Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

What is at the edge of the unvierse


GUNNARY SEARGENT HARTMAN

Recommended Posts

if you got to the actual edge ? you'd probably see this beyond it.

linked-image

“Once you can accept the universe as being something expanding into an infinite nothing which is something, wearing stripes with plaid is easy.”

Albert Einstein

Edited by Lt_Ripley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 503
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Virtual Particle

    135

  • greggK

    90

  • sepulchrave

    52

  • Meiliken

    44

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

That's only true to an extent. You're actually brushing on science farther above than just geometry. You're brushing on physics, quantum physics, cosmology, as well as several others. A good analogy might be thinking of a bubble in water. The air inside the bubble is the entire universe. All of space, the trillions of stars, planets, black holes, white holes, galaxies, gases and whatnot all inside this bubble. The outside of this is unknown, perhaps a chaos of matter/antimatter. I'd think a better question would be "what is at the very center of the universe?" If there is an outside to our universe, and an inside to our universe, then there is a center we've not found yet. Now if this is a bubble of existence floating in an eternity of chaos, then the possibility of there being other bubbles with alternate universes exists. Geometry is only the beginning, not the end, of understanding.

Btw, I know where you're thinking is coming from since I use physics in 3 dimensional models in a 3 dimensional space. But there is a construct that exists outside of the 3 dimensional space on the computer. To think there isn't a construct that holds this universe is not grasping the fundementals of science.

Its difficult for me to try and explain how I understand it, but there is no "center" to the universe. The "surface" the universe is expanding on is most probably a 4 dimensional "sphere." Asking if there is chaos "outside" the universe is meaningless for the reason that there is no "outside." There's a possibility of other universes interconnected through a higher dimensional constructs however their effect on us would be unnoticed. We exist along side these universe's as different probabilities, meaning that as multiverses we exist in a 5 dimensional "plane" or whatever you'd call it as 4 dimensional variations of each other from a 3rd dimension perspective.

Its not an easy concept to try and wrap your mind around but thus far it makes the most sense to me. I don't believe in infinities, only states of reality we don't understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its difficult for me to try and explain how I understand it, but there is no "center" to the universe. The "surface" the universe is expanding on is most probably a 4 dimensional "sphere." Asking if there is chaos "outside" the universe is meaningless for the reason that there is no "outside." There's a possibility of other universes interconnected through a higher dimensional constructs however their effect on us would be unnoticed. We exist along side these universe's as different probabilities, meaning that as multiverses we exist in a 5 dimensional "plane" or whatever you'd call it as 4 dimensional variations of each other from a 3rd dimension perspective.

Its not an easy concept to try and wrap your mind around but thus far it makes the most sense to me. I don't believe in infinities, only states of reality we don't understand.

Yes, but if it is a sphere, then there is an exact center of the sphere. But if you don't believe in infinities, then you believe there is an edge, and if there is an edge, the most logical reasoning is that of a sphere. Part of the conjecture is that space while being spheroid, is also foldable like a sheet of paper. All spatial bodies themselves are spheroid after all, and the shortest distance between any two points is a straight line. Yes, these are two ideas, but I'l show how they relate. Since all spatial bodies are spherical, the natural phenomenon would be to assume that so is space. Now since everything moves in a straight line, the edge will never be seen because as one approaches the edge, ones trajectory curves with the natural curvature of space. Kind of like how when you walk on the earth, your perspective is you walking straight, but you're actually curving around the surface of the earth. This is why space seems to have no end, because even if we get to the end, we're really looping back around like a U-turn that you are never able to distinguised tfrom going straight since the curvature is on such an astronimical scale. So yes, the idea of it being infinite is not realistic, but in the scope of its size, it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but if it is a sphere, then there is an exact center of the sphere. But if you don't believe in infinities, then you believe there is an edge, and if there is an edge, the most logical reasoning is that of a sphere. Part of the conjecture is that space while being spheroid, is also foldable like a sheet of paper. All spatial bodies themselves are spheroid after all, and the shortest distance between any two points is a straight line. Yes, these are two ideas, but I'l show how they relate. Since all spatial bodies are spherical, the natural phenomenon would be to assume that so is space. Now since everything moves in a straight line, the edge will never be seen because as one approaches the edge, ones trajectory curves with the natural curvature of space. Kind of like how when you walk on the earth, your perspective is you walking straight, but you're actually curving around the surface of the earth. This is why space seems to have no end, because even if we get to the end, we're really looping back around like a U-turn that you are never able to distinguised tfrom going straight since the curvature is on such an astronimical scale. So yes, the idea of it being infinite is not realistic, but in the scope of its size, it is.

Umm... What I think PsiSeeker meant that our Universe is the surface of a 4-dimensional sphere...

Imagine if we would be in a two-dimensional universe, which in turn is actually the surface of a 3-dimensional sphere... There's no up or down, just forward, backward, left and right, so no matter what way you go to, you'll be going on infinitely...

Yeah, I have no idea what would a 4-dimensional sphere look like, though there are tutorials how you could somehow get the idea what a 4-dimensional cube would look like, it's called a tessarect if I remember correctly...

But anyway, our 3-dimensional universe would be the surface of the said 4-dimensional sphere... And like PsiSeeker said, "Its not an easy concept to try and wrap your mind around", but it makes most sense to me as well... Made this theory up myself as well (if I got what you meant correctly, PsiSeeker)...

*Edit* Triad has a tessarect as his avatar I believe... And I don't think the Universe has an "edge" if someone didn't get my explanation just there...

Edited by N080DY
Link to comment
Share on other sites

multiverses i don't think have "edges

Edited by widowerson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone have any theories??

Thanks, GUNNARYSEARGENTHARTMAN

I dont think there is an edge of the universe..that's my theroy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone have any theories??

Thanks, GUNNARYSEARGENTHARTMAN

The edge of the universe will be the edge of another universe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Umm... What I think PsiSeeker meant that our Universe is the surface of a 4-dimensional sphere...

Imagine if we would be in a two-dimensional universe, which in turn is actually the surface of a 3-dimensional sphere... There's no up or down, just forward, backward, left and right, so no matter what way you go to, you'll be going on infinitely...

Yeah, I have no idea what would a 4-dimensional sphere look like, though there are tutorials how you could somehow get the idea what a 4-dimensional cube would look like, it's called a tessarect if I remember correctly...

But anyway, our 3-dimensional universe would be the surface of the said 4-dimensional sphere... And like PsiSeeker said, "Its not an easy concept to try and wrap your mind around", but it makes most sense to me as well... Made this theory up myself as well (if I got what you meant correctly, PsiSeeker)...

*Edit* Triad has a tessarect as his avatar I believe... And I don't think the Universe has an "edge" if someone didn't get my explanation just there...

That may be true, but then so is what I'm saying to be true. Triad's avatar is a good example and may be a good representation of how space time folds. Though being spherical would also be logistical since soace appears to be expanding and contracting at the same time. Since an exact edge would indicate something else directing a specific directional interference, like an edge. But is there is nothing directing it, then directional would be in all directions at the same time. In a 3 dimensional space, that is a perfect sphere. If there is a perfect sphere, there is a perfect center. Mathematically speaking, there'd have to be an exact center. If there is a perfect center, there is a perfect exterior surface. The idea of a bubble becomes more feasible with this in mind, but that doesn't mean the sphere isn't 4th dimensional. But really, the question is what is outside of this. If these theories are right, then the idea that there is chaotic matter/anti-matter outside becomes more believeable. Like Triad's avatar, it may be the beginning to understanding how to fold this space to be able to see what is outside of this space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Albert Einstein pointed out that light cannot escape our universe because the mass in our universe exceeds that of the escape velocity of light. In other words, you shine a light and because mass curves space-time, the light will curve around the mass so that it will return to you. Here is the newest Unified Field Theory; an 8 hour long video in 2 parts:

http://www.niburu.nl/index.php?articleID=18715

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Albert Einstein pointed out that light cannot escape our universe because the mass in our universe exceeds that of the escape velocity of light. In other words, you shine a light and because mass curves space-time, the light will curve around the mass so that it will return to you. Here is the newest Unified Field Theory; an 8 hour long video in 2 parts:

http://www.niburu.nl/index.php?articleID=18715

Heh, yeah, since the universe is spherical, like the earth, stars, and any other spatial body. Or at least it would certainly explain all of these questions, and seems more logical.

Edited by Meiliken
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may be true, but then so is what I'm saying to be true. Triad's avatar is a good example and may be a good representation of how space time folds. Though being spherical would also be logistical since soace appears to be expanding and contracting at the same time. Since an exact edge would indicate something else directing a specific directional interference, like an edge. But is there is nothing directing it, then directional would be in all directions at the same time. In a 3 dimensional space, that is a perfect sphere. If there is a perfect sphere, there is a perfect center. Mathematically speaking, there'd have to be an exact center. If there is a perfect center, there is a perfect exterior surface. The idea of a bubble becomes more feasible with this in mind, but that doesn't mean the sphere isn't 4th dimensional. But really, the question is what is outside of this. If these theories are right, then the idea that there is chaotic matter/anti-matter outside becomes more believeable. Like Triad's avatar, it may be the beginning to understanding how to fold this space to be able to see what is outside of this space.

I somehow got the picture that you're talking about Einstein's 4th dimension, time... I'm talking about the 4th spatial dimension, which is different (I think)... But anyway, in my theory, you don't curve back in any way, you just end up back where you started if you move in a straight line (like drawing a line on top of a 3-dimensional sphere, note my metaphor for 2-dimensional people before this post)... And if you want to see what's outside of the Universe, you'd just have to move in the direction of the 4th spatial dimension... As in direction parallel to our 3-dimensions (width, length and depth)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the latest Theory by Nassim Haramein in the video I put up there, the sun travels at @200 km/sec through our galaxy (17.97 miles/sec). The planets follow the sun in a vortex where each revolution around the sun (a year in earth's time) would take the earth billions of miles from where it was the previous year. Each second of the year, the earth has traveled 17.97 miles from where it started in a straight line, not in revolution, but from one point one second to the next point the next second. There is 31,536,000 seconds in a year. That means the earth travels 214,149,440,000 miles in a year from its starting point in a straight line.

Now, y'all are imagining a 4th dimension calling it time or spatial. What I think is that no other creature besides man can move backwards or forward in time. And in doing so, it creates the fourth dimension. People say they wish they could go back in time and change this or that. Well, whats done is done, right? In the physical dimension, yes. But, the act of thinking backwards to the point you wish to change creates another dimension. And according to Mr. Haramein, if you picture the scene from a 180 degree perspective, you can cancel it out and in doing so, you can start at the point before the scene existed. You cannot drag everybody and everything back to whenever and start again, but now the point in the past never existed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Each second of the year, the earth has traveled 17.97 miles from where it started in a straight line, not in revolution, but from one point one second to the next point the next second.

How did you jump to this conclusion? Or is it part of the theory as well? In time dimension, we move exactly one second in one second, not 200 km (which is a spatial measurement)... In the fourth spatial dimension, we don't move at all... At least according to what I understand and theorize...

And the rest of that should belong to a topic about time travel, rather than the edge of the Universe... And even then, from what I can tell about your theory, is that just by thinking about a certain time where we have been, we move through space-time dimensions, which does sound a bit weird to me...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time and space. When an object remains in one place, how is time measured? If the earth revolved around the sun in the same plane, every second would be the same as the previous second. And all seconds would pile up on every other second and there would be no change. But, we do not live in a static universe. Everything is moving every second.

The planets revolve around the sun and the whole system revolves around other systems in a galaxy and the galaxy revolves in a group of galaxies in the universe which revolves around other universes. So how can we tell if we are moving? And what would tell us that we have reached the edge of the universe?

Edited by greggK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The universe is infinite, and there is no edge. That is all.

If the universe is expanding then the question is what is it expanding into

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time and space. When an object remains in one place, how is time measured?

*cough* I think you might have heard of this incredible invention: a watch...

Or any other instrument designed to measure time...

If the earth revolved around the sun in the same plane, every second would be the same as the previous second. And all seconds would pile up on every other second and there would be no change. But, we do not live in a static universe. Everything is moving every second.

Oh let me correct this... *cough* Lets take your example there, Earth... If you inspect the space-time-coordinates of every second, you see that Earth's spatial coordinate changes the amount you mentioned before... In time, we go a straight line, second by second and no two time-coordinates are exactly alike... But we still move in seconds, not in km or miles in the time coordinates... And on the other hand we move in spatial coordinates...

The planets revolve around the sun and the whole system revolves around other systems in a galaxy and the galaxy revolves in a group of galaxies in the universe which revolves around other universes. So how can we tell if we are moving? And what would tell us that we have reached the edge of the universe?

How can we tell if we're moving? Don't know the correct technical term scientists use, but if you look at the stars with some thingamabob, if the star shows red it's moving away from us and if it shows blue it's moving towards us... And if we are moving? I'm pretty sure we're in a galaxy and revolve around a star... If we didn't, we'd first be pulled into the star, then the star would be pulled into the center of the galaxy... It's something called "science" I believe...

And about the edge of the Universe, in my theory, you can't reach it... Which has been my point for a while now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I somehow got the picture that you're talking about Einstein's 4th dimension, time... I'm talking about the 4th spatial dimension, which is different (I think)... But anyway, in my theory, you don't curve back in any way, you just end up back where you started if you move in a straight line (like drawing a line on top of a 3-dimensional sphere, note my metaphor for 2-dimensional people before this post)... And if you want to see what's outside of the Universe, you'd just have to move in the direction of the 4th spatial dimension... As in direction parallel to our 3-dimensions (width, length and depth)...

Heh, that's exactly what I mean about drawing a line on 3 dimensional sphere. I think that 4th spatial dimension may be the answer to bending space and entering another bubble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*cough* I think you might have heard of this incredible invention: a watch...

Or any other instrument designed to measure time...

Oh let me correct this... *cough* Lets take your example there, Earth... If you inspect the space-time-coordinates of every second, you see that Earth's spatial coordinate changes the amount you mentioned before... In time, we go a straight line, second by second and no two time-coordinates are exactly alike... But we still move in seconds, not in km or miles in the time coordinates... And on the other hand we move in spatial coordinates...

How can we tell if we're moving? Don't know the correct technical term scientists use, but if you look at the stars with some thingamabob, if the star shows red it's moving away from us and if it shows blue it's moving towards us... And if we are moving? I'm pretty sure we're in a galaxy and revolve around a star... If we didn't, we'd first be pulled into the star, then the star would be pulled into the center of the galaxy... It's something called "science" I believe...

And about the edge of the Universe, in my theory, you can't reach it... Which has been my point for a while now...

I myself understand what you're talking about, but your response to the guy this is directed towards is very condescending. Though some of what you said is true and others are hitting a little too far from what is actually happending, I'd suggest a little more tact. This is after all a discussion on what others "think".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the universe is expanding then the question is what is it expanding into

That is the problem with the balloon analogy, that we naturally assume there is an 'outside' into which the universe is expanding. It is also the natural consequence of viewing the expansion as being of 'the universe' rather than just an expansion in the dimensional quality of space.

The universe isn't getting 'bigger', but space is stretching.

Edited by Leonardo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh, that's exactly what I mean about drawing a line on 3 dimensional sphere. I think that 4th spatial dimension may be the answer to bending space and entering another bubble.

What I didn't understand in your post before this, was the term "fold" you use a few times... Not exactly sure what you mean by that...

And the problem with the "4 spatial dimensions" -theory, is that we have no way of affecting the said 4th spatial dimension... We are 3-dimensional and can't even properly conceive this 4th dimension that is parallel to our three dimensions... Everything we build is 3-dimensional as well... It may as well be that everything in our Universe is 3-dimensional (though not completely sure about it, it's a possibility)...

I myself understand what you're talking about, but your response to the guy this is directed towards is very condescending. Though some of what you said is true and others are hitting a little too far from what is actually happending, I'd suggest a little more tact. This is after all a discussion on what others "think".

I know, and I apologise for this... I have a habit of doing that if I think someone's... less intelligent (no offense, a personal opinion)... It's just that what he says is going against any logic I know, he is free to point out anything I got wrong though... And he didn't even get what I said in my post before the one you pointed at... So I decided to take some assurance that there's little room for misunderstanding me this time... And I again apologise if this, or the post before this, offends you, greggK, or anyone else... A bad habit I'm working on...

Edited by N080DY
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I didn't understand in your post before this, was the term "fold" you use a few times... Not exactly sure what you mean by that...

And the problem with the "4 spatial dimensions" -theory, is that we have no way of affecting the said 4th spatial dimension... We are 3-dimensional and can't even properly conceive this 4th dimension that is parallel to our three dimensions... Everything we build is 3-dimensional as well... It may as well be that everything in our Universe is 3-dimensional (though not completely sure about it, it's a possibility)...

I use fold because folding and bending is relative terms. If the universe is 3 dimensional, then it will indeed have an edge that would seem flat to our small infintesimal perception. Any flat surface can be bent/folded. With this in mind bending space would in essence force all of the rest of space to bend with it, since it is all connected. They'll follow the line of the fold and force the rest of the universe to fold with it. When that happens, two different places in the universe will touch each other. This is the example where they say the shortest difference between two points is 0 when both points are on top of each other. I think that is the 4th dimension, where it is on top of us while being beyond us, since we are 3 dimensional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may be true, but then so is what I'm saying to be true. Triad's avatar is a good example and may be a good representation of how space time folds. Though being spherical would also be logistical since soace appears to be expanding and contracting at the same time. Since an exact edge would indicate something else directing a specific directional interference, like an edge. But is there is nothing directing it, then directional would be in all directions at the same time. In a 3 dimensional space, that is a perfect sphere. If there is a perfect sphere, there is a perfect center. Mathematically speaking, there'd have to be an exact center. If there is a perfect center, there is a perfect exterior surface. The idea of a bubble becomes more feasible with this in mind, but that doesn't mean the sphere isn't 4th dimensional. But really, the question is what is outside of this. If these theories are right, then the idea that there is chaotic matter/anti-matter outside becomes more believeable. Like Triad's avatar, it may be the beginning to understanding how to fold this space to be able to see what is outside of this space.

I think ultimately the reason you're getting confused over what I'm trying to get at is that you're getting your mind lost in infinities because you're trying to look at the "edge" of the universe from a purely 3 dimensional perspective. To you logically there should be an edge. The fourth dimension confuses people because they argue they cannot go back and change things. Everything we perceive is purely relative. We can only perceive time as moving in one direction, the way our consciousness is constructed and the way we interpret everything around is causes time to appear to move in one direction. Its pointless asking if it actually does because asking that question would mean you'd have to step outside of time to try and look at time, which can't fully perceived with the way we understand reality at the moment.

To try and get your mind around what I'm saying, most people when thinking of different dimensions try to attach distance in some way or another to their model of a higher dimension. The thing is distance is a representation of the first 3 dimensions. The square thing triad has as his avatar is the net of a 4 dimensional square being rotated in the 3rd dimension. You can't perceive everything that's there because it just isn't possible with our understanding of things at the moment, its like trying to understand how something is round when viewing it in the purely 2 dimensions. You can't do it, all you'd see is a line. How you view perceive things is limited to the restriction your mind has on perceiving things, this actually applies to a lot of things, not just physics.

It isn't something you can wrap your mind around in one sitting, but asking if the universe has an "edge" is similar to to trying to understand from a purely 2 dimensional perspective how something can have a hole. Its difficult to wrap your mind around it like I said. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think ultimately the reason you're getting confused over what I'm trying to get at is that you're getting your mind lost in infinities because you're trying to look at the "edge" of the universe from a purely 3 dimensional perspective. To you logically there should be an edge. The fourth dimension confuses people because they argue they cannot go back and change things. Everything we perceive is purely relative. We can only perceive time as moving in one direction, the way our consciousness is constructed and the way we interpret everything around is causes time to appear to move in one direction. Its pointless asking if it actually does because asking that question would mean you'd have to step outside of time to try and look at time, which can't fully perceived with the way we understand reality at the moment.

Not at all. An edge doesn't necessarily mean a crease. If it is spherical, it'll still have an edge, just not corner, or crease that one may think of as an edge. I also don't say nothing can be changed. Time is directly proportional to distance. Take black holes for example. Time doesn't run the same way inside a black hole. If you were falling into a black hole, someone behind you would see you, but what they are seeing already happened, they won't actually be seeing you. This is why the only way to stand still inside a black hole would be to move at the speed of light. Once that happens, time itself stops.

To try and get your mind around what I'm saying, most people when thinking of different dimensions try to attach distance in some way or another to their model of a higher dimension. The thing is distance is a representation of the first 3 dimensions. The square thing triad has as his avatar is the net of a 4 dimensional square being rotated in the 3rd dimension. You can't perceive everything that's there because it just isn't possible with our understanding of things at the moment, its like trying to understand how something is round when viewing it in the purely 2 dimensions. You can't do it, all you'd see is a line. How you view perceive things is limited to the restriction your mind has on perceiving things, this actually applies to a lot of things, not just physics.

It isn't something you can wrap your mind around in one sitting, but asking if the universe has an "edge" is similar to to trying to understand from a purely 2 dimensional perspective how something can have a hole. Its difficult to wrap your mind around it like I said. :)

As I was saying, time and distance are directly related. Take light for example. If time stopped, light would cease to travel, and the world would turn to pitch darkness. Since light requires time to be moving for it to move, it can't travel to an object, and bounce back into our irises giving us an image. Time itself is required for everything that has to do with distance or movement. This is why we're studying Black Holes and Quantum Singularities so much. They break all known science on time/space/distance. An object that has an edge doesn't mean it is square. But the edge part of it is what confuses people. Surfaces don't require edges. Same with spheres. A perfect sphere will never have an actual edge. I myself work with 3 dimensional objects on the computer, so I don't actually look at things 2 dimensionally. I actually think this is why the universe is expanding. There are far more white holes creating matter in the universe than there are black holes sucking it in turning it back into tachyon energy. Bending the universe would be like taking a balloon and pinching part of it. The rest of the balloon adjusts for the pinch, but in the pinch, 2 separate places are touching that are very far apart normally. This is where I think the 4th dimension plays effect. The 4th dimension is the surface of this bubble that surrounds the 3rd dimensional universe. Who knows what is outside of this 4th dimension. I postulate it is an ocean of matter/anti-matter. And this bubble may be floating in it amongst other bubbles of 3 dimensions. Part of the science that is being studied is that of Dark Matter and Dark Energy which isn't seen, but the effects are what are able to be seen. The theory is, this is the matter that is holding this universe together, ensuring that it doesn't fly apart. So maybe the 4th dimension is the dark matter/energy of the universe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In our three dimensions, the universe doesn't have an edge, at least in my theory... The fourth dimension Einstein theorised is what allows the "pinch"ing effect Meiliken described... And this warping of space-time is the thing that theoretically enables warp-drive and explains blackholes etc...

Now the fourth spatial dimension is what I've been talking about, which you seem to constantly confuse with Einstein's time-dimension (you talk only about one "4th dimension" in your posts)... This universe is the "surface" of a 4-dimensional sphere (4 spatial dimensions, no time-dimension accounted for)... And no, I don't think this fourth spatial dimension can be folded the same way Einstein's fourth dimension, time, can... Though if you fold the time dimension, it could affect all four spatial dimensions (or more dimensions)... The fourth spatial dimension is as constant as our three "normal" dimensions people know... Basically, if you want "out" of our three dimensional universe, you'd need to move in the fourth spatial dimension... But we can't interact in the fourth spatial dimension in any way because we, and everything else in this universe, are three-dimensional (or at least can only affect the three dimensions)...

This is a little off-topic, but I personally think wormholes could be some kinds of gaps towards this fourth spatial dimension...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the universe is expanding then the question is what is it expanding into

Ahhh, you watched the video.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.