[lodestar]

Excellent! I'm glad you recognized my symbol for its meaning. You are very intelligent indeed, and it is reflected in your theory, which in turn is reflected in this symbol. Thanks also for complimenting me on this symbol.

This is the symbol that represents everything. It shows the true natural relationship of everything. So this symbol is actually the true symbol of 1/0, and it is better than any equation. It came to me in a revelation, and it holds many many secrets. You can use this symbol to represent your theory.

kudos, Lee

[protheory]

No problem Lee, I recognised it as symbolising the true nature of everything right away, the symmetry speaks for itself really and I see it as I described above, it's similar in symmetry to my pics and we're both seeing the same thing here aren't we.

I have also seen this in everything, way beyond words, all buildings and structures, all nature, everything, it's just difficult to describe isn't it.

That's why I resorted to using pictures, then you can see into everything without having to imagine the words.

[protheory]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick

Hello and welcome Protheory to the forum,I have been away soaking up the sun in Turkey for two weeks,you have been very busy posting I see,I may well have a rival?
I have very briefly looked at your theory,seems quite logical in a illogical sort of way!
I agree that within the relative physical universe all is a sequence of three,some say that
if your inner senses are finely tuned,you can actually "hear" the sequence completing itself like-click-click-click!


While I agree that this is so in the relative universe;the sequence of three,I feel that this
does not apply to the absolute universe,which is I feel to be a sequence of one.


kind regards michael.

Hi Michael, I'm Pro, pleased to mee you

It sounds like you enjoyed yourself on holiday, good for you, and thanks very much for the welcome to the board, I'm so glad to have found a place where people actually understand me for once, I'm still trying to get my head around it now actually.

If you want to read any more of my own Pro theory there's this thread and as you say, I've been quite busy posting around the board with my various ideas too so I'm sure we'll be able to have a friendly debate soon.

I'm interested in what you said last on your post, you said that you agree with my three pronged explanation of the universe when viewed relatively, as humans perhaps, but that the absolute universe is ultimately one.

I've been so long now talking and writing about three potentials that I'd forgotten how I originally used to view the absolute universe, by this I mean the universe at the end of the day so to speak, after all things are said and done.

I remember writing that ultimately the universe is change, and that it only forms in three potentials when we look at it relatively, I'd forgotten about this until you mentioned it there.

By relative I'm talking about the fact that to say and/or type 'universe' or even 'change' necessarily depends upon the relative existence of humans and consciousness to create the observation in the first place.

I hope you see what I mean here but I've written about this removal of consciousness from ultimate perceptions before so I can always quote some earlier text for you too.

Thanks again for the welcome.

PRO

[protheory]

I've posted this in the Russell's paradox thread and I thought I'd better post it here too, my motto here is that every little helps I suppose with regards to a TOE and an understanding of Pro theory.

I'm constantly thinkng of how to communicate more effectively and positively but I guess I'm only human at the end of the day so I'll just have to keep trying and trying

All that be is 123

Three things, three levels, and three theories...

I think that we need three levels to provide an accurate explanation of the three possible potentials of everything, nothing and also most importantly neutrality.

Everybody knows that when you make a decision you either choose one path or the other, you have left and you also have right, you have male and female, up and down...the list is literally endless isn't it.

I don't mind or dispute this principle but I feel that it is extremely important not to forget about neutrality, I feel that this is where we've been going wrong all this time, in a western knowledge sense I suppose this would be since Newton proposed an equal and opposite reaction for every action.

This seems profound doesn't it, two opposites, good and evil, forwards and backwards, everything and nothing, and particularly from a scientific point of view it rings true doesn't it.

This is fine for everyday life, perhaps in reality (whatever that is) we don't need to account for neutrality as in a human sense neutrality is the point between opposites, it is neither good nor evil, it is neutral between the two.

Pro Theory

As I've just said, opposites seem to work for the majority of the time but in actual fact there is also the theoretical possibility for neutrality too, even though it may seem not worth considering as by its very definition it is unknowable.

I think that if we are ever to be truly "accurate" in our knowledge we need to account for neutrality also, if we want to be pedantically accurate about everything, nothing AND neutral.

If you doubt this important point then try to "prove" Pro theory "wrong" and I will use neutrality as the third option to loop all criticism, this is not my idea of somehow proving myself right, it's just my way of trying to communicate the neutral possibility within the accepted view of everything as opposites.


The Axiom of Choice

This third way or middle path is the reason why I don't talk about the positive path at the current moment, I believe in and follow the positive path at all times in my life but I felt that if I were to state this first without us all agreeing on a TOE or in the case of Pro theory a TOE, theory of nothing plus neutral, it might obscure the three potentials message and shift the focus onto something singular.

I actually think that the axiom of positive choice is a part of everything but that it comes after the three potentials definition, it's a part of Pro theory but only one of the three possible parts.

I don't mind making the positive choice later on in time when we've all established the true nature of everything and nothing and neutral but I feel that until this is achieved I must try to explain my three potentials argument...THEN the positive decision can be used and accepted, and promoted as the correct way to live your life.

Completeness

What I'm trying to communicate here is that there's nothing wrong with positivity but that we can't truly make that choice as the true path until we know what everything, nothing and neutral is.

I think that seeing as Pro theory is now accepted as a theory of three potentials, rather than just a TOE the definition of which is singular in the popular imagination as Lodestar kindly pointed out, that Pro theory is even more "accurate" than I thought it was.

I also think that now I understand that the concept of a TOE is singular that my theory is actually even better than a TOE, more accurate than any possible TOE could ever hope to be, due to the looping proof it provides within itself which I've stated many times before.

I'm just trying to show that theoretically there is three choices/potentials/ideas/theories etcetera.

You can change the words around if you want to, you can agree, disagree and nothing if you like, I just think that it's important to understand three things before we choose to make the positive choice.

Three Theories

So I feel that ultimately we have three theories, namely a theory of everything, a theory of nothing, and a theory of neutral, this is ultimate accuracy in my view and if we accept and understand this we can THEN make the choice.

I have been thinking that Pro theory is a part of the three possible theories, but that there's two more theories possible too.

The School of the Future

I imagine a primary school of the future, the children are taught that there are three levels to all things, the most literal level is Pro theory which is a theory of everything, nothing and neutral, including its seemingly meaningless loop of proof, not proof and neutrality.

The next level is less literal and more practical, it's the opposites level, the idea that there is left and right, good and evil, up and down, and the children are taught that this is the everyday level, more practical than the literal level of Pro theory and at this opposites level one may make a choice between opposite potentials.

Then there's the third level, this level is singular, the idea that 2 plus 2 equals 4, the idea that my name is Pro (singularly), and that positivity is the best way to try and live your life, and the idea that Russell's Paradox is provable singularly.

The Children's Choice

Now that we have explained how all things work and may form this leaves the choice up to the individual child, imagine a conversation in the playground between children, one may say "Well I take the literal Pro theory view but I also don't plus neutral simultaneously."

Another child might say "Fair enough but I choose the opposites view on this and I choose my own path of either good or evil in my life" and a third child might simply say "Well, I'm choosing the singular view and I'm hungry, shall we go for dinner."

This way we give the children the choice and the knowledge with which to make an informed choice, we don't hold anything back or try to tell them anything unchanging such as "If you do this then such and such will definitely happen" we just help them to understand the three theoretical choices for themselves openly and honestly.

I hope that this post makes my ideas somewhat clearer to everybody, I have a lot more to say but I basically think we need to agree on our ideas before we are able to make an informed choice, whether for good or bad, understanding or not understanding...

Pro

[lodestar]

Ok, so protheory is a theory of nothing, everything, and anything. We can state this more simply and completely by saying that protheory is a theory of anything, because anything includes both nothing and everything. So when we say that protheory is the theory of anything we are saying it is a theory of three potentials.

Ok, now let's bring in some mathematics. Let's bring in the number 0/0 which is commonly called "indeterminate" in math because depending on how you solve it you can show that it is equal to any other number. So that's a complicated way of saying that 0/0 is the number anything. So 0/0 can be equal to 1, 2, 6, -22, or any other number for that matter. 0/0 can even be equal to 0 or 1/0 if it wants to.

So 0/0 is the number anything, and it can be positive, negative, or neutral. So protheory is the theory of anything, the theory of 0/0. Now there are two forms of neutral that 0/0 can take. There is the neutral form that is both positive and negative, and the neutral form that is neither positive nor negative. The neutral form of 0/0 that is both positive and negative is 1/0, and the neutral from of 0/0 that is neither positive nor negative is 0. So since zero is neither positive nor negative zero is the form of anything that is nothing. Since 1/0 is both positive and negative 1/0 is the form of anything that is everything. So 0/0 is anything, it can be either positive or negative, or it can be neutral, and there are two forms of neutral. One form of neutral is both positive and negative (1/0) and the other form is neither (0).

1/0 has traditionally been called undefined because it confuses mathematicians that it is both positive and negative. It actually makes perfect sense though and since it is BOTH positive and negative, it is defined as both, and thus it is defined. 0 on the other hand is neither positive nor negative. So 0 is actually the number that is undefined, not 1/0.

Ok, so let's go back to protheory. As I said, protheory is the theory of three potentials, the theory of 0/0. 0/0 can be anything, nothing, or everything. So being about three potentials protheory is both wrong, right, and neutral. So everytime we define protheory as true we need to use the form of 0/0 that is also true. THis is how we turn protheory into a theory with 3 seperate meanings that are all true.

So when we define 0/0 as true 0/0 takes the form 1/0. WHen we define 0/0 as false 0/0 takes the form 0. We could say instead that 0 is true and 1/0 is false, but that would not be true. That would be an example of pessimism. So when protheory is false, 0/0 takes the form of 0, and when protheory is true, 0/0 takes the form of 1/0, and this is because everything is true and nothing is false, according to the principle of the theory of everything.

SO that is how you take your theory and give it the correct definitions for the three potentials. What's wrong is defined as wrong and what's right is defined as right, so we know that the theory is right even though it's wrong, because what's wrong is not right. Right? So if the theory is right, we don't have to think about it being wrong or neutral anymore, because we defined the part that's wrong as wrong, and the part that's right as right. Similarly, we don't have to think about nothing anymore, because we defined everything as true. Then your theory becomes the theory of 1/0.

Originally Posted by protheory

I've posted this in the Russell's paradox thread and I thought I'd better post it here too, my motto here is that every little helps I suppose with regards to a TOE and an understanding of Pro theory.

I'm constantly thinkng of how to communicate more effectively and positively but I guess I'm only human at the end of the day so I'll just have to keep trying and trying

All that be is 123

Three things, three levels, and three theories...

I think that we need three levels to provide an accurate explanation of the three possible potentials of everything, nothing and also most importantly neutrality.

Everybody knows that when you make a decision you either choose one path or the other, you have left and you also have right, you have male and female, up and down...the list is literally endless isn't it.

I don't mind or dispute this principle but I feel that it is extremely important not to forget about neutrality, I feel that this is where we've been going wrong all this time, in a western knowledge sense I suppose this would be since Newton proposed an equal and opposite reaction for every action.

This seems profound doesn't it, two opposites, good and evil, forwards and backwards, everything and nothing, and particularly from a scientific point of view it rings true doesn't it.

This is fine for everyday life, perhaps in reality (whatever that is) we don't need to account for neutrality as in a human sense neutrality is the point between opposites, it is neither good nor evil, it is neutral between the two.

Pro Theory

As I've just said, opposites seem to work for the majority of the time but in actual fact there is also the theoretical possibility for neutrality too, even though it may seem not worth considering as by its very definition it is unknowable.

I think that if we are ever to be truly "accurate" in our knowledge we need to account for neutrality also, if we want to be pedantically accurate about everything, nothing AND neutral.

If you doubt this important point then try to "prove" Pro theory "wrong" and I will use neutrality as the third option to loop all criticism, this is not my idea of somehow proving myself right, it's just my way of trying to communicate the neutral possibility within the accepted view of everything as opposites.


The Axiom of Choice

This third way or middle path is the reason why I don't talk about the positive path at the current moment, I believe in and follow the positive path at all times in my life but I felt that if I were to state this first without us all agreeing on a TOE or in the case of Pro theory a TOE, theory of nothing plus neutral, it might obscure the three potentials message and shift the focus onto something singular.

I actually think that the axiom of positive choice is a part of everything but that it comes after the three potentials definition, it's a part of Pro theory but only one of the three possible parts.

I don't mind making the positive choice later on in time when we've all established the true nature of everything and nothing and neutral but I feel that until this is achieved I must try to explain my three potentials argument...THEN the positive decision can be used and accepted, and promoted as the correct way to live your life.

Completeness

What I'm trying to communicate here is that there's nothing wrong with positivity but that we can't truly make that choice as the true path until we know what everything, nothing and neutral is.

I think that seeing as Pro theory is now accepted as a theory of three potentials, rather than just a TOE the definition of which is singular in the popular imagination as Lodestar kindly pointed out, that Pro theory is even more "accurate" than I thought it was.

I also think that now I understand that the concept of a TOE is singular that my theory is actually even better than a TOE, more accurate than any possible TOE could ever hope to be, due to the looping proof it provides within itself which I've stated many times before.

I'm just trying to show that theoretically there is three choices/potentials/ideas/theories etcetera.

You can change the words around if you want to, you can agree, disagree and nothing if you like, I just think that it's important to understand three things before we choose to make the positive choice.

Three Theories

So I feel that ultimately we have three theories, namely a theory of everything, a theory of nothing, and a theory of neutral, this is ultimate accuracy in my view and if we accept and understand this we can THEN make the choice.

I have been thinking that Pro theory is a part of the three possible theories, but that there's two more theories possible too.

The School of the Future

I imagine a primary school of the future, the children are taught that there are three levels to all things, the most literal level is Pro theory which is a theory of everything, nothing and neutral, including its seemingly meaningless loop of proof, not proof and neutrality.

The next level is less literal and more practical, it's the opposites level, the idea that there is left and right, good and evil, up and down, and the children are taught that this is the everyday level, more practical than the literal level of Pro theory and at this opposites level one may make a choice between opposite potentials.

Then there's the third level, this level is singular, the idea that 2 plus 2 equals 4, the idea that my name is Pro (singularly), and that positivity is the best way to try and live your life, and the idea that Russell's Paradox is provable singularly.

The Children's Choice

Now that we have explained how all things work and may form this leaves the choice up to the individual child, imagine a conversation in the playground between children, one may say "Well I take the literal Pro theory view but I also don't plus neutral simultaneously."

Another child might say "Fair enough but I choose the opposites view on this and I choose my own path of either good or evil in my life" and a third child might simply say "Well, I'm choosing the singular view and I'm hungry, shall we go for dinner."

This way we give the children the choice and the knowledge with which to make an informed choice, we don't hold anything back or try to tell them anything unchanging such as "If you do this then such and such will definitely happen" we just help them to understand the three theoretical choices for themselves openly and honestly.

I hope that this post makes my ideas somewhat clearer to everybody, I have a lot more to say but I basically think we need to agree on our ideas before we are able to make an informed choice, whether for good or bad, understanding or not understanding...

Pro

[protheory]

Originally Posted by lodestar

Ok, so protheory is a theory of nothing, everything, and anything. We can state this more simply and completely by saying that protheory is a theory of anything, because anything includes both nothing and everything. So when we say that protheory is the theory of anything we are saying it is a theory of three potentials.

Ok, now let's bring in some mathematics. Let's bring in the number 0/0 which is commonly called "indeterminate" in math because depending on how you solve it you can show that it is equal to any other number. So that's a complicated way of saying that 0/0 is the number anything. So 0/0 can be equal to 1, 2, 6, -22, or any other number for that matter. 0/0 can even be equal to 0 or 1/0 if it wants to.

So 0/0 is the number anything, and it can be positive, negative, or neutral. So protheory is the theory of anything, the theory of 0/0. Now there are two forms of neutral that 0/0 can take. There is the neutral form that is both positive and negative, and the neutral form that is neither positive nor negative. The neutral form of 0/0 that is both positive and negative is 1/0, and the neutral from of 0/0 that is neither positive nor negative is 0. So since zero is neither positive nor negative zero is the form of anything that is nothing. Since 1/0 is both positive and negative 1/0 is the form of anything that is everything. So 0/0 is anything, it can be either positive or negative, or it can be neutral, and there are two forms of neutral. One form of neutral is both positive and negative (1/0) and the other form is neither (0).

1/0 has traditionally been called undefined because it confuses mathematicians that it is both positive and negative. It actually makes perfect sense though and since it is BOTH positive and negative, it is defined as both, and thus it is defined. 0 on the other hand is neither positive nor negative. So 0 is actually the number that is undefined, not 1/0.

Ok, so let's go back to protheory. As I said, protheory is the theory of three potentials, the theory of 0/0. 0/0 can be anything, nothing, or everything. So being about three potentials protheory is both wrong, right, and neutral. So everytime we define protheory as true we need to use the form of 0/0 that is also true. THis is how we turn protheory into a theory with 3 seperate meanings that are all true.

So when we define 0/0 as true 0/0 takes the form 1/0. WHen we define 0/0 as false 0/0 takes the form 0. We could say instead that 0 is true and 1/0 is false, but that would be a pessimistic definition. So when protheory is false, 0/0 takes the form of 0, and when protheory is true, 0/0 takes the form of 1/0, and this is because everything is true and nothing is false, according to the principle of the theory of everything.

SO that is how you take your theory and give it the correct definitions for the three potentials. What's wrong is wrong and what's right is right, so we know that the theory is right even though it's wrong. Right? So if the theory is right, we don't have to think about it being wrong or neutral anymore. Similarly, we don't have to think about nothing anymore, only everything. Then your theory becomes the theory of 1/0.

That is extremely interesting to me you know, I've never really seen it quite like that before.

I don't really know what to say here as I've only just read your post but it's quite amazing to me to be honest, I like the way you define Pro theory using symbols from math which I've never really done myself.

I'm really pleased about this post, it shows once and for all that I understand you and that you understand me too, which is excellent

Sorry about the smilies but it helps me to communicate my positive and happy attitude better than clear text, some people on other boards I post on say that it seems cheesy but I think that if a person is trying to be positive it's all good so I choose to use them

I think it's going to take me a while to take in exactly what you've said here and for it to become a part of me but like I say I'm impressed and very pleased that we understand each other in this way.

I've been thinking more and more about how to illustrate how I see numbers as repeating combinations of three potential amounts lately and also I'm thinking lots about my whole philosophy of everything.

May I ask you Lodestar, what do you think about my Millennium Problem answers?

I have answered all seven of them on my site and the most popular one on toequest is the "pattern in primes" which I've also been writing about, I'd really like to hear what you think about these problems too some time.

I'll think some more about all this and particularly numbers repeating and write some more soon, I've got a bit of text on my desktop that I'm in the process of writing at the moment, just a bit about my own toequest and my life before and after Pro theory so I'll get to work on that and post that here too.

I was going to post some more on this thread earlier today but real life got in the way I'm afraid

Thanks again for showing me this method of visualising my own theory, I really appreciate it a lot.

Respectful regards.

Pro

[protheory]

I think it's important for me to say that I've come across a new understanding of this board and the whole idea of a theory of everything.

When I first decided that Pro theory was a TOE I wasn't really aware that other people might intend something different than myself when they mention "everything."

To me personally the definition of everything contains everything, nothing and also neutrality but it seems clear to me now that what I have written is actually a theory of everything, nothing, and neutrality, rather than a singularly stated theory of everything as I had first indicated.

This whole idea came about because I am manic-depressive and I also suffer from adult ADHD so as a consequence I literally can't stop thinking, I really can't.

Strange as it sounds I also get terrible mental blocks too, as well as the rushing flow of thought that I usually experience, I can't go into too much detail here but suffice to say that I grew up in a very religious family and I was very upset and confused for a long time, as well as being manic-depressive and ADHD.

I just couldn't stop thinking, ever, and eventually (thank goodness) I discovered that when I looked at atoms and imagined everything, nothing and neutrality through the guise of atomic potentials that I could see a pattern right from a single atom to the whole of the universe itself, whatever that means

This discovery really helped me to find a way to break through my mental blocks and such, and Pro theory gave me hope and positivity forever more for which I am truly thankful.


Right now though I'm a bit lost to be honest, I've been kind of set on a particular path with this idea for so long it's proving strange to me to re-evaluate my whole method and my ideas but I joined this board to get Pro theory out of my own mind and to see what everybody else thought about it so I guess this is just the beginning and so it feels strange as it's only just started to change.


I just don't really know what I want from this any more, at least not at the moment, I too believe in positivity or neutrality before negativity but I think I need a bit more time to clarify my own position again, change always seems strange and disconcerting at first but eventually it gains acceptance within me.


The way I see things at the moment is that i obviously don't like negativity so my choices deep within myself are either the absolute removal of Zen or the ultimate positivity of the Buddhists that sweep the floor in front of themselves before every step so as not to harm a life and I choose the positive path.


That's all I know for sure at the current moment

[protheory]

Numbers and Pro Theory

I've been thinking about numbers and how to explain them here like I see them in my mind.

Let's start with the number 1.

1 means 1 (singular).

2 means 2 x 1, or 1 x 2, so it's a repeat of the original 1 (singular), it is the opposite of 1.

3 means 1 + 1 + 1, or 2 + 1, or 1 + 2.


Higher

And that's it with the positive numbers really, if we go any higher we end up repeating ourselves over and over.


Example

Let's try 4 for an example.

4 is 2 x 2, or 1 + 1 + 1 + 1, or 3 + 1, or 1 + 2 + 1 etc.

And 5?

5 is 4 + 1, or 3 + 2, or 1 + 4 etc but no matter how far forward we go the repetition stays the same.

Whatever enormous number we choose to create we are still repeating the three original amounts over and over again.

All numbers are either odd, even, or zero, no matter how relatively "large" in size.

All numbers are odd (1) even (2) or neutral (0).


The Primes

As I understand the primes they are numbers that can only be divided by themselves and 1.

So if we look at primes from the beginning we notice that 2 and 3 are prime.

Now I would say that these are the only true primes and that they repeat themselves following this pattern, over and over again.

Let's take 5 for an example, now we know that 5 is a combination of 2 + 3, both of which are prime and I don't think that 5 is anything new actually in the grand scheme of things.

I think that 5 is a repeat combination of the two original primes of 2 and 3.

And if we look at 7?

7 is a combination of 5 + 2, or 3 + 2 + 2, or 2 + 2 + 3 and yet it follows the same pattern of simple repetition.


Conclusion

My conclusion from this simple rule of repetition is that though we can invent enormous numbers we are actually repeating the three amounts over and over again ad infinitum.

I'm not saying that we are somehow mistaken when we say things like "I have 10 million dollars" merely that the amount is composed of repeated potentials.

I think this is important to our true understanding of numbers and particularly mathematics, which is the accepted form of explanation for the universe at the current moment.

As I have said before, no matter how far forward we choose to go with numbers we are still repeating three original amounts.


The Largest Number

Now let's say that we somehow managed to find the largest possible number, for example purposes we'll have to assume its existence for now.

There might be all sorts of wacky and far out theories about this largest possible amount, and no doubt many such theories already exist right now.

I would look at this amount and say that it is either odd, even, or neutral in its potential regardless of its relative size because this pattern continues through numbers forever.


Pro Theory

And that's what Pro theory has to say about numbers, as I have said before many times, the 'words' negative, positive, and neutral symbolise the three potentials within the universe or whatever you choose to call it.

You can change the words around in any way you like but at the end of the day the potentials, ideas, amounts, directions, words still form in a pattern of the same three symbolic potentials in my opinion.

[lodestar]

Originally Posted by protheory

The Largest Number

Now let's say that we somehow managed to find the largest possible number, for example purposes we'll have to assume its existence for now.

There might be all sorts of wacky and far out theories about this largest possible amount, and no doubt many such theories already exist right now.

I would look at this amount and say that it is either odd, even, or neutral in its potential regardless of its relative size because this pattern continues through numbers forever.

Very interesting post protheory. The largest number is 1/0. It is the number everything. It is the inverse of 0, the number nothing. So 1/0 is the highest number and it is like positive AND negative infinity combined to form the absolute greatest value. SO when I say absolute greatest value I mean 1/0 is the highest number and it represents the most value, the value of everything, which is indeed priceless. So 1/0 is the highest number, the meaning of meaning, the price of pricelessness, the limit of limitlessness, the timelessness of time itself. So 1/0 is the largest number and that's why the theory of everything is really the theory of 1/0. 1/0 is totally synonymous with the words "everything" and "all" just like how 0 is totally synonymous with the words "nothing" and "none". 1/0 is the size of all reality and the extent of eternity. It is simple in a complex way.

[lodestar]

here you go PRO, check out this diagram I made called the number circle. When you look at this you will understand the place that 1/0 occupies at the culmination of positive and negative infinities. ALso you will understand how space/time goes through an inversal or exversal everytime the arrow of time crosses over it's axis (this is what happened at the "big bang")

http://www.photobucket.com/albums/y9...everything.jpg