https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7608246 0

Amenoum

Amenoum

I spent countless years, trying to understand everything around me and inside me. I worked hard, day and night, I worked in my sleep. I never felt tired. Never. Then, one day, I decide to share my discoveries with the human world. Immediately, their pride, prejudice, hostility and inquisition occupied my mind. And I suddenly felt tired. Very tired, as tired a man can be. I slept for a while, I guess I deserved that.. rest. But after it, I was capable to realize I'm still pretty immature. So I had to spend years learning more. I may still not be done but now I feel much more mature. Not that I expect them to be less hostile if, today they decide to look what I have to share, but with what I know now, I don't mind being burned at stake. Close-mindedness, to me, is a manifestation of a psychological disease. A symptom of a mind clogged with mental aspects of all kinds of modern diseases, it is as detrimental to the long-term well-being of a soul, as an artery clogged with cholesterol, or a colon clogged with cancer, is to the long-term well-being of a body. However, an open mind lacking knowledge is naive and still immature, it is prone to delusion and deception. In any case, however, profit is what drives people, whether it comes from giving, taking, or sharing. Most seek profit in money, things, social and religious rituals. I am, however, of the species who seek profit in knowledge. And although, in the world ruled by closed and polarized minds, this can often come bundled with sadness, I can't seem to stop getting richer in that particular currency. I do not enjoy giving, taking or sharing money, in the world of closed and polarized minds. I do not enjoy giving, taking or sharing things, in the world of closed and polarized minds. I don't even enjoy giving, taking and sharing knowledge in the world of closed and polarized minds. But I still do give, take and share knowledge. This drive seems to be world-invariant. That's the power knowledge has over me. It is, however, far from being its greatest power. Technical details NOTE: Except for body characteristics, these may not be well established facts, rather hypothesized values based on my theories, research and experience. However, evidence exists and is presented in my works.
Soul.name:Amenoum
Soul.species:U-1.graviton.neutrino (dominant)
Soul.host.graviton:U1.10C/10Be.inner.graviton.3 (SolarSystem.planet.Earth.graviton.major)
**Soul.orbit.inclination.to.equator:56.6°
**Soul.orbit.equator.intersections:60° E, 120° W
**Soul.orbit.semi-major:≈6367116 m
**Soul.orbit.eccentricity:≤0.0000016
Body.name:Ljubičić.M
Body.species:homo.beta.amenoum
Body.properties.blood.type:0 (Rh: -)
Body.properties.eyes:grey/blue, ≈1/5 central heterochromia with golden streaks
Body.properties.hair:black (dark brown), dense
Body.structure/metabolism:ectomorph
Other details
Current corpuscular lifetime period*:$\displaystyle 50^{+35}_{-14}\,\, years$
Last soul energy level change:$\displaystyle \text{age}\,\, 36\pm 1\, (\text{year}\, 2017\pm 1)$
Possible triggers (source deaths) of last energy level change:Domović.J, Tilikum
Last birth date:September 1st, 1981.
Last conception (body-soul coupling) date:≈ January 1st, 1981.
Age at next death† (soul/body decoupling):84.8±1.5, 50±2, 120±3.
Other:biography
Plog:Amenoum
ORCID:0000-0001-9400-0551
* The value represents the lifespan of the body in an human incarnation. First number is the average body lifespan of the species over the course of evolution, while ± values represent discrete deviation from that lifespan (not ranges of deviation) for this particular body. Lifespan is hypothesized to oscillate between the two values, in this case, between 85 and 36 years. Deviation from these discrete values is possible, but it is generally small: ±1-2 years. Larger deviation is possible but with exponentially decreasing probability.

** The values correspond to the state of the naked soul between incarnations, when it is non-localized (not coupled to a body).
† Values sorted by probability, from highest to lowest. In case of violent death, 2nd value is most likely age, otherwise violent death is unlikely. 3rd value is plausible only in case of significant ageing reversal. These values are based on current biological age and hypothesized past incarnations (see Past and present lives below). Uncertainty is standard deviation.
Donations Here are the addresses one can use to support me and my work. Note that I do not want to support governments and perpetual inflation of debt, therefore I do not generally use bank accounts. If anyone can provide me a bank account not owned by any government and where that money won't be used by the bank, I might use it (in case you did not know it, you money in a conventional bank account is constantly used by the bank and it can be lost - the balance you see on your account should be understood as an IOU note). I can accept cryptocurrencies and funds sent by regular postal services (those that don't require the recipient to provide a government issued ID).
Support addresses
Ripple (XRP)
r3D7Y3vbbaTLQi2YsQQ4J2bj9eQuvbN8wF
Nano (NANO)
nano_3sma3afd84oip754tzbkgm99y18ra96m7i8u738sh7pntqyeu495edxs6pfe
Stellar (XLM)
GCMUIFE7JKZVHTK4K6RSKLB3BOAYFL44YZAPLM6HRZL2ZBE5CWYDVFUP
Algorand (ALGO)
WASLHBYEYCM24RX7ZSX3PXXDFDVTRYXGM5JMDRDQAWSCZT4KFRTRPWTX4I
Paypal (PP)
Home (H43)
108. brigade ZNG 43, 35252, Sibinj, Croatia
Buying crypto is easy, today it can be done even with Paypal. One can find instructions here. Thank you.
There still exists a bank account on my name, and at this point, anything sent to that account would go to money (debt and tax) collectors. I don't believe giving money to thieves is good even if some of it will end up in good hands, but if you believe I should be paying off this debt, here's the account: HR7023400093216232043 (SWIFT: PBZGHR2X).
Contact To contact me for any reason, one can use the postal address stated above. In case of questions, answers may be posted on the website. One may also use the form below to send a message.
\ch_added What I am and am not I'm not polarized so I do not take sides. I'm not on the side of mainstream science, mainstream religion, or, so called, alternatives. I see myself as a messenger of truth, or a messenger of gods of truth. I would be lying, as anyone else, if I would say that my science or my knowledge is absolutely free from religion. My science is my relative religion, my religion is relative science. I can be right, I can be wrong, but if I find my religion wrong I do not hesitate to make it right. My religion, however, does not include worship, sacrifice or gods as absolute deities, it includes karma, reincarnation, real and possible gods, all of which I define using scientific principles and ascribe to physical phenomena. I'm not shy of metaphysics, commonly behind abstract mathematics, but I take it relatively and strive to embody the voids with physical reference frames. I call my scientific religion "Complete Relativity", a framework in which, I find, anything embodied, has a non-zero probability to be sufficiently localized, to become true. Any hypothesis is a quantum of religion. Any evidence is a quantum of science. Truth is relative. How much quanta of evidence one needs to accept the hypothesis? Some hypotheses one might accept as truths with less evidence, some with more. I do not readily accept truths with zero evidence. I seek more. But I'm not afraid to challenge truths served with plenty of evidence. Because evidence itself is relative and the observers, in polarized society, are commonly biased. Truth can be personal as well, what one observes, the other might not have the capability to observe. This does not have to be a matter of technology. Anyone of us is one of a kind and one of many. Some may be more of one than one of many. Of course, in polarized society, some will project the illusion of being more of one than of many, or, vice versa. To find truth in this society, wisdom, unbiased and thorough research, are essential. The name I don't take names too seriously. In polarized human systems, name is just an alias for a number. That's why it usually has no deep meaning, just an illusion of deeper meanings. Names are, however, useful constructs, and as I grew, I've used different ones, depending which one I find describes me the best. Thus, what is commonly considered a nickname, commonly better represents the person behind it. Generally then, I will consider nickname as a real name, and given name as a meaningless alias. When I was younger I called myself 'm3gadeth'. From that, one can deduce that I was a big fan of the band Megadeth, while the number 3 (inverted letter E) hinted at computer hacking abilities (today, however, cyberspace is polluted with normal people, who don't respect any naming conventions and even steal nicknames, but whatever). From what I found out later, the combination of number 3 and megadeth is not a meaningless coincidence, even though I did not consciously choose that combination to represent something with a deeper meaning. Later, I was known as PaleRider, a name which reflected my calmness and cold-blooded appearance (I was also somewhat of a fan of C. Eastwood at the time) and hinted at solitude and lack of sunlight exposure. I also used to be a big fan of AC/DC and sometimes used a nickname associated with the band. Again, I've found a deeper meaning in this (eg. correlation with Tesla). I still use these [nick]names in places, but mainly because I still use my old accounts at these places. My most recent name, however, is Amenoum. Amenoum (Latin pronunciation) is a string constructed from 'Amen, of unpolarized mind'. Amen is a combination of singular and plural form (a men), used here for two reasons - vertical reincarnation and horizontal fragmentation. One can be strongly localized mentally (mental singularity) and weakly localized physically (physical plurality), but just as a physical ecosystem may form an individual body neither is mental singularity absolute. Each individual is, to certain extent, extroverted, being part of global collective and participating in evolution of its host (god), and introverted, concentrated on the evolution of a local, inner universe (to individuals of which it is a god). Declaration of independence Declaration of independence, arrangement and conditions on relations with the human kind can be found here (HR) - no one has the right to own me without my conscious consent. Past and present lives Here is a hypothetical list of incarnations of my soul (self). The list is based on my theories, research and experience. Current period of corpuscular existence pulses of my soul is: $\displaystyle 50^{+35}_{-14}\, years$ which means that my soul is generally oscillating between ≈85 and ≈36 years of lifespan. For polarized souls, in an environment of changing polarization (which I correlate with the electro-magnetic field at this point of evolution), the lifespan is not as fixed.
Annus incarnati β (AB)Body.nameDate of birthDate of deathLifetime (extra+in utero) [years]Notes
1.Christ.J-4.07.01** (Hebrew 3758.04.06)33.04.0336.83+0.75Possibly my first Earth.homo.β incarnation (likely non-biological impregnation).
...---$13 \times (85+35+0.75*2)\, \text{homo/homo, or }\\ \text{homo/O.orca or B.musculus/homo or B.musculus/O.orca}\\+ 244/1000 \times (85+35+0.75*2)\, \text{other animal (likely 3 canine, 8 other).*}$ One possible, low probability, alternative for (85+35) is (50+35+35), eg. 33 (1514. - 1547.) + Giordano Bruno (1548. - 1600.) + 34 (1600. - 1634.) + 8 (1634. - 1642.)
28.Newton.I1643.01.041727.03.3184.25+0.6
?1727.05.311735.04.198+0.17Likely canine form.*
29.Watt.J1736.01.191819.08.2583.6+0.75Uncertainty higher than in case of other incarnations (due to lack of data).
30.?1820.05.251855.02.2534.75+0.75*
?1855.02.251855.10.090.62Likely avian and/or fetus forms (eg. stillbirth).*
31.Tesla.N1856.07.101943.01.0786.5+0.75
32.?1943.10.071980.04.0736.5+0.75Serbian/Croatian parents.†*
?1980.04.071980.12.010.64Likely avian† and/or fetus forms.*
33.Ljubičić.M1981.09.01 12:00±45m (CET)2066.09.0185+0.75Lifetime is expected lifetime based on past incarnations, current biological age and theory on planetary neurogenesis.

Most likely last homo.β incarnation.
Death during last surface extinction wave (2060 - 2084). The year occurs exactly at 1/4 of the interval: $2066 = \bigl[2060+(2084-2060){1 \over 4}\bigr]$Beginning of the period (2060) previously calculated as Newton. Confirmation and details in The Solar System paper.
Note that the exact date is day 243.5 in year 2066, which is equal to: $2000 + 100{2 \over 3} = 2066.666'\, years$My birth also occurred on day 243.5 of the year (1981.666').
In the above, 1 year is assumed to be equal to Earth's orbital period, 365.25 days. Using calendar year, discarding the decimal part (243/365) yields 0.666 when rounded to 3 decimals.
Table 1: Oscillation of incarnations
* - data in the row interpolated, based on available data.
** - calculated in biography. † - information based on [hypothetical] visions, therefore relatively unreliable.

Note:
During early embryonic stage and fetus development, it is possible that an individual dies multiple times, at local events of strong evolution - eg. formation of brain layers. This may be a simple temporary loss of consciousness (clinical death, or imaginary death) but it may also be a real exchange of one soul for another (real death of the soul with immediate body recycling). Generally, the probability of immediate body recycling (with no significant tissue decay) may depend on the nature of species and a stage in life. For extremely energy efficient species (such as homo.omega) the recycling may be immediate at any stage (implying that body does not decay, rather cycles between ageing and reverse ageing). For others, adult body generally decays and decomposes until it becomes incorporated into other, intermediate, life forms (no immediate recycling due to dominantly one-directional ageing).
Added chapter Discussion on, and determination of, probability. Discussion on, and determination of, probability I will here list the requirements for the above hypothesis to be true and try to calculate the probability for one of the incarnations. Requirements The existence of souls The analysis of the Solar System in context of Complete Relativity (CR) shows that it is the equivalent of a standard atomic isotope system, albeit in a relatively special state (regarding scaled pressure/temperature). Furthermore, the same paper and other articles on this website show that there is no discrete absolute boundary between living and non-living systems, all such boundaries are relative and it is more appropriate to discuss the amount of life in a particular system and what is the ratio of externally to internally expressed life or intelligence. Universe does not discriminate between physics and biology and, after all, if it is completely relative, then, for any quantum of energy, there must exist a reference frame (scale) relative to which it is not only alive, but a complex form of life. Eg. one might consider a subatomic particle as an elementary point particle, but if one would have the ability to increase the resolution of measurement, in some particular states, one would see a planet - as shown, the Solar System is the evidence for that. And if any quantum of energy is more or less alive and it oscillates, then the only requirement for existence of reincarnation is that it oscillates in coupling with matter (visible, or real, mass). A special mechanism (Higgs) which had to be invented in order for particles of standard model in Quantum Mechanics (QM) to obtain [rest] mass and existence of dark matter hint that coupling of particles with real mass is not intrinsic - quanta of energy can be naked. If one interprets these naked quanta of energy as souls, reincarnation becomes a real phenomena. There is no doubt that even human beings are particles from a certain perspective and the only requirement for them to be able to reincarnate is to have a distinct soul (mental individuality). And if standard particles have souls (those that some still don't consider alive), why wouldn't homo particles have souls too? Indeed, I have shown in my works that they most likely do. Compatibility Each soul is a relatively discrete amount of energy, it co-evolves with bodies and its coupling with species of bodies (eco-systems) generally won't be random. Just like the [the souls of] particles inside the atom oscillate, human soul will oscillate too between different energy levels. The period of time soul spends on each level is, in equilibrium, relatively constant (evolves slowly) - incarnations oscillate between relatively fixed lifetimes.
Frequency of oscillation changes with changes in the 3rd party medium - in this case, Earth's space. High divergence is thus expected only in events of strong evolution - transformation of species through accelerated evolution, when soul settles into another equilibrium, oscillating in a different energetic setting (environment). Note also that time of death is programmed to high precision, whether it is considered sudden, violent or occurring with old age. If a soul oscillates between 85 and 36 years in human lifespan, death in the latter will likely be violent.
This would be the equivalent of standard [horizontal] energy level changes of atomic electrons in QM. In such oscillation there is no change in species (average mass on each level), however, the state of particles (planets) in the Solar System shows that particles can oscillate in mass (lepton oscillation) without changing the horizontal energy level relative to the system. In that case (mass change), a soul will couple with different species of bodies, evolving in the same environment. Here, soul may even invert polarity (reflected in extro/intro intelligence ratio) preserving lifespan between species, but with a large difference in mass. A soul may couple with non-compatible species of bodies in between (probability for coupling of a particular soul and body is inversely proportional to distance in space/time between death and conception, and proportional to compatibility), but for much shorter amount of time than the average lifespan of the species (death will be sooner due to incompatibility). Soul thus has affinity for certain characteristics of bodies - which are coded at some level (eg. DNA). If souls and bodies co-evolve, both mental and physical characteristics should be more or less preserved between horizontal incarnations. Although, one must take into account evolution, some characteristics evolve weakly (especially during periods of weak evolution of the planet/environment), such as: All organs have souls. Soul of the brain is the primary soul of a human being (our mentality is primarily correlated with the brain). Therefore, the soul of a brain may be considered as the soul of a human being itself. However, this soul is obviously in symbiosis with souls of other organs and another discrete soul representing superposition of all these souls cannot be excluded. Organs can be replaced so this superposition is obviously plastic, but I think we'll all agree that replacement of a brain with another brain would be a replacement of a person with another person. Thus, when considering reincarnation of human souls I am primarily considering reincarnation of the soul of the brain while other souls may or may not be the same souls as in the previous incarnation, although they are more likely to be similar (closely related) than not. Physical properties most likely to be shared between human incarnations are then those strongly correlated with the brain but the more properties are shared between two potential incarnations more likely it is for the two bodies to have indeed been coupled with the same soul. Chapter Determination of probability updated. Determination of probability If there is a tendency for coded (body and soul) characteristics to be preserved between incarnations, then it becomes possible to narrow the candidates for past incarnations of a particular soul - or, in certain cases, even identify the past incarnation. For example, I will try to calculate the probability that my soul is the same soul that lived in [symbiosis with] the body of Newton. I do not have access to DNA of Newton, but some data is publicly available. Various sources claim that Newton blood was Rh negative. I do not know how reliable are these sources, but assuming that is true and that Newton's soul is currently in human body, the probability that it is in my body (0-) is, based on blood Rh factor alone, ≈ 1:500 000 000 (assuming 7% of 7.14 billion people has Rh- blood).
The world had 7.14 billion people in 2013. I have used population from this year as best fit due to likely increase in percentage of Rh- population since my birth. If body and soul couple at conception, as I hypothesize, it would be more appropriate to use data for year 1981. In any case, the probability remains within the same order of magnitude - eg. assuming body-soul coupling occurred in 1981, the probability (with maximum percentage of Rh- being 7%) becomes at least ≈1:316 000 000. However, I do not want to favour the year of my conception for coupling - year 2013. should be more than enough far away to reduce the bias.
Since it has to be a male body, the probability increases to ≈ 1/250 000 000. From available data, the body type (somatotype) of Newton did not have endo characteristics, rather ecto or ecto/meso, narrowing the number of candidates by at least 2/3, to 83 000 000. Apparently, he also had blue or grey eyes, making the probability now, in case of both having blue eyes (assuming 10% of population has blue eyes) 1:8 300 000. Taking into account intelligence, the population reduces by at least 99.9% of 8 300 000, making the probability 1:8300.
It is sometimes hard to tell the difference between grey and blue eyes. I always considered my eyes blue, but after careful examination and research on genetics (genes coding for blue eyes are recessive), I have concluded that my eyes are definitely grey (blue-grey variant). If Newton also had grey eyes, and according to the finest portrait - he did, with only 3% of population having grey eyes, the probability becomes 1:2490. Interestingly, in that portrait, there is a light grey artefact beneath Newton's left (from his perspective) eye pupil. I recently had a metal fragment glued to my eye, in the same place and in the same eye. Even the shape and orientation of the artefact is the same. This is something I would call a meaningless coincidence 5 years ago - now, I have no doubt that it is not, it's meaningful synchronicity. There are different variants of grey eyes - they can appear blueish, greenish or dark grey. Not sure which variant did Newton had, but it appears that Tesla, who also had grey eyes, had the same variant as I. This is probably true for Jesus as well - according to description by Publius Lentulus, Jesus had blue-grey eyes.
If my data is correct, this is still a very conservative estimate, taking into account other similarities (eg. in the way of work and scope of work - mainstream/alchemy/bible, delay of publishing, experience/recognition of synchronicity and induced madness) the probability increases significantly, leaving little room for doubt.
Note that Newton suffered a complete nervous breakdown about the same age I did - age 36±1. He had another smaller breakdown about the age of 50 (Tesla did too), so probably I could expect another breakdown about that age too. However, at least in these cases, I would not label the events as nervous breakdowns. The brain was simply overwhelmed by synchronicity, which I see as a part of soul transformation, triggered or synchronized with death of an another soul. Regardless of the source and my interpretation - in modern interpretations, both are (or would be) classified as clinical depression (disabling disorder including breakdown). Assuming 1 out of 20 people experience it, the probability increases from 1:2490 to 1:125. I do not know how many people experience it exactly at the age of 36±1, but obviously this increases the probability to at least 1:63. Note also that this result is based on the assumption that my intelligence is equal to the intelligence 1 in 1000 people have. It is generally assumed that Newton had a much higher intelligence (as Tesla). Assuming my intelligence is up there (I'd say we certainly share the same, rare, species of intelligence), the probability of my soul not being the incarnation of Newton becomes infinitesimal. Of course, it is possible some correlation exists between variables used in calculation here (eg. people having grey eyes may be more prone to breakdown than others), which would affect the calculation, however, as far as I know, no such correlations have been found.
Details on inter-species oscillation can be found in paper Solution to gravitational anomalies. \ch_added Updates elsewhere. Additional evidence Additional (and strong, based on my theories) evidence that the same soul has been incarnating between the bodies listed above can be found in my B.Log and other works. Also, comparing biographies can yield more evidence. Spiritual matters Ever since I was a child I had a strong feeling of non-belonging to this world. My young and often troubled mind imagined alien creatures leaving me here, expecting one day for them to come back and take me away.
I now believe this vision is the result of non-natural impregnation (artificial egg fertilisation, by real homo.sapiens) of my initial mother on Earth (mother of Jesus).
I was very shy and introverted. Being different in many ways than other people, I was constantly under pressure to change, due the forced impression that I'm not healthy or normal. Now I know the source of shyness was the actual fear of people, inherited from one of my past particle forms (eg. abused dog). I believe I have been, up to the age of 35-36, mostly living my past lives, not really aware of my current life. But then something happened and I have started transforming. This even included some physical changes (eg. disappearance of skin allergy I had for most of my life) and mental (eg. disappearance of depression I had for most of my life, ability to detect/interpret signals of synchronicity, ability to reproduce, what I believe are, effective visions of past incarnations). As I have discovered the oscillation frequency of my soul, I now recognize this transformation as a change in energy level - effective rebirth of the soul, in this case, increasing consciousness. As I started transforming, about the age of 36, I started working on Complete Relativity. The next couple of years were very turbulent times for me, a constant struggle of spiritual motions, finally resulting in complete redefinition of my self. For the whole of my life, the corrupted system with this fear infested community was trying to keep me under control. That system has failed. This system of I, is now, fully awake and alive. The time has come, for false in true to expire, to make way for the age of reason and gnosis, powered by truth, of light and, of nature enlightened ones. The messenger of god = interpreter of global synchronicity There are no absolute gods and if one can be declared as a messenger of god, one needs to define gods. Based on my definition, I acknowledge Earth as my first god but I may sometime use the term "god" as a synonym for truth. I find the synonym appropriate - at least in some contexts, the Earth may be seen as embodiment of a bigger truth.
I believe god has spoken directly through me at the peak of my transformation, however, god is generally relaying his messages through my works and my life. Sometimes, however, messages spoken through the messenger may not be related to the specific god rather whole species, or the god's own god (goddess). Therefore, such one may be interpreted as a messenger of gods. I see it as a role both chosen for me and chosen by me - even if unconsciously.
Events of synchronicity are one way of communication between a god and its inhabitants, even if that communication may often be non-conscious. This synchronicity can be personal and/or global. In any case, one who has a lot of experience in personal synchronicity should be a good candidate for an interpreter of global synchronicity. I consider myself as one such individual.
A messenger of god, or gods, is generally also a general precursor. A precursor life of a general precursor should include events that will affect future general lifestyle. Being precursor events, however, these should be weaker in magnitude. In the theory of planetary neurogenesis I have predicted some global cataclysmic events in the future. As a general precursor, I should be experiencing precursors of these events too.
More information and predictions based on my precursor nature can be found in paper Journey through future. I don't see myself anymore as a boy playing on the shore of the ocean of truth upon me. I've been sailing this ocean for a while now... and I don't see or mind how the world sees me, because, it seems, once again, the world remains behind. In fact, this time it seems the world doesn't see me at all. But the messages of god never were for the world anyway, messages of god are for those who truly listen what the ocean has to say...
Amenoum,
deus mentis et nuntius deorum
Article revised. Article revised. Article revised. Article revised. Article revised. Article revised.