It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

page: 114
39
<< 111  112  113    115  116  117 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
It is telling that Mallove in one of his "letters" claims to have observed that a device allegedly draws 50W of electrical power yet has 500W shaft power. He proceeds to say that it must be trivial to loop the energy and then this become a truly independent fountain of free power. Well I agree with Mallove in this instance, question is how come "most impressive lab" and authors of the "breakthrough" etc did not manage to get a simple dynamo from a surplus store for $5 and connect it to the apparatus? They would be getting 495W of electricity right away at zero cost! A handful of these machines would power a house! There is a telltale sign of a fraud -- there is a measurement that claims to demonstrate there is excessive power, yet a simple step to loop it is not done, and why?


Please link to the quote, and comment on whether or not you've taken anything out of context, or, jumped to conclusions.


Originally posted by buddhasystem
It's like Bearden -- instead of selling electric power and becoming a multi-billionaire, he's content with selling DVDs on the Internet.


I don't believe that Bearden is interested in selling electric power.




posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
www.srmhp.org...


BS,

Don't you know that there are numerous front groups, financed by foundations, which are, in turn, front groups for wealthy oligarchs, who, in the guise of "philanthropy," "educate" the public using the internet?

In my opinion, Alan Watt is the best source of insight about this sort of thing.

Do you believe srmhp.org is a reliable source?

Here's their About SRMHP page:


About The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice

The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice (SRMHP) is the only peer-reviewed journal devoted exclusively to distinguishing scientifically supported claims from scientifically unsupported claims in clinical psychology, psychiatry, social work, and allied disciplines. It applies the best tools of science and reason to objectively evaluate novel, controversial, and untested mental health claims. Our purview includes claims regarding the efficacy of psychotherapies and self-enhancement methods, the validity of assessment instruments, and the scientific evidence for psychiatric diagnoses. We will reject no claims out of hand or prior to scientific scrutiny, although we will subject all claims to careful investigation and analysis. Its publication has been endorsed by the Commission for Scientific Medicine and Mental Health, a panel that includes prominent psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, and Nobel prizewinners.

Raison D'Etre

The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice is edited by Scott O. Lilienfeld, Ph.D., of Emory University. For information regarding the journal's purpose and mission please see the article "The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice: Our 'Raison d'etre," which appeared in the Spring/Summer 2002 issue.


Where do they get their funding from? Donations?



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by buddhasystem
It is telling that Mallove in one of his "letters" claims to have observed that a device allegedly draws 50W of electrical power yet has 500W shaft power. He proceeds to say that it must be trivial to loop the energy and then this become a truly independent fountain of free power. Well I agree with Mallove in this instance, question is how come "most impressive lab" and authors of the "breakthrough" etc did not manage to get a simple dynamo from a surplus store for $5 and connect it to the apparatus? They would be getting 495W of electricity right away at zero cost! A handful of these machines would power a house! There is a telltale sign of a fraud -- there is a measurement that claims to demonstrate there is excessive power, yet a simple step to loop it is not done, and why?


Please link to the quote, and comment on whether or not you've taken anything out of context, or, jumped to conclusions.


I've linked to that ALREADY, and once again you amply demonstrate that you don't bother to read either the thread or the materials provided therein. Amazing.




Originally posted by buddhasystem
It's like Bearden -- instead of selling electric power and becoming a multi-billionaire, he's content with selling DVDs on the Internet.


I don't believe that Bearden is interested in selling electric power.


What's the purpose of selling the DVDs? Getting cold hard cash. So apparently he can use some money (don't we all). Now, if there is an ample opportunity to get money and recognition by producing energy, and he doesn't avail himself to that, well, I posit that he's a fraud.

edit on 7-11-2011 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Contrary to being "suppressed", quack "science" gets huge funding at the taxpayers' expense:

www.srmhp.org...


The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) (nccam.nih.gov...) is a thriving section of the NIH. Among other activities, this center provides funding for dubious “research” into fringe treatments. In actuality, its chief function seems to be to promote alternative therapies rather than to investigate them. Psychiatrist James S. Gordon, M.D., has long been a major force behind NCCAM. It is highly significant that he is an advocate of orgone therapy and other forms of aberrant treatment, as described at the following link: here.

The origins of NCCAM go back to 1992, when its precursor started with a budget of $2 million. The 2004 budget was $116.9 million. Cancer biologist Saul Green has spoken of the low scientific standards and mostly useless results of the meager reports coming from NCCAM-supported studies. As quoted by Maher (2002) at here, Green could have been speaking for many medical scientists when he called NCCAM a boondoggle that should be shut down. In a similar vein, Time columnist Leon Jaroff (2002) wrote “Wasting Big Bucks on Alternative Medicine.” Unfortunately, Capitol Hill isn’t listening.

With substantial help from NCCAM and the politicians behind it, antiscientific alternative therapies seem to be rapidly overtaking conventional medicine in popularity and market share. It has been estimated that in 1997, the $27 billion spent on alternative therapies was comparable with the amount spent on all physician services for that year. This does not bode well for the health of the American people or for the financing of scientific medicine. Until recent years, hospitals, physicians, and government agencies held the line against unscientific treatments and outright quack remedies. The line is now crumbling. If Reich were alive today and promoting his methods, would the government prosecute him or would it reward him with a research grant from NIH? What’s your guess?


edit on 7-11-2011 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
I've linked to that ALREADY, and once again you amply demonstrate that you don't bother to read either the thread or the materials provided therein. Amazing.


By clicking on your link and doing a find for “50W,” I found what you were referring to.

In my opinion, the courteous thing for you to have done would be to post this followed by your remarks:


Originally posted by buddhasystem


On my last visit, when your PAGD inverter technology had improved considerably from my first visit, I observed an input DC power to the PAGD reactor of 50 watts, with an output motor power (mechanical shaft power) of approximately 500 watts. I commented to you that this could easily be made self-sustaining with a DC generator on the output shaft of the motor, and you agreed with that general conclusion. My understanding is that several other respected Ph.D. scientists have similarly been present in recent times at your laboratory to witness the PAGD experiments and even more remarkable ones connected with your already self-sustaining Aether Motor devices, which I will discuss below.



Originally posted by buddhasystem
Well I agree with Mallove in this instance, question is how come "most impressive lab" and authors of the "breakthrough" etc did not manage to get a simple dynamo from a surplus store for $5 and connect it to the apparatus? They would be getting 495W of electricity right away at zero cost! A handful of these machines would power a house!


I don’t know the answer to your question. I will see what I can find out.



Originally posted by buddhasystem
What's the purpose of selling the DVDs?


1. To educate the public.
2. To make a living.



Originally posted by buddhasystem
Now, if there is an ample opportunity to get money and recognition by producing energy, and he doesn't avail himself to that, well, I posit that he's a fraud.


I posit that Bearden is interested in technology that will lead to the manufacture of devices that pull energy out of the vacuum. The goal is to have devices that we pay for, but the energy drawn would not have a meter on it.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Contrary to being "suppressed", quack "science" gets huge funding at the taxpayers' expense:

www.srmhp.org...


Is this your answer to:


Originally posted by Mary Rose
Where do they get their funding from? Donations?


Alternative medicine is not quack science.

However, let’s get back to the question I posed.

I’ll word it a different way: Are you of the belief that SRMHP is not a front group?



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I don’t know the answer to your question. I will see what I can find out.


Please keep me posted.




1. To educate the public.
2. To make a living.


Sure, I was talking about "2". Energy is a commodity. If you have a source of it, you can make a very good living. Bearden resorts to peddling DVDs instead. You see, if he monetized his alleged "invention", he could be giving these DVDs away for free, right? So I doubt "1" is the real motif.



I posit that Bearden is interested in technology that will lead to the manufacture of devices that pull energy out of the vacuum. The goal is to have devices that we pay for, but the energy drawn would not have a meter on it.


Bearden "is interested"? That's all you can say now about this individual? With all his prior claims of imminent device?

Technology needs financing. Financing can be achieved by having a small plant running a prototype generator and producing power. This is not happening. And we all know why. Meters have nothing to do with it.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Energy is a commodity. If you have a source of it, you can make a very good living.


Energy should not be a commodity. Only the devices should be a commodity (speaking in broad terms).

If you can get your device on the market, you can make a very good living - agreed.


Originally posted by buddhasystem
Bearden resorts to peddling DVDs instead.


No, he does not. He's doing what he has to do at this point in history. Hopefully, he will see devices like his on the market in his lifetime; I don't know. Maybe there are devices on the market at this time that I don't know about.

The point is he's not a fraud. Nor is/was Rodin, Keely, Searle, DePaula, Mallove . . .


Originally posted by buddhasystem
Technology needs financing. Financing can be achieved by having a small plant running a prototype generator and producing power. This is not happening. And we all know why. Meters have nothing to do with it.


Yes, technology needs financing.

Meters have everything to do with it. Meters is the reason J.P. Morgan removed financing from Tesla. Meters is the reason why the powers that be are resisting free energy technology.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The following is intended for lurkers of this thread who are interested in doing some research about suppression of technology: "To Be or Not to Be - 150 Years of Hidden Knowledge"



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Energy is a commodity. If you have a source of it, you can make a very good living.


Energy should not be a commodity. Only the devices should be a commodity (speaking in broad terms).

If you can get your device on the market, you can make a very good living - agreed.


Originally posted by buddhasystem
Bearden resorts to peddling DVDs instead.


No, he does not. He's doing what he has to do at this point in history. Hopefully, he will see devices like his on the market in his lifetime; I don't know. Maybe there are devices on the market at this time that I don't know about.


Are you serious? Free energy already exists? That would be the greatest hit in Wall Street Journal, CNN Money and all sort of science publications.


The point is he's not a fraud. Nor is/was Rodin, Keely, Searle, DePaula, Mallove . . .


Oh yeah they all are. What's in common? Outrageous, stupendous claims that are not supported by evidence. Mallove, God bless his soul, could extoll infinite praise on Correa's "excellent lab", but even he couldn't explain why they could not harvest power from an apparently (and allegedly, I would add) running device. Searle with his generators that fly away the moment they start... Come on. Rodin, incidentally, has the least to show for his claims, or more precisely, nothing.

I need to clarify "fraud". Dr.Langmuir was more precise than that, when describing at least one example of "pathological science". The person in question did believe in what he saw and therefore was being honest, however his mental state was such that he was extremely selective in looking at his own observations, effectively creating his result by his own volition. The cold fusion paper with its amazing gamma ray plot is another example -- it's impossible that the line presented could be produced by neutrons, yet they believed it was. When they had their backs against the wall, confronted with facts, they laboriously admitted they simply didn't know what they were looking at.

Some sloppy science here, and I'm being generous.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Alternative medicine is quack science. you can't beat cancer by taking coffe enemas and juicing fruit.

If it were actual medicine, it wouldn't have the label "alternative." Kind of like legitimate scientific advancements.
edit on 7-11-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Are you serious? Free energy already exists? That would be the greatest hit in Wall Street Journal, CNN Money and all sort of science publications.


You trust the mainstream media to keep you informed? I don’t.

You mean like Nature?

I don’t know whether there is a device that is marketed somewhere in the world, or not, like I said.

Certainly if you read alternative science publications rather than ridiculing them you would learn a lot.


Originally posted by buddhasystem
The cold fusion paper with its amazing gamma ray plot is another example -- it's impossible that the line presented could be produced by neutrons, yet they believed it was. When they had their backs against the wall, confronted with facts, they laboriously admitted they simply didn't know what they were looking at.

Some sloppy science here, and I'm being generous.


You’re talking about electrochemists Fleischmann and Pons making a mistake and then consulting with physicists afterward? My understanding is that Fleischmann and Pons were pressured at their end (by a lawyer, as I recall) to make their announcement at a press conference, rather than by publishing it, and that they would have preferred to wait about eighteen months before announcing this to the world.


Originally posted by GringoViejo
you can't beat cancer by taking coffe enemas and juicing fruit.

If it were actual medicine, it wouldn't have the label "alternative." Kind of like legitimate scientific advancements.


To the contrary, “actual medicine” for cancer is radiation and chemo, which, according to my research, often is the cause of death in cancer patients rather than the cancer itself. People need alternative treatments to choose from.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Are you serious? Free energy already exists? That would be the greatest hit in Wall Street Journal, CNN Money and all sort of science publications.


You trust the mainstream media to keep you informed? I don’t.


And you shouldn't. But you may want to listen to a renowned cancer expert who worked at the Sloan Kettering Institute, and that's a top notch, leading research and medical center.

Links to some of Saul Green's papers

Please read the papers linked to therein.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Alternative medicine is not quack science.



Originally posted by GringoViejo
Alternative medicine is quack science. you can't beat cancer by taking coffe enemas and juicing fruit.

If it were actual medicine, it wouldn't have the label "alternative." Kind of like legitimate scientific advancements.
This raises an interesting question about the definition of alternative medicine.

Mary, perhaps you can answer it.

Someone in another thread cited Stanislaw Burzynski as a practitioner of alternative medicine that really works. So I read up on him at various websites, including that link, and found this:


The 2010 film, Burzynski, Cancer is Serious Business, directed by Eric Merola, documents Burzynski's efforts to gain FDA approval for the therapy.
So, given his effort to gain FDA approval, here's the question:

If Burzynski gains FDA approval, will he still be practicing alternative medicine?

I think it depends on how you describe alternative medicine. My definition is:

Alternative medicine: treatment that hasn't been proven to work in the mainstream medical community.

Gaining FDA approval is pretty mainstream.

And Mary, I don't disagree with you that the FDA could do a better job if that's what you inferred. I would agree they have probably made some mistakes and approved some things they shouldn't have and perhaps not approved some things as quickly as they could have, and they might even admit that. So nobody's claiming the FDA is perfect, it's not. But this doesn't make the argument that a treatment is effective in spite of the fact that the FDA rejected it. In Burzynski's case, he's trying to convince the FDA his treatment actually works. If he succeeds in proving that it works, then I'd say it's no longer alternative medicine. What do you say?


Originally posted by buddhasystem
I realize it's hard to explain how they harvest the mystical Orgone substance (the essence of orgasm, actually, according to their guru Reich) to power their machines. For those who haven't read yet this crap, I'm not kidding, a few of f these contraptions supposedly run on orgasm, according to Correa.
I could understand some unqualified Montauk boys claiming they created enough energy with their genitals to warp space and time, but to me it's a little different for a qualified psychologist to be making claims about the Orgone energy. No, I hadn't read that until you mentioned it, and I thought maybe you were exaggerating, but if anything that's an understatement.

I don't dismiss the idea that some people might have sexual frustration and that psychological treatment may help resolve those issues. However I find Reich's claims of "Orgone Energy" to be beyond far fetched. I don't know whether to laugh or cry that some people believed that. However once I found out that one in five American's believes the sun revolves around the Earth and not vice versa, and knowing the true answer is the easiest thing in the world to prove now, I must admit I'm a little less shocked by significant percentages of people believing in ideas which are easily proven false. I'm still dismayed by it, but I'm just not as surprised anymore.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
And as the excuses go, nobody beats "pathological scientists". It's beyond laughable that applications of the alleged discoveries are always "just around the corner", and yet never materialize. In some cases the mysterious generator takes off and disappears in the sky, in others (like Bearden), well I guess they genuinely run out of excuses and just shut up.
Bearden said in 2000 if we don't commence production of vacuum energy devices by 2004, the world as we know it will end in 2008. That may be an oversimplified synopsis of his 36 page manifesto, but it's the general idea. So in 2011 I don't know how he can top his 2000 prediction that never happened. What's disturbing to me is that he says:


Personally, the present author regards the increasing energy crisis as the greatest strategic threat to the United States in its entire history. I will do anything within my power to help prevent what I perceive to be the looming economic collapse of the Western world, preceded or accompanied by a sudden, explosive, all-out and continuing exchange of the WMD arsenals of most of the world.

We can still meet this early 2004 production deadline. It is difficult, but it is definitely a doable at this time.

We must do it, and we must do it now. Else the technology for electrical energy from the vacuum will also be "too little, too late." In that case, not only the world economy but civilization itself will likely be destroyed — not 100 years from now, not 50 years from now, but in less than one decade from now.
He says he will do anything to prevent the destruction of civilization by the year 2010, but as far as I can tell, he has done absolutely nothing, but sell DVDs with fantasy stories in them. He claims to have the vacuum energy solution to the world energy crisis he says will destroy us, but he won't even make some free energy machines to alleviate the crisis? If he's willing to do anything why wouldn't he at least do that?

I don't see why people would believe anything he says, but then I remember how many people think the sun revolves around the Earth.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
He claims to have the vacuum energy solution to the world energy crisis he says will destroy us, but he won't even make some free energy machines to alleviate the crisis? If he's willing to do anything why wouldn't he at least do that?


Well, in that opus of his, he's got yet another excuse:

We are still waiting for the "old scientific opponents" — adamantly opposed to the very notion of electrical energy from the vacuum — to "die off and get out of the way."


So maybe he's deliberately waiting for near-extinction of humankind to finally open a venue for open-minded people like himself, who "can freely and inexpensively extract enormous EM energy flows directly from the active vacuum itself".

Man, if he claims it is so simple to do, what does he do sitting down and writing pompous papers? Build the damn thing already.

And of course:

However, they have been seized by the Japanese Yakuza




edit on 8-11-2011 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
And I also like this cop-out:

However, they have been seized by the Japanese Yakuza
Yes I thought that was a bit of a stretch too!



Build the damn thing already.
He's already built one and claims it has an output 100 times greater than the input:

www.cheniere.org...

But why settle for a measly increase of 100 times input when you can get a million times input?

www.cheniere.org...

The first part of the video, recorded in the evening of April 30th, 1987, covers two bench tests of his units, which would put out over a million times more power than was put into them.
But again that's a link to an advert to sell a DVD and not to sell a working device.

Keep the DVD and sell me the device! Wait, you're not selling a device? Why not?

It should take far less intelligence than that of Albert Einstein to be able to answer that question!



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
To the contrary, “actual medicine” for cancer is radiation and chemo, which, according to my research, often is the cause of death in cancer patients rather than the cancer itself. People need alternative treatments to choose from.


Yeah, that worked out for steve jobs, didn't it? His delusion ultimately lead to his own death. Sure, by all means, study new posible cures and preventions, its not a fight won overnight. But when you find a cure to something, and can verify it, then is stops hovering in the world of quack science, homeopathy, alternative med, etc and enters the realm of real science.

Which, after 114 pages, it is painfully obvious that you don't know the difference.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
But why settle for a measly increase of 100 times input when you can get a million times input?


You know Arb, thing is, unless there is saturation or some capacity bottleneck in the alleged device, any "overunity" device appears to actually have INFINITE gain -- simply because there is positive feedback in this loop, right? Let's say you feed 100W, and get 101W at the output, which you immediately feed back to input, and it just goes exponentially!

Of course it won't be quite like that with magnets due to saturation, but I don't see this point addressed anywhere


About that sum of $11M that Bearden claimed he needed for further R&D -- this is not a large sum of money to be sourced from venture capitalists. Completely doable. Provided, of course, that you can show a working device instead of stacks of $19.99 DVDs meant for the ignorant citizenry (complete with "no returns" policy").



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Absolutely ridiculous, Buddhasystem. I don't have enough time to go into all the reasons you should not be talking about Wilhelm Reich, and why you presuppose a different universe than he did.

Wilhelm Reich pity's the fool... but not just that, he tried to CURE the fool.

Gravity Probe B validated the logic of the aether physicists, as well as vacuum density and zero point experiments.

There is a general trend coming from the Wiener Kreis of absolute genius, which is denied by the mass psychology of the 'big other' in physics.

Oops, did I say 'aether'? Oh, sorry... of course thats hogwash! Aether is clearly pseudoscience... because light travels through a vacuum of empty space and all those other delusions...

The 'electron' is a probability of finding itself... that is somehow not made up of photons but can absorb or emit photons, and quarks are physical particles instead of fields... The Higg's discovery is right around the corner... it simply HAS to be! Look at the math!

Have the courage to use your own reason. Principles in nature can largely be determined by clear and critical thinking. Obviously, the dogmatic adherence to a certain interpretation of data can be terribly misleading. Practice underdeterminism.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by beebs
 


Beebs, so you agree with Reich that the force of orgasm can be harvested from the Universe and transmitted via metallic tubes?



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 111  112  113    115  116  117 >>

log in

join