion shows a rotating field creating it's own propulsion to move forward.

This "engine" could produce any type of effect from a "time machine" to a "winking" effect of moving from one light year to another in space or distance.

 

If this is what the equasion is relating, all the diagrams are related and are explaining how or what whoever is coming here from the star on Orion's belt.

 

I would only add that if Orion seems not to match earth's view then the Orion view might match from another plane of sight.....or whoever gave this is showing how intelligent they are....but are deceiving people of their real origins.

 

 

Comment
From Carl 12-31-3

 

Hello Jeff,

 

I might be able to shed some light on equation #1.

 

An atomic number, 115 (currently an "undiscovered" element in civilian science) is set equal to the Maxwellian Equation describing the curl of a magnetic field (Maxwell states that the curl of a magnetic field at a point is equal to the time rate change of the electric field at that point, plus the current flowing through that point (if in a conductor)). However, Romanek's expression includes a coefficient 1/c2 in front of the partial of E wrt T, which doesn't agree with Maxwell's (unless 1/c2 = mu). Furthermore, stating that the atomic number of element 115 (its # of protons) is equal to the curl of a magnetic field doesn't seem to make sense. Continuing, Maxwell's Equation is then set equal to a figure depicting what appears to be a particle with a magnetic field line encircling it. Qualitatively, this seems somewhat reasonable when considering an infintesimal particle with a time-varying electric field.

 

I've only taken one course in electromagnetics, so I apologize if the information I have presented is inaccurate. Hope this helps.

 

Regards, Carl

 

 

Comment

From Shadow

12-31-3

 

Jeff,

 

To understand the meaning of Stan's information, superimpose his positions on this model, please,

 

http://pw1.netcom.com/~hjsmith/WireFrame4/tesseract.html

 

and repost it on your site.

 

Hint: Time and distance are completely and equally interrelated, and are easily interchanged, during harmonic coupling.

 

Comment

From Veo

12-31-3

 

Hey,

 

I was looking at #5 again, is there a way we can get another picture of that?

The basic equation for gravity is:

 

 

 

or Force = (G-constant)(mass of object A)(mass of object B) divided by (r = distance between the two objects)

 

There's other ways you can plug in, but in #5, Is that a 12 at the end or is it r squared?

 

Also, I noticed something else strange about # 6.

Is there something wrong with the scan of the image or has the top left corner and the lower right corner of the picture been removed and replaced by a matching piece of paper? I mean, the top left corner image and the lower right corner image are the Exact same image, just mirrored. Has something been removed from the original image?

 

Thanks,

Veo

 

 

Comment

From P.D. Seniura

1-1-4

 

The mid-right part of Mr Romanek's first drawing is Frank Drake's Famous Equation from 1961, featured in many science pubs and on TV (most notably Dr Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" series). It's a way to calculate the odds of finding intelligent life "out there".

 

SETI.org has the entire explanation here: http://www.seti.org/seti/seti_science

 

On Mr Romanek's drawing, the "x 100" would convert the equation's answer, a fraction, into a "Percentage" that most people can understand.

 

I will stop there and let others try to explain what it all means in relation to his other drawings.

 

 

 

Comment
From Anonymous
1-1-4

 

Jeff,

 

Whether or not this guy is as ignorant of physics as he claims, I cannot say. He may really have only a "5th grade" math education just as he claims. Or this may just be a practical joke to see what outlandish theories people come up with to explain it. But, I'll bite, just for entertainment value if nothing else. Here are some thoughts:

 

The diagram in the upper left corner of the first page appears to represent the conversion of a helium atom (containing two protons, two neutrons and two electrons) into two separate hydrogen atoms (each containing a single proton and neutron in the nucleus and a single orbiting electron) which is made explicit by the drawing and the "x2" in the second part of the drawing indicating two separate copies of each.

 

The part of the first line which contains the "d" and "p" appears to be a valence electron shell diagram, although written down incorrectly if it is. I haven't done the diagram to see if it really represents element 115.

 

The curl equation on the first line is one of Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism, which can easily be seen by looking at equation 123 at http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Sciences/Physics/Electromagnetism/
Magnetostatics/MagneticField/Maxwellsequations/Maxwellsequations.htm

 

and making the substitution indicated by the line above it and rearranging.

 

The "waves" around the arrows through the parabola drawings are, I believe, not indicating waves, but are instead spirals around the arrows which indicates rotation. The number of rotations appear to double for the second diagram as compared to the first, indicating a doubling of rotation rate or frequency.

 

The last part of the second line does appear to be Drake's Equation. The last diagram at the bottom right of the first page seems to indicate two separate points (in space-time?) which are brought together by bending the intervening medium. This is exactly how Bob Lazar described the propulsion method of the craft he worked on. The diagram definitely indicates a bending of something and bringing two far separated points closer together.

 

In picture #4: Let's assume that; m=mass c=speed of light lambda sub e = the Compton wavelength of the electron L sub p = Planck length

 

Although I can't make out the first part of the equation at the top left of page 4, it appears to be an energy density calculation and involves the Compton wavelength of the electron and dimensions on the Planck scale. The equation a=[e^2]/[h*c]~1/137 is the formula for the fine structure constant which is a coupling constant for the electromagnetic field.

 

The formula, A=4*[Pi]*(2*G*M/[c^2])^2 gives the surface area of a black hole of mass M, having a Schwarzschild radius given by the value (2*G*M/[c^2]). This should be apparent, since the formula for the surface area of a sphere is 4*Pi*(r^2) and the quantity (2*G*M/[c^2]) gives the Schwarzschild radius of the mass M. This is the radius which, if the mass M is completely compressed within the volume having this radius, a black hole is formed. The diagram at the beginning of this line looks like it is supposed to represent, first a condition of stable orbit, since the curving arrows are at separate, well defined radius' which don't converge on each other, and then this diagram leads to a spiraling inward condition indicating a condition in which stable orbits are no longer possible, which is exactly the case when one crosses, traveling inward, the Schwarzschild radius of any given mass distribution. The last part of this line which is the parabolas with the arrow and spiraling line look like they indicate a "falling through" (into a higher dimension or less restrictive dimension as regards to motion through space and time?) Pure speculation, but an idea. But, again, it ends with the diagram indicating the curving of something and bringing together of two remote points to a common point. The "shrinking" to Schwarzschild dimensions (or perhaps generation of a local energy density which would extend the Schwarzschild radius out beyond the observer? hint: mass=energy equivalence) is the key here.

 

Drawing #6 is a hypercube and indicates travel across hyperspace. Stargate SG-1 anyone?

 

That's all I have for now.

 

Signed, Anonymouse

 

PS Jeff -

 

I can confirm that, assuming the expression in the first line of page #1 of Stan's pages is simply written incorrectly and that the 56^14 should instead be written 5f^14, and also that what looks like 75^2 is supposed to be 7s^2, this is without a doubt an electron shell configuration diagram representing element 115, which has the configuration of 5f14 6d10 7s2 7p3. Also, the "parabolas" appear to represent the throats of wormholes or blackholes, shortcuts across hyperspace.

 

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ununpentium

 

Signed, Anonymouse

Comment

From Stan Romanek

1-3-4

 

Hi Jeff -

I hope you had a good Holiday. I noticed that there were some concerns about equation #6 that I sent you...and the fact that it looks so pieced together. The original image is to big to fit into my scanner, so I scanned it in sections and assembled it for viewing.

 

Stan

 

 

Interpretation of Stan Romanek's Two Pages Filled with Symbols, Equations, and Drawings

 

By Jack Kasher, PhD

 

1) The Page Written Under Hypnosis

 

The symbol on the upper left is clearly helium, with two protons and two neutrons in the nucleus, and two electrons circling around outside. The arrow may mean that it is used to bombard element 115, which is indicated both by the circled number 115 and by the correct electron configuration, which is

 

5f146d107s27p3

 

In Stan's expression the f looks like a 6; but it must be an f to be correct. Also, his s resembles a 5; but, again, it must be an s to be correct.

There is no way that Stan could know this configuration on his own-I didn't know it myself until one of my colleagues at the University of Nebraska at Omaha helped me calculate it. So Stan got it from "elsewhere," whatever that means. I should add that after I did confirm that it is correct, it took me about five minutes to find it on the internet by using Yahoo and the keywords element 115. But I would not have been able to confirm that it is correct before I was shown the order in which the electron energy levels would fill for element 115.

 

The equation on the second line,

 

- x B = _ J + 1/c2 E/T_,

 

is the generalized form of Ampere's law, and is the fourth of Maxwell's equations from electromagnetic theory. The equation is precisely and correctly written, although normally we would use t instead of T_. But Stan also uses T for time on the other page, the one he wrote during the night.

 

An electric charge in motion generates a magnetic field. This equation describes the relationship between the moving charge and the resulting magnetic field. B is this field, J is a flowing group of charges, and E/T_ is the time rate of change of the electric field produced by those charges. _ is the magnetic permeability of free space, normally written as _o, and c is the speed of light in a vacuum, 3 x 1010 cm/sec. What is interesting about the form here is that the symbol 1/c2 is not usually used-in fact, I have never seen it written this way in any textbook, even though it is correct. 1/c2 is equal to _o_o where _o is the permittivity of free space. Since Stan uses _ instead of _o, I would expect to see __ instead of 1/c2 here. This is how it is written in the textbooks. This may seem like a small point, but it does indicate to me a working knowledge of Maxwell's equations, and not just something copied from a textbook. Again, I don't see how Stan could be familiar with this equation on his own, especially in the 1/c2 form.

 

The next symbol is the small circle with the arrow, inside the larger circle. I don't know what it means, but it does equal the straight line with dots at each end, followed by the curved line, also with dots at the ends. These may indicate that flat space can be curved, so that one can travel quickly from one point to the other (i.e., from one dot to the other). This could be done by creating a wormhole.

 

The third line on this page shows the constellation Orion, with a circle around the star Mintaka, which is 920 light years from the Earth. The circle apparently indicates that the extraterrestrials come from Mintaka. This is an O9 type star, which means that it has a surface temperature of about 30,000 K. A star of this type lives only on the order of a few million years before it becomes a red giant, so there is no way a planet like the Earth circling this star would have enough time for intelligent life to evolve like it did here. Perhaps they colonized a planet there, coming from somewhere else.

 

The two curved lines with the curly line going through between them might signify that the beings journeyed from Mintaka to the Earth through a wormhole. The dots and circles that follow seem to indicate our solar system, starting with the Sun at the bottom. The Earth would be the third dot, and is circled. They even included the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter by drawing the curved line. What is interesting is that there are TEN dots, indicating ten planets, not the nine that we know of.

 

The second pair of curved lines with the curly line between may indicate that they would then travel to another earthlike planet through another wormhole. The circle with the arrow within the larger circle is like the one on the second line, and may again be the symbol for curving space to make travel much quicker. Drake's equation, which follows this symbol, suggests that they would be going to another earthlike planet. This equation, though very speculative and inexact, does provide a framework for calculating the number of earthlike planets in our galaxy on which intelligent life has evolved and developed technology similar to ours. The x 100 may mean that earthlike planets with intelligent life and technology are all over the place. Note that Stan correctly writes each of the subscripts in each of the terms isnDrake's equation.

 

I find it interesting that there are equal signs throughout this page, indicating that each term leads to the next. I am speculating, perhaps too wildly in connecting element 115 and Ampere's law, but here is a possible interpretation.

 

Helium is used to bombard element 115, which results in an intense flow of electric charges. This creates a very strong magnetic field, which is used to create a wormhole for space travel. The extraterrestrials go through the wormhole from Mintaka to the Earth, then pass on to more earthlike planets, warping space each time to speed up the travel.

 

 

2) The Second Page, Written During the Night

 

The second and third lines of this page are explanations and approximations of the terms used in the first line, so let's start with them.

 

 

_ = e2/ _c ~ 1/137

This is the fine structure constant used in quantum electrodynamics. The funny symbol used here by Stan has to be the Greek letter alpha, since e2/ _c is the fine structure constant, and alpha is the symbol used for it. c has been defined above. _ is Plank's constant h divided by 2, where h is 6.62 x 10-27 erg-seconds. e is the charge on the electron, which is 4.8 x 10-10 in esu units (1.6 x 10-19 coulombs in mks units).

 

 

 

 

_e _ _/mc ~ 10-11 cm

 

This is the Compton wavelength of the electron. m is the mass of the electron. Determining the position of an electron to within this distance requires enough energy to create another electron. The exact value of the Compton wavelength of the electron is 3.86 x 10-11 cm.

 

The mc written next appears in the first line, with m again being the mass of the electron, and c the speed of light in vacuum. Possibly trying to explain this term, Stan follows this with

 

mc2 ~ _ MeV

 

This is the rest mass of the electron given in millions of electron volts. The exact value is 0.511 MeV. Notice that Stan uses the precise notation of capital M, small e, and capital V.

 

 

L2p ~ 10-66 cm2

This is the square of the Planck length, and is sometimes referred to as the Planck area. Physicists suspect that quantum gravity will become important for understanding physics at about this scale. Taking the square root, Lp ~ 10-33 cm. The exact value is calculated from Lp = (_G/c3)_ = 1.61 x 10-33 cm, where G is the gravitational constant, 6.67 x 10-8 dyne-cm2/gram2. It is curious that Stan writes Lp as the square of the Planck length, rather than just the length itself. This requires him to square the 10-33 to get 10-66.

 

Now, to the top line on this page.

 

 

-8e2/_e2Lp2

 

This is the third term in the top line. The fourth term, -1073 GeV/cm3, shows that the units for each of the five terms is energy per unit volume. If in the third term we insert the value for e, 4.8 x 10-10 esu, and the approximations for Lp and _e, 10-33 cm and 10-11 cm, and convert to GeV/cm3 (1.6 x 10-3 erg = 1 GeV), we get -3.62 x 1073 GeV/cm3, which corresponds to his ~ -1073 GeV/cm3. If, on the other hand, we insert the exact values for Lp and _e, namely 1.61 x 10-33 cm and 3.86 x 10-11 cm, we get 9.37 x 1071 GeV/cm3 ~ 1072 GeV/cm3, which does not quite match the 1073. So Stan (or whoever) is using the approximations for Lp and _e when making the calculations. This makes it even more unlikely that Stan could find these expressions in any textbook.

 

This term can be written 8(-e2/_e )/_eLp2. The expression in parentheses is the electrostatic or binding energy between an electron and a positron which are a distance _e apart. As we will see next, when we look at the second term, this is also equal to _mc2, the fine structure constant times the rest energy of the electron. So these terms are not just random letters thrown together, but have some physical meaning.

 

 

-8amc/ _eLp2

 

This is the second term in the top line. If we equate the second and third terms, as Stan does, after canceling the 8, , Lp2, and one of the _e, we are left with amc = e2/ _e. Substituting _e _ _/mc, we have amc = e2mc/_, or a = e2/_ = (e2/_c)c = _c. So in the second term a = _c, the fine structure constant time the speed of light. Thus the second term is

 

-8_mc2/ _eLp2.

 

When numbers are substituted into this expression, we get -9.37 x 1072 GeV/cm3 ~ -1073 GeV/cm3, which matches Stan's approximation given in the fourth term. The reason for the difference in the two calculations is that in going from the third term to the second term I used the exact value of _e instead of Stan's approximation.

 

So the second, third, and fourth terms in the top line match; and, in addition, we have found out that the a in the second term must be the fine structure constant times the speed of light, a = _c.

 

A final note about this term, -8_mc2/ _eLp2. Something close to this, -Lp-3_mec2 = -_mec2/ Lp3 , appears in footnote 13 of Jack Sarfatti's article The Micro-Quantum Vacuum, 4th draft, 11/14/2002: (I've underlined the relevant line)

 

 

13 We do not need the electron-phonon interaction here as in a real superconductor with real electron-electron pairs. The Fermi momentum is ~ h/Lp. The binding energy is the virtual pair is ~ _mpc2 ~ -1017 Gev ~ critical temperature to destroy vacuum superconductivity. The condensation energy density is ~ -Lp-3(me/mp)_mpc2 ~ -Lp-3_mec2 ~ 1099 10-2 Mev/cc. The photon rest mass is ~ 10-65 gm with a Meissner penetration depth ~ 1028 cm, so that the ratio of penetration depth to coherence length of the macro-quantum vacuum >> 1, i.e. a hard superconductors (sic) with magnetic vortex string topological defects.

 

If we drop the 8, what is left of the second term, -_mc2/ _eLp2, is very close in form to this condensation energy density, -_mec2/ Lp3. the difference is that _e has been substituted for one of the Lp, so that we have _eLp2 instead of Lp3. I don't know what the physical interpretation of Stan's term would be.

 

 

 

10-45 mpc2/Lp3

 

This is the last term in the top line. This term apparently was included because the "writer" wants to show us that the energy density in the second, third, and fourth terms is not beyond what is physically possible. The last term includes the Planck mass, mp. This is the mass whose Compton wavelength, _/mc, is equal to its Schwartzschild radius, 2Gm/c2. This latter is the radius a mass would have if it becomes a black hole. When the Compton wavelength is equated to the Schwatzschild radius the 2 is not included in the latter, so that the two lengths will be equal to the Planck length, instead of 2.28 x 10-33 cm. Equating _/mc to Gm/c2 and solving for the mass leads to mp = 2.177 x 10-5 grams. The largest energy density possible is the expression given in the last term in line 1, mpc2/Lp3. Inserting the exact values for mp and c and the approximation 10-33 cm for Lp into the last term, 10-45 mpc2/Lp3, and converting to GeV/cm3, we are left with 10-45 x 1.22 x 10118 GeV/cm3 = 1.22 x 1073 GeV/cm3 ~ 1073 GeV/cm3, as needed.

 

 

d_wx/dV

 

This is the first term in the top line. It appears that the V is volume, since all the rest of the terms have volume in the denominator. I am not certain that the wx is correct. It cannot be _x = 2fx, the angular frequency in the x direction, since the units of _ are 1/time, and the term in the numerator must have units of energy. So I am not certain what this term is. The _ indicates that it is a small amount of whatever wx is. The d in both numerator and denominator indicates that this term is the rate of change of _wx with respect to volume; i.e., the derivative of _wx with respect to volume.

I should point out here that the term in the denominator appears to actually be V, and not dV. Perhaps Stan just didn't finish the downward stroke on the d. In any case, V is incorrect. You could also ask him for the physical significance of the energy densities expressed in the second and third terms, and why he chose to use _eLp2 for the volume.

If Stan is hypnotized again, it would be good to ask him what he means by this first term-what is the "wx," and what is meant by the _wx and its rate of change with volume.

 

This completes the analysis of the top line. Now let's look at the rest of the page.

 

 

V = n x a x dB/dT

 

I interpret these symbols to be what I have written here. If I am correct, the two x's appear to indicate that the n, a, and dB/dT should be multiplied together. If the funny symbol between the x's is an a, then this equation is a specific case of Faraday's Law, which shows the magnitude of the voltage V generated by a magnetic induction changing with time, dB/dT, inside a constant area a. The n would be the number of coils in the wire surrounding the constant area. There would normally be a minus sign before the n on the right side, and the use of a instead of A would be unusual, but not incorrect. The use of a might be a stretch, since Stan quite clearly writes a nice A in the expression immediately below this. But he also wrote a strange symbol for the fine structure constant, instead of the _.

If this expression is Faraday's Law, I'm not sure how it fits in with the rest of the page. If it is not Faraday's Law, then I don't know what it is. If V is a volume, as in the first line, then it probably is one that is shrinking, because of the last line on the page. The two x's cannot indicate a double vector cross product, since V on the left side is a scalar, whether it is volume or voltage, and n should not be a vector.

The first symbol on the last line could be interpreted as positronium, which is an electron (negative charge) and positron (positive charge) bound together and circling one another. The next symbol seems to indicate that they circle closer and closer, spiraling in toward one another, until they get close enough to become a black hole. This is stretching things a little bit; but I am trying to make sense out of the symbols and equal signs. The next term,

 

A _ 4(2GM/c2)2

 

Indicates to me that a spherical surface area is shrinking to the size of the surface area of a black hole, which is what the 4(2GM/c2)2 is. This might lead to a gravitational field dense enough for the creation of a wormhole, shown by the two curved lines with the curly one in between, like the ones on Stan's other page.

At the bottom of the page the straight line with dots at each end, followed by the curved line, also with dots at the ends, are the same as on the first page. Again, these may indicate that flat space can be curved, so that one can travel quickly from one point to the other (i.e., from one dot to the other) through a wormhole.

 

 

 

Comment

From Mark McAndrew

1-7-4

 

Jeff,

 

It's a hypercube (what a 4D cube looks like in 3D, but here in 2D because it's on paper) with the constellation of Orion on the outside and the solar system on the inside. It shows a trans-dimensional conduit between Earth and one of the stars of Orion's belt.

 

However, most 'weird stuff' relating to the stars of Orion's Belt (The pyramids, etc) emphasizes Al-Nitak, the star on the left. (Eg. The Great Pyramid, to the left of its two neighbours, is bigger than the centre one, and both are far bigger than the small one on the right. Corresponding brightness doesn't explain it, because the centre star is actually the brightest -just.) The star pointed to in Romanek's diagram is the faintest one, the one on the right. Nothing I know of in ETH lore, ancient or modern, gives that star any significance.

 

Because of this, I think it's a hoax.

 

Keep well,

 

Mark McAndrew, UK

 

PS

Jeff,

 

I should have looked more closely. The hypercube does indeed refer to Al-Nitak if you look at it from the INSIDE, where the solar system is shown. i.e. looking at the page, the viewer is behind Orion. Al-Nitak has great significance, not least being that although slightly dimmer than its neighbour, it has the largest (the 'Great') corresponding pyramid at Giza. Al-Nitak is special for some reason.

 

Because of this, I'm not so sure it's a hoax after all...

 

Keep well, Mark McAndrew UK

 

 

Comment

From Juli

1-9-4

 

Dear Jeff,

 

Two days ago my co-researcher friend sent me the link to your article entitled 'Stan Romanek's Mystery Equations'. As I viewed the first diagram I became very intrigued as I immediately recognized Orion and the Solar System. Then when I saw Stan's drawing #6 of Orion and the Cube I was awestruck.

 

I have reason to believe this may possibly be related to something that I figured out as it specifically relates to Orion and its relationship to the Cube.

 

It also has relevant connections to two other items mentioned in a letter at the end of your article from William Alek to Richard Hoagland dated 12-29-3. The first being the connection to the Giza Complex and the second relating to the date of 2012.

 

I have explained these discoveries in an online paper should you wish to read it. The Chapter which discusses Orion and its relationship to the Cube and to the Giza Plateau is found here:

<http://members.aol.com/SeeingBelieving/Chapter14.html>Seeing Is Believing - Chapter 14 - ORION

 

The Chapter which discusses the relationship to the date 2012 (and more specifically to the date of December 21, 2012) and also the connection to Pisces which Stan also includes in his drawings can be found in the previous chapter here (see section The 11th Hour):

<http://members.aol.com/SeeingBelieving/Chapter13.html>Seeing Is Believing - Chapter 13 - 11:11

Unfortunately I do not understand the math in Stan's equations, but perhaps the information in the above two chapters will provide more pieces to the puzzle.

 

Actually, on the day after I read your article (on January 8 - yesterday) there was an interesting story in the newspaper entitled 'Math Mystery Solved?' about a man named Grigori Perelman who may have cracked one of mathematics' oldest and most obscure problems, the Poincare Conjecture, which seeks to explain the geometry of three-dimensional space. Since the Cube is related to three-dimensional space and because of the "coincidental" timing, perhaps Stan's Mystery Equations are somehow related to this?

 

 

Thank you,

Juli

 

 

 

Comment
From William Alek
alekws@intalek.com
1-10-4

 

Jeff - Here's another one you could add to Stan Romanek's Mystery Equation page. The mystery ONLY deepens.

 

Bill

 

From: William Alek Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 To: Richard C. Hoagland Subject: Wonderfully Weird...

 

Richard,

 

Going back to Stan Romanek's Mystery Equations: http://www.rense.com/general46/stan.html

 

Observe Drawing #6, which shows the hypercube. The hypercube shows what appears to be the "band of Orion". You identified the circled star called Alnitak: http://sunra.lbl.gov/~vhoette/Explorations/OrionStarNames/index.html

 

The bubble below appears to show Alnitak with a neighboring star circled. Alnitak, is of course, a binary system. This circled star is apparently near Alnitak and shows a string of planets below it. Now, what I found rather shocking is that this string of planets resembles: http://claudescommentary.com/special/chilbolton/

 

In Stan's diagram and in the 2001 Chilbolton Code Formation, two planets are "occupied" by these "bubble-headed" creatures, as shown in the formation.

 

The 2000 Chilbolton Circle Formation which is a symmetric pattern of multiply interlocked circles could be related to this element 115 shown in Stan's drawing #1. For traveling interstellar distances, all that's necessary is replacing tungsten with 115: http://www.intalek.com/Pictures/SmartFLOW01.gif

 

Which is their mechanism of communication.

 

Bill The NUCLEAR VILLAGE Project http://groups.yahoo.com/group/intalek

 

 

Comment
From Haakon Norway
1-11-4

 

Hello Jeff...

 

I wrote down on a piece of paper some months ago. That a planet was supposed to enter Jupiter's atmosphere.

 

The mentioning of ten planets is interesting. Meaning we get one more.

 

Also in Romaneks pictures Jupiter is seen in the ring with four dots. That could very well mean that the occurence is to do with nearby Jupiter. Jupiter was first thought to have only four moones. Like Galilelo saw. The marking of Jupiter and its four moones within a circly. Indicates to me that whatever is going to happen will occure out there. I also belive that this will affect us. Beacuse the pointer from Jupiter ring with four dots is to helium. Wich of course is a star. Meaning either that jupiter is moving towards our sun. Wich will mean we also will move inwards. O,r that a foreign object off very great mass is incoming. I tried to find a date and I came up with 62 days from now.

 

I have to meation that the whole thing strikes me as a little Stanley Kubrickish.

 

Sincerely, Haakon

 

 

 

Comment

From Byron Guernsey

1-11-4

 

Jeff,

 

I've been reading the discussion of Stan Romanek's drawings and noted that the reader submitted commented interpretation of the star in Orion's belt in #6 seems to be wrong. If you look closely, Mintaka is circled and a the circle links to an inset map, which shows Mintaka as the brightest star (indicated by the largest dot) in the blown up section, with a group of stars around it. Of those, 1 is circled. In the inset, Mintaka has a star very close to it for reference. Its difficult to say which star, visibly closest to Mintaka in the 2d plane, the drawing refers to, but there are two candidates visible in the Starry Night software. TYC4766-2446-1, and Mintaka's 'eclipsing' companion star (labeled as Delta Orionis- which is another name for Mintaka). If the drawings inset orientation is correct, the star closest would be TYC4766-2446-1, making the star the drawing has circled on the first level inset HIP25905 (aka TYC114-64-1) or HIP25818.

 

If you simply look for the closest star in the 2d plane to Mintaka, it is Delta Orionis (companion), which orbits Mintaka every 5.73 days. And if you rotate the inset 180, it would be TYC4766-2446-1 that the Romanek inset has circled. It would also seem to me that the line trailing from the circle star points to a solar map and symbolizes the 2nd and 3rd planets from the star.

 

TYC4766-2446-1 is 484.2 light years from Earth, and HIP25905 is 124.5 light years away. HIP25818 is 1254.5 light years away. If I were taking a best guess from rough scale of the drawings- and surrounding stars, I'd say the drawing refers to HIP25905 as the star of origin.

 

Please see the attached image for reference. I am only an amateur astronomer and know very little on the topic. HIP25905 and HIP25818 are both magnitude 8 in terms of visibility, which means they are not visible to the naked eye. Under best viewing conditions the naked eye can generally see about a 6 magnitude star. Both should be visible with binoculars or an inexpensive telescope.

 

HIP25905 is 5762 Kelvin and is about 1.2 times the size of our Sun. Its about 50% brighter than our sun. Our sun is 5777 Kelvin on its surface, so the temperatures are extremely close. HIP25905 is a G5 V, and our Sun is a G2 V class star. From what I understand, the G refers roughly to the temperature. The number following refers to the absolute magnitude of the star (brightness) and the V refers to the wavelength of light. So this star is a fairly close match to our own Sun.

 

Byron

 Comment
From John Mannon

1-19-4

Hi Jeff -

I have been enthralled with the Romanek case for some time now it is a great story. As I fallow his adventures on your site, I see something that others have missed. This is in response to Byron Guernsey's comment and star chart. I noticed that Stan Romanek's #6 equation is depicting Orion - but Orion is upside down Please see attached

Comment

From Steve Coe

6-8-4

 

Dear Jeff,

 

I read with some interest and some disbelief the story of Stan's drawings, but think it is of at least intellectual value to follow it through. I have an issue with everyone's immediate fascination for element 115, however...

 

The spdf electron configuration [Rn] 5f14 6d10 7s2 7p3 *would* imply element 115 if it was using Radon (Rn) as the noble element (this is to abbreviate the lengthy process from 1s2, 2s2 1p..etc..)

 

However, radon is not the noble element given, helium is the noble element given.

 

What this implication means I'm not sure, if helium can be electronically excited to an electron state isoelectronic with element 115 is a matter for someone more qualified to tell you. What happens if it can?

 

I have to say element 115 is like the 21st century philosophers stone!

 

Let it go, people!

 

Thanks Jeff

 

Steve