The Matrix: Sphere with a Flat Surface

I certainly hope that we do not live in a matrix computer simulation world, but sometimes I can't help it but think that we do. William Cowper once said, God moves in mysterious ways. Mark Twain, supported this notion by proclaiming that truth was stranger than fiction. And Arthur C. Clarke did not seem to object by summarizing that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
  • Naturally, who knows what our enclosure really looks like? But... I definitely do not want it to be a computer program.
Tower of Babylon and Ted Chiang
A few years back I had a pleasure of reading an alternate universe story by Ted Chiang called Tower of Babylon. At the time I found it entertaining, and somewhat praised the author for thinking outside the box. Now I think there is way more to this story, and if there is a person out there to ask a few questions about the set up of our realm, that would be Ted Chiang.

Ted Chiang

Synopsys of the Tower of Babylon: Hillalum is a miner from Elam who has been summoned to the Tower of Babylon, an enormous brick tower that has been in continuous construction for centuries. He and his colleagues have been hired to dig through the Vault of Heaven to discover Yahweh's creation. Hillalum alone passes safely through the Vault.
  • After a perilous journey ever-upwards, he finds that he has reemerged back at the surface, some distance from the Tower, rather than in Heaven as expected.
Ted Chiang's biography does not reveal where his knowledge could be coming from, but I do find this "climb up to come out at the bottom" story to be fascinatingly random to be a mere coincidence.
  • And even if it was Ted's vivid imagination and nothing else, it made me think of the Flat vs. Spherical Earth controversy.
The Earth
What I find funny is that our current heliocentric understanding of the world is a model. How can it be a model? A model of what? Anyways, the definition of our current narrative compliant setup of the world and universe sounds like this:
  • Heliocentrism is the astronomical model in which the Earth and planets revolve around the Sun at the center of the Universe.
So, according to this model, the Earth is a sphere, or something like that. They say that your average globe is a fairly good visual representation of the real thing.


From everything we know, If we travel East, we will come out in the West. In other words, we would circumnavigate the globe, and arrive at the same place we started at.

Naturally, one of the ways to picture our travel around the globe projected on a flat map, would be the below image. We have our snake traveling East, and after circumnavigating the globe, it comes out in the West. It works the exact same in the opposite direction.


Planes, as we know, only fly East to West, or West to East. On my image below, numbers 1 and 2 are supposed to occupy the same grid coordinates, or to be in the exact same spot on the globe of the Earth.
  • #1 and #2 represent the same location.
And while #1 and #2 are in the same location on the globe of the Earth, #3 and #4 are not. Per the narrative, North Pole and South Pole are separated by 12,440 miles.
  • #3 and #4 do not represent the same location.

Here is one additional thing we need to remember about them airplanes flying around. The NASA Reference Publication 1207 titled Derivation and Definition of a Linear Aircraft Model contains the following:
  • This report derives and defines a set of linearized system matrices for a rigid aircraft of constant mass, flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat, nonrotating earth.

So, how can they fly in a stationary atmosphere over a flat, nonrotating earth, while simultaneously satisfying the concept of a spherical Earth?
  • At this point, I think that a God-programmer created computer simulation based planet could be the answer.

The Matrix
And now, welcome to the Matrix, or say hello to Hyperborea, for according to my hypothesis, admiral Richard E. Byrd had a chance to visit it. What exactly did he say in his interview?

He said something like this:
  • But strangely enough, there is left in the world today, an area as big as the United States that’s never been seen by a human being. And that's beyond the pole on the other side of the South Pole from Little America.
What land was he talking about? I think he could be talking about Hyperborea. We all know, that Hyperborea, if it ever existed, was located in the vicinity of the North Pole.

The admiral, on the other hand, was quite clearly referring to the South Pole and... beyond. As we know, there is no officially undiscovered "area" out there. We only have Antarctica itself, and that's it.
  • Unless going towards the South Pole he came out at the... North Pole, and ended up on the other side of the continent he was on. The continent we commonly refer to as Hyperborea.. the one that does not exist on our maps.

In other words, when we look at our regular map, we would have our Hyperborea split in two:
  • Antarctica - one half of Hyperborea
  • Arctica - the other half of Hyperborea
It would look something like this ugly map compilation below.


Or something like this on one of the older maps...


Related article: Hyperborea - what if it still exists?

Rotation of the Sky
The conventional Flat Earth model allegedly has an issue with stars rotating in the opposite direction in the Southern Hemisphere. I've heard that there was an explanation, but I'm yet to see it. Well, if we are a part of a certain computer simulation, the program would work the exact same way with two pre=programed hemispheres.

Needless to say, but this set up would only work under one condition, and one condition only ... The Matrix.
  • God moves in mysterious ways.
  • Truth is stranger than fiction.
  • Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

If you were the PTB, and had to present a convenient "politically correct" model of the above simulation world... what model would you choose? Could it be that the Spherical Earth model was forced upon us, because there was no better way to misrepresent the truth while simultaneously exploiting certain laws of the available simulation?
  • It does appear that to make it work, the North Pole and South Pole regions would have to be offlimits.

Snow and Ice
Both North and South Poles are known for their extremely cold temperatures. The PTB wants us to think that due to elevation and other BS, the North Pole is much warmer than the South Pole. We have no way of verifying that, of course.
  • Could it be that both North and South Poles are covered with ice due to them being two halves of the same continent... Hyperborea?

Who knows, may be there is a reason we have this North Pole Ice Cap related Mandela Effect.

KD: Well, my heart does not want to accept something like this, but some of the mental gymnastics my brain was involved in, suggest that there could be something to this hypothesis.


Jul 11, 2021
Reaction score
Ok, well I said I'd wade into this topic and I hope this isn't too long so as to bore everyone to death, but first off this is a huge worm bin with lots of different species of worms, so let's understand from the get go that while all worms are worms, they are not all the same kinds of worms.

Making sense of these ideas begin with applying logic and working backwards based on what we think we understand about the Universe. The issue with this approach is that you have to understand that the knowledge which we have all been told was a proven fact is neither true nor accurate.

For example, Einstein reified space by saying it was something that did something, when here there was no physical evidence for that, and while Tesla called Einstein's theory idiocy and said space has no properties, and yet it's the physics of Einstein that we are all taught as truth. Now you can call it what you like, a lie, a deception, whatever, but today people familiar with the failures of present day physics know that the physics of our time and of our parents time was incorrect; probably purposely so and for reasons which reach far beyond the discussion here.

So to begin with, in a nut shell, what we know is that matter is held together by magnetism, and all matter is formed and exists solely due to magnetism, and we also now know that magnetism is made from the ether, which was a conceptualized concept of a space counter to our own that was thought to be responsible for causing gravity. This so called counter space was formulated by Charles Proteus Steinmetz mathematically before Einsteinian Physics became the model for education, so the Einsteinian model of the Universe is manifestly one which runs counter to the greatest minds such as Tesla, Steinmetz, and others.

The ether theory was only the first form which was used to describe what we today would call hyper-space, and hyper-space is counter-space, meaning it's a place counter to our own. This precise description of a place counter our own has precise implications of what we might expect that place to be like.

Now real experts knew about this stuff long ago. People like Joe Parr for example, and who knew about counter space and Steinmetz, and this is when probably only 10 other people in the whole US of A knew or had ever heard of any other theories about time and space way back in the 1960's, and that's probably why Joe was working on unraveling some ubber top secret artifact/s in Antarctica while a B-52 bomber maintained a 24hour a day, seven day a week schedule overhead, which I suppose was probably also carrying thermonuclear weapons because why else would you have such a thing hovering over your head? Anyways, obviously something important, but the point is that this understanding about counter space, about hyper space, about the ether, those were things Joe Parr understood when only a handful of other humans in the United States did.

Now to return to our space, the visible universe, we have matter (which is a physical particle) and we also have this perception of distance, which by extension means time since distance = time. We humans of course associate time with aging and change. Counter space means the opposite.

Hyperspace, which is counter to our space, theorized by Steinmetz I believe but don't quote me on that, has no such properties. Matter does not exist in hyperspace, nor does time exist in hyperspace.

This is not to say that travel through hyperspace is impossible nor that once in it time won't take place. The total loss of both time and space are therefore to be understood as the theoretical absolutes of hyperspace. While a spacecraft, a person, a car, or anything else which one way or other enters hyperspace may have completely different outcomes, such as arriving instantaneously at grandma's house, or not, and instead arriving 400 years later, unawares of course that you've lost some time. Examples exist so there is apparently no doubt whatsoever that this form of teleportation is real and has happened more than once, and which also goes a long ways to towards explaining many other phenomena.

So now we know that the ether is a hyper-spatial medium, but of unknown composition, of unknown substance, but which undeniably exists because among other things that's all magnetism is made from, and which is, by extension of it's ability to create magnetism, is what also forms matter to bind itself together, and so understanding what creates magnetism does become an important part of understanding the many aspects which are raised in this discussion.

By definition magnetism is the result of a loss of acceleration of inertia of the dielectric field. So not to lose you but remember that the dielectric field is a hyper-spatial field, meaning it's not in our realm, that also means it has no physical particles, no matter which defines it.

Now is that beginning to help you understand this matrix mud that's been slung around? Holographic Universe? Well...sort of, I guess, but not the way it's been painted. It's real enough alright, it's not a mirage or illusion, it's not a hologram you're living in. Not really truly it isn't. It's just assembled by a material which resembles a holographic substance in that it's incorporeal but matter is real and hard as rock because it is rock.
Got it? God I hope so... but yea you can have your cake and eat it too if you like.

Now to progress with this holographic concept a bit further, we are ourselves hyperspatial creatures existing inside of material bodies, and therefore our world is not physical, it is not of this earth nor this universe of matter. In other words you are a counter spatial being and this existence we call life is a temporal condition; meaning with time and which by extension means with physical form (matter).

Now this ether material which is counter spatially located is also all around us at all times. It is the zero point energy field, it's the radiant energy field that Tesla talked about, it's the ether of Farady, Maxwell, and many others. Magnetism is defined by a self recirculating dielectric energy field moving through a center point of counter-spatial convergence. This means by definition that gravity is an acceleration towards counter space.

As incoherent matter, we along with almost all other matter, have a dielectric acceleration towards the earths' center where the counter spatial convergence of our own planets coherent dielectric field (magnetism) cycles through. Actually that's an over simplification since it's a mutual acceleration to meet and form a singularity at a null point between the two masses, but the earth is so large by comparison that this null point is essentially at the surface of the earth and therefore immaterial.

So hopefully you will now have some greater understanding and see that flat earth as probably yet another failed attempt by the ruling elites to construct a plan to muddy the waters of real knowledge. It didn't resurface for no reason; you can be sure of that and one of it's objectives is to confuse so that understanding how gravity works becomes even more difficult, or at least that was the intention when it popped up a while back.

One thing that's key here is to understand that magnetism has two distinct forms. Coherent magnetism and Incoherent magnetism. Most all matter is bound together by incoherent magnetism, and that is why gravity is actually incoherent magnetism accelerating towards counter space.

This all means that the nature of nature is to form sphere's, and thus a planetoid cannot by natural action form a plate, because by nature all matter is created by magnetism, and that is a fact demonstrably proveable, and so all matter which is organic and non living will find it's way towards other matter and will form a sphere by natural action.

Now I'm tired and haven't even gotten to the interesting part about the possibilities of what this all means with regard to the wacky world of Antarctica but for sure there's shit going on there. After all, how many of us have had a B-52 bomber flying overhead just as a fail safe to something we might screw up on. For most of us we can be pretty sure that practically none of us here would be here to tell the tale since most of us have lives made of screw ups. :)

I realize that this magnetism business seems off and unrelated but it is not. It is instead entirely related and that's why I'm going the extra mile.

Our physical universe of matter forms spherical like bodies by way of natural action, but juxtaposed against this understanding is the knowledge that all matter has a magnetic field, and as we now know magnetism is itself an incorporeal medium. Comprehending this is where doors begin opening. Describing the nature of matter as bound to a non-physical phenomena is where our real world meets the fantasy worlds.

Unfortunately, the corruption of physics under the Einsteinian model has produced unreal and fantastical constructions, such as the many worlds theory, and which includes this idea that there are other dimensions or other realities. This falsehood is also extended by the cult of bumping particles known as Quantum Physics, or RBP which is the shorthand version for the religion of bumping particles, but as we know the magnetic field is not composed of any physical particle, nor can any physical particle explain instantaneous action at a distance. Only magnetism can explain instantaneous action at a distance. The action isn't spooky but the outcomes probably are.

Having said the foregoing do not misunderstand and conclude that other worlds do not exist, for they do, just not the kinds which you've been told are real. One other real world would be the spirit world and that is positively something the powers that be wouldn't want you to understand, but spook stories have a basis in reality; after all I've already said that you're an incorporeal being using a material physical body, and so you're about half way there to understanding that there are indeed other worlds and those worlds are not physical worlds.

What this all means is that, as far as we know, there are no such things as other dimensions or other worlds. Not in the sense of being physical material worlds like ours is. So far as we know (right now) there is only our dimension and that of counter space, and counter space is not a dimension per say, rather it is a medium like water is a medium, or the air is a medium, or oil is a medium. This medium produces pressure when it's made coherent and coherent counter spatial energy is the dielectric field from which all energy in this physical realm derives from and flows back into. We can approximate that the coherency of this field produces a high pressure because we know that magnetism is one form of coherent dielectric energy and it produces a pressure field which geometric shapes react to.

Realizing what this implies goes a long ways towards understanding pyramids, tetrahedrons, and triangles which I assure you are in your face 24 seven just to see if you've caught a clue. We know that specific geometric shapes (*Crystals) produce outcomes in response or reflection to this counter spatial energy. For example, a graphite crystal, which is lead, is also among the heaviest of all matter and yet pure graphite levitates when exposed to a coherent dielectric field known as magnetism. This is something to ponder upon; that lead, of all matter, can levitate due to magnetism, and it implies that lead can instantaneously become weightless in a magnetic field. That its' crystalline structure produces a response to the magnetic pressure which is uniform around the graphite itself.

A flat earth is not logical "once" you understand that gravity is not real in the sense that it is an autonomous field present in matter. Magnetism is the field present in matter and not gravity. Weight, which we call gravity, is also not autonomous in matter either but can instantaneously change even though the mass itself remains entirely unchanged. We cannot therefore macro-engineer this or any other planetary body into a ring world or flat plate by pushing dirt with giant bulldozers.

Incoherent magnetism is what produces mutual mass attraction, and MMA as it's called is nothing but two masses with incoherent magnetic fields accelerating towards a null point in space between the masses seeking to join together to form the unified singularity which defines magnetism on the whole, and this null point which forms is the confluence of the accelerating dielectric field forming a counter spatial point.

Understanding that the movement of masses towards one another is due to the creation of counter spatial point in our physical realm is also key to comprehending what creates so-called gravity as well as why a flat earth cannot naturally form.

The null point between masses that does form out of thin air is a defining property of magnetism, and which is the incommensurability of dividing magnetism into parts. Meaning it is impossible to divide a magnet into parts such that there is a polarized section, with one being north and the other south, as each instantaneously becomes another whole individual magnet, and since all matter is magnetic it too will always seek to combine upon itself.

OK, understand? The earth has to be spherical, the moon has to be spherical, ect, ect, and so these science fiction ideas such as macro engineering a flat world, or bulldozing our world into a ring world are only possible using Einsteinan based physics which describes matter as possessing an autonomous energy field called gravity, and they are also only possible by the additional means of reifying space as having qualities which can be acted upon, such that it is something which does something, and only by this supposed fictional construct of gravitational fields acting upon another fictional construct of space being something which can be acted upon and thereby bent can flat worlds or ring worlds be created, but of course these are both non-truths. Space has no qualities and is nothing and can do nothing and gravity is not an autonomous field modality possessed by dirt.

This all has a point because using what we know we can now ask ourselves what do we make out of the account of Admiral Byrd, and given the understanding of what magnetism is and how it cycles through a counter-spatial point, and including how it does this by means of a centripetal decreasing vortex coming in from either end at the top and bottom of a coherent magnet, and the Earth does have a coherent magnetic field.

Maybe more later but realize that whenever you play Mr. Knowitall you're bound to wear a large dunce cap, which is a whole topic in itself BTW.
Everything is subject to revision primarily because we really do not know very much and most of what we thought we knew was a purposely constructed lie. We are right now living through a revolutionary phase in human comprehension and the powers that be know this and are actively trying to suppress this and other understandings in order to retain their grip on real knowledge and true understanding.

BTW, the so called dunce cap first began as a the Wizards cap, which you may notice also is a cone, which in 2D is a triangle, which also forms a tetrahedron. I have not tried applying this but considering what I now think I understand there might be some sort of rational logic to the shape and isn't it interesting that this so-called cap of knowledge becomes transformed into the cap of stupidity, and by none other than organized institutionalized education.

Gravity wells, warped physics, and other distortions to consider. The human mind is not composed by a biological body but is, rather, a counter spatial entity occupying a physical form in a temporal plane. These polar regions and the off limits business about them does imply that more is going on about them.

The idea that there may be a hole at the polar regions derives from the understanding of a gravity well. Einsteinian Physics holds that matter bends space and that it has this quality called gravity. According to this (warped theory), a sufficiently dense mass will produce a black hole in the fabric of space+time, which thus causes all sorts of theoretical outcomes.

View attachment 7408

Einstein reified space by saying it was something which did something.

However, the two people who gave you everything you can't live without these days, namely electricity, say that Einstein was wrong about the nature of space and matter.

Black holes do exist but that does not prove they are gravitational black holes because magnets also have black holes and which can be seen using a ferrocell lens.

Black holes are voids where the area of space has no dielectricity. Light exists if there is dielectric energy available; only dielectric energy exists, and for there to be light there must be dielectric energy.

Now, what did the Admiral see? Is there a location where an seeming opening exists? If so where does it lead? We are talking about a planetary power system and any opening through counter space would probably mean it's more like a star gate which opens to another planet somewhere else, but a real world in the same dimension as our own, only somewhere's else unknown.
Mr. Dielectric I realize you are very busy conducting business on the moon, but I have found your takes on topics on the sister site very interesting. I will begin reading the book you recommended from Kenneth Wheeler immediately. Concerning the shape of the earth, you have indicated that a flat shape isn't possible, but how about a Toroid like below?

On an additional note. This magnetic demonstration is very interesting; any relation to black goo? Ferroliquid
Last edited:
  • A Avatar

  • Banta

    Active member
    Feb 4, 2021
    Reaction score
    So hopefully you will now have some greater understanding and see that flat earth as probably yet another failed attempt by the ruling elites to construct a plan to muddy the waters of real knowledge

    Or it resurfaced because there's no measurable curvature and modern optical equipment has completely debunked the notion of a visible geometric horizon. "Flat earth" may be a "psy-op" in a keyword hijacking sense (along with the perceived and legitimate oversimplification the term implies) but the real heart of the discussion is the lack of empiricism in a globular earth. We have a mathematical conception, borne originally out of the desire to better map and illustrate celestial observations and their correlation to places on the Earth for the sake of navigation. But the map is not the territory.

    Your knowledge is impressive and you're able to weave the correlations together well, but it's ultimately the same storytelling that birthed heliocentrism, geocentrism, and other mythologies and religions. And I don't personally think the physical ground has to be shaped like a ball for electromagnetic energy to flow in a toroidal fashion.

    For instance, as you state:

    Coherent magnetism and Incoherent magnetism. Most all matter is bound together by incoherent magnetism, and that is why gravity is actually incoherent magnetism accelerating towards counter space.

    This all means that the nature of nature is to form sphere's, and thus a planetoid cannot by natural action form a plate, because by nature all matter is created by magnetism, and that is a fact demonstrably proveable, and so all matter which is organic and non living will find it's way towards other matter and will form a sphere by natural action.

    I appreciate your attempt to explain why you, me, the trees, the birds, and the bees aren't giant balls (in a physical sense, I think there's possible something to the "energetic body" being spherical, but that's a separate discussion), but that's a pretty specific distinction that conveniently defies any sort of experimental validation. And raises some questions... are all rocks organic, meaning having some at least formerly living component, but yet non-living? When I die, can my remains turn into a planet? What's the mechanism that judges the living from the dead to prevent physical "spherification"? Does the "gravity" (or some other inhibiting mechanism) of earth stop the soil from forming into balls?

    I really do appreciate your passion and it's obvious you've studied a lot of information to coalesce it into a model, but whenever I see something correlative asserted as fact, and then that fact built onto by additional correlations until the whole narrative becomes "true" and is asserted as such, I feel compelled (reluctantly, believe it or not) to point that out. Your opinion is wonderful and relatively plausible, but I don't agree with most of it.

    Edit: Looking back, I clearly skimmed the OP and thread before. I sometimes get burnt out on the cosmological stuff, namely, the presumptions that go into attempting to create some sort of provable totality out of our physical realm. I've come to feel this is a fool's errand, as we have to make assumptions about something, generally the nature of the sky.

    For instance, in the OP:

    The conventional Flat Earth model allegedly has an issue with stars rotating in the opposite direction in the Southern Hemisphere. I've heard that there was an explanation, but I'm yet to see it.

    The earth can be mostly planar (relatively speaking, as it obviously isn't flat... vast bodies of ocean seem to be, as far as we can see anyway) and that seems to be how it presents itself, but that observation tells us absolutely nothing about the nature of the sky. These models carry-over the physicality bias to the celestial "objects" (all I see is light, with the possible exception of the moon, which... well, that's another story I think too). Could the sky not be curved itself in some sense, wrapped around us, and perhaps viewed through a lens of distortion that acts as a mirror of sorts (as a result of the "atmos" or perhaps something physical)?

    Beyond that possibility, all of this greatly discounts the role of consciousness in creating our physical experience, which everyone has to agree to some extent, has a role. Philosophically, there's no way I know of to resolve the chicken and the egg of perception and an "objective" physical reality. Does out there exist independently of us or do we create it? Or is it even some combination of the two that our dualistic nature cannot resolve in our lifetimes? These are some of the oldest questions we have in "recorded history" and I think some tend to get bored with the inability to empirically validate any of it. So they pick a side and start their storytelling! It's definitely human nature, of some kind.

    From the moment we become all tonal we begin making pairs. We sense our two sides, but we always represent them with items of the tonal. We say that the two parts of us are the soul and the body. Or mind and matter. Or good and evil. God and Satan. We never realize, however, that we are merely pairing things on the island, very much like pairing coffee and tea, or bread and tortillas, or chili and mustard. I tell you, we are weird animals. We get carried away and in our madness we believe ourselves to be making perfect sense.

    Basically, models like the globe have sort of all made us think that the Earth even having a shape is definitely a valid question. I think that needs to be proven first and ultimately, I'm pretty sure that's not even possible.
    Last edited:
    Similar articles
    Article starter Title Section Replies Date
    KorbenDallas Two Hemispheres: do they form a sphere? Earth Shape and Size 0

    Similar articles