"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

reply to post by Mary Rose


So, no. you can't read it. Or won't, can't is a bit harsh.

But you seem to make a habit out of not reviewing sources. Very telling.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

If the topic is controversial, it has been my experience that Wikipedia is not a reliable source - much like the mainstream media.

Wikipedia has pretty high standards, that's been known for a while. It certainly has been my experience. A sign of a good article is a large number of references, which allow you to cross-check all information and research the original sources. So look, you can't blame them, they are trying to get that info across to you.

Originally posted by GringoViejo
reply to post by Mary Rose

 

So, no. you can't read it. Or won't, can't is a bit harsh.

But you seem to make a habit out of not reviewing sources. Very telling.

Yup, I find it rather striking as well...

Originally posted by GringoViejo
But you seem to make a habit out of not reviewing sources. Very telling.

See the following

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
And it certainly hasn't gone commercial yet as Mallove claimed.

I vaguely remember seeing that but I'm not sure what the context was. Can you post the link?

Actually, it was YOU who posted the link:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Mary Rose
From page 8 of "MIT and Cold Fusion- A Special Report":

I read the whole thing, not just page 8. Page 13 is probably the most concise quote you can refer to:

Cold fusion is now being developed commercially.

Even today, 12 years later, I have yet to see any evidence of that which I can confirm. Yet he made this claim 12 years ago.

Other related quotes from that source:

p3
MIT’s Plasma Fusion Center continues to receive tens of millions
of dollars per year for its tokamak hot fusion program.
This clearly makes no sense now that cold fusion has begun to
demonstrate its commercial potential as both an energy source
and in the low-energy remediation of radioactivity generated in
the past from the commercial and defense industry fission
nuclear enterprises. Who would wish to waste further billions
of dollars on a technology—hot fusion—that has already come
under serious question for its technological and economic viability
as a twenty-first century energy source, if there were a
clear alternative?

The alternative is here.

He said "the alternative is here" in 1999, yet in 2011, I'm still asking, "where?"

p11

The media, in general, are still largely
ignoring scientific and commercial developments in cold fusion,
but commercial-scale reactors will be impossible to deny—even
for some heretofore obtuse science journalists who should have
been continuing their coverage had they not been so strongly
influenced by the likes of the negativists at MIT and elsewhere.



p16
To cover up
a sorry episode may have been comfortable for the MIT administration
in an era in which cold fusion had not yet achieved general
acceptance (thanks in no small way to some on the MIT
staff), but that era will pass. An age of enlightenment is coming
that will make the tokamak hot fusion program at MIT a footnote
to history. The era of safe, clean, and abundant energy from
water—non-chemical energy from hydrogen—will drown the
deceivers from MIT to Princeton. (If anyone has any doubt about
this emerging commercial reality, they should consult one of the
energy-from-water corporations that was influenced by the
announcement of Fleischmann and Pons—see BlackLight Power
Corp. [www.blacklightpower.com].

I still have doubts about the emerging commercial reality. In fact after checking the link he provided [www.blacklightpower.com], I have even more doubts, not less.

That site refers to hydrino technology, and I've seen less evidence of the existence of hydrinos (zero evidence, to be precise) than I've seen for cold fusion where at least the US Navy scientists have published papers with what they believe to be evidence.

So to convince those with doubts about cold fusion, he jumps from the cold fusion frying pan into the hydrino fire? I can't see any logic in that at all, and it reinforces my opinion that he's a few french fries short of a happy meal, unless you can provide some evidence for the elusive hydrino that buddhasystem and his peers have overlooked.

And before you even suggest it, no, it is NOT a logical fallacy to suggest that Mallove wasn't mentally sound when he suggested we can alleviate our doubts about commercial cold fusion, by referring to a website that posits the existence of hydrinos which are not known to exist and almost certainly don't. (I said "almost" in case you have some evidence for them I haven't seen yet, but you probably don't). In fact you may want to read this post about how easily the hydrino is falsified: www.physicsforums.com...

I think those claims go back way more than 12 years, they are decades old, I think, and in all that time, we've seen nothing commercial, but maybe some new gullible "investors" aka suckers giving them money.

Edit to add: Here is a paper that essentially says hydrinos don't exist, though you can read the paper yourself in case that's an unfair paraphrase of the content:

A critical analysis of the hydrino model

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
And before you even suggest it, no, it is NOT a logical fallacy to suggest that Mallove wasn't mentally sound when he suggested we can alleviate our doubts about commercial cold fusion, by referring to a website that posits the existence of hydrinos which are not known to exist and almost certainly don't

It is remarkable that Mary is saying that practical application may not be an important means to convince the public and "alleviate doubts", while Mallove says exactly the opposite. As to his mental state, it's interesting to read the following link.

Idée fixe began as a parent category of obsession,[5] and as a preoccupation of mind the idée fixe resembles today's obsessive-compulsive disorder: although the afflicted person can think, reason and act like other people, they are unable to stop a particular train of thought or action. However, in obsessive-compulsive disorder, the victim recognizes the absurdity of the obsession or compulsion, not necessarily the case with an idée fixe, which normally is a delusion

And this applies more to Correa:
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by GringoViejo


The point is that the topic at hand is Reich’s work. The subject of chemtrails was not even current during his lifetime, so anything an ATS person says on a thread is of no consequence; Reich would not have commented on it or made assertions about them. The subject is off-topic.

reply to post by buddhasystem


Wikipedia is a goldmine if the subject is not controversial.

But they are censured in the same way the mainstream media is. There is no way Reich will get a fair shake on Wikipedia – the same powers that be that were behind the harassment Reich was subjected to are still in control today. Reich's work points to energy medicine, which is a huge threat to the allopathic/pharmaceutical medical cartel.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


“MIT and Cold Fusion – A Special Report” is a 57 page document. Maybe you haven’t observed this, but when I post, as a courtesy, I provide the page number for my reader so he/she doesn’t have to go fishing for it. I didn’t ask for anything of you that I don’t do myself.

I see the statement “Cold fusion is now being developed commercially” comes within the context of Petrasso et al. having accused P&F of fudging gamma-ray spectroscopy data. But yes, the statement is not backed up by specifics. Maybe Mallove knew of goings on that were not reported in the mainstream media – or misrepresented in the mainstream media.

I remember Mallove talking about BlackLight Power on one of the videos I posted.

When you say you’ve seen less evidence of something, I have to say from reading your posts that the reason could be the information that you dismiss.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I remember Mallove talking about BlackLight Power on one of the videos I posted.

When you say you’ve seen less evidence of something, I have to say from reading your posts that the reason could be the information that you dismiss.

While that comment may have a certain valid logic as a general rule, it's not the case regarding hydrinos, in fact I even edited my post a few minutes after posting it to add the scientific paper which says in a more polite scientific way that hydrinos are nonsense.

And to put in perspective, several claims had been made of confirming excess heat in cold fusion replication experiments so at least we have multiple sources to consider, including the US Navy. But there is still only one lab in the world I know of that has claimed to see hydrinos, so I think this supports the less evidence claim in this case. I don't know of any other confirming sources to dismiss regarding hydrinos.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


From the BlackLight Power Executive Summary:

Independent Validation

• Electrical power from the CIHT cells, thermal power from the solid fuels and their thermal regeneration, hydrinos from both synthesis reactions and as a product of the CIHT cells and the solid fuels, as well as the light signature of the formation of hydrinos, and other signatures of the BlackLight Process have been independently validated and published in scientific journals and reports.

Did you check out their "Tech/Theory Papers" to see whether they linked to the published scientific journals and reports?

reply to post by Mary Rose

I think this is what we should focus on now.

I see that Blacklight Power states:

A Classical Theory of Nature

• The theory upon which BlackLight's technology has been developed is based on the classical laws of physics. The Company recently released the finalized Grand-Unified Theory of Classical Physics that comprehensively addresses many of the basic problems in chemistry and physics using these physical laws without using approximations or pure mathematics, devoid of physics, as is the case for the incumbent atomic theory of quantum mechanics. BlackLight's wholly owned subsidiary, Millsian, Inc., is dedicated to developing computational, chemical-design software tools based on solving molecular structures using these laws. The essentially real-time, analytical solutions of the precise physical structure of molecules of boundless extent and complexity, not possible using quantum mechanics, further validates the classical theory relied on by the Company.

I'm intrigued by ". . . without using approximations or pure mathematics, devoid of physics, as is the case for the incumbent atomic theory of quantum mechanics."

From Millsian:

BlackLight has formed a wholly-owned subsidiary company, Millsian, Inc., dedicated to developing the molecular modeling applications of classical physics (CP), solving atomic and molecular structures based on applying the classical laws of physics, (Newton's and Maxwell's Laws) to the atomic scale. The set of individual bonds between two atoms apiece of a molecule are known as the functional groups. The functional groups (Table 1) of essentially all major classes of chemical bonding including those involved in most organic molecules have been solved in analytical form. By using these functional groups as building blocks, or independent units, a potentially infinite number of molecules can be solved. As a result, Millsian software can visualize the exact three-dimensional physical structure, calculate physical characteristics of a boundless number of molecules of any length and complexity, and facilitate the engineering of new pharmaceuticals and materials at the molecular level. The results obtained in real-time match the experimental values typically to the limit of measurement. . . .

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Did you check out their "Tech/Theory Papers" to see whether they linked to the published scientific journals and reports?

They are all written by Mills and there is no independent confirmation of the hydrino anywhere.

I figured you'd like Mills, he's the modern day version of Keely, who bilked investors out of roughly $110 million dollars in today's dollars, for which they got zip.

Mills is slowly catching up to Keely, a while back he was up to $30 million, in 2009 he was up to $60 million bilked from investors, and like Keely, his investors have zip to show for it.

2. HYDRINOS: HOW LONG CAN A REALLY DUMB IDEA SURVIVE?

BlackLight Power (BLP), founded 17 years ago as HydroCatalysis, announced last week that the company had successfully tested a prototype power system that would generate 50 KW of thermal power. BLP anticipates delivery of the new power system in 12 to 18 months. The BLP process, (WN 26 Apr 91) , discovered by Randy Mills, is said to coax hydrogen atoms into a "state below the ground state," called the "hydrino." There is no independent scientific confirmation of the hydrino, and BLP has a patent problem. So they have nothing to sell but bull #. The company is therefore dependent on investors with deep pockets and shallow brains.

12-18 months from that article would have been the last half of 2009, and here we are in 2011 no closer to a working product.

The patent office even took the patents back which seems pretty unusual: bobpark.physics.umd.edu...

If he ever builds a working machine and can demonstrate it really works he could get the patent office to issue a patent, but I think it's pretty clear he can't do that because his theory is stated to be nonsense, supported by the fact that he's never made anything that works. The CIHT Hydrogen Fuel Cells still aren't shipping!

I predict that as in the Keely case where a few people with infinite patience are still waiting for the Keely motor to be adopted 130 years later, there will still be people 130 years from now wondering when these hydrino gizmos are going to start shipping. It's kind of funny and sad at the same time that some investors don't seem to have learned from the Keely hoax, and they are now falling for another one.

reply to post by Mary Rose


reply to post by Mary Rose

Originally posted by Mary Rose

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

BS,

Do you intend to answer the above question?

From "About The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice":

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.

Here's what you get if you click on the above link:



Why do you suppose they don't have an established website yet?

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I figured you'd like Mills, he's the modern day version of Keely, who bilked investors . . .

I see. We're going into a fresh round of here a fraud, there a fraud, everywhere a fraud, fraud.

I don't know the slightest thing about Mills. I'll research his work next, as time permits.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I don't know the slightest thing about Mills. I'll research his work next, as time permits.

From Blacklight Power's "Key Publications and Recent Papers":

Technical Presentation
(This is a large file which may take a while to load.)
Summary of recent experimental results and overview of BlackLight Technology with updated animations.

The above link pulls up a 172 page .pdf file.

As a sampling, here are a few screen shots:

Page 8:


Page 11:


Page 15:

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I figured you'd like Mills, he's the modern day version of Keely, who bilked investors . . .

I see. We're going into a fresh round of here a fraud, there a fraud, everywhere a fraud, fraud.

Well Mary, what nonsense. Fraud is not "everywhere". Fraud is found in 0.01% cases (figuratively speaking) , and it doesn't even need to involve physics. I was defrauded of a large sum of money when the waste management company I heavily invested in was infiltrated by fraudsters who used creative accounting to artificially inflate profits. Still, it's not surprising that the cases of fraud are strongly correlated with "free energy" claims, because obviously the rewards for intrepid investors would be humongous -- nothing is better than "free", like in "free money". And that is used as a bait. From that perspective, Rodin is not a fraud but simply a delusional person, and that's OK.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I see. We're going into a fresh round of here a fraud, there a fraud, everywhere a fraud, fraud.

I don't know the slightest thing about Mills. I'll research his work next, as time permits.

I suppose I should be more open-minded to the possibility that Mills might be simply delusional such as a victim of Idée fixe or some other psychological condition, instead of criminally fraudulent. As a free energy skeptic wrote on the Peswiki board about the Vorktex MagnaCoaster free energy gizmo:

On July 12, 2009, New Energy Congress member Eric Krieg wrote:

...I don't claim to know which people are mistaken and which are knowingly operating a criminal enterprise. My open offer to all these companies and now magnacoaster via this email is:

"If you really do have a power multiplier or something that makes net energy out of nothing, then your device would usher in a golden new age of cheap energy. It would greatly turn around our dying world economy, reduce pollution, roll back global warming and help every people group except a small number of oil producing countries who tend to hate us. But what stands between you and massive wealth and world adoration is credibility. You must have a problem of being considered delusional or out right crooks by the majority of people you deal with. Allow me to take part in a simple test that would give you instant credibility and help you more clearly stand apart from a pathetic century of history of crooks and kooks who pretty much have been regularly making the same claim as you. Please take a look at my open $10,000 offer for real proof of one of these things at: www.phact.org... "

Mills isn't the typical "crook or kook" as most don't have an elaborate theory of everything as Mills does. But what he does have in common with them is that nothing he makes actually works. So in addition to having a device that doesn't work, he also has an elaborate theory that doesn't work either.

Also, I applaud the efforts of NASA scientists Nelson and House. They don't assume everyone is a crook or a kook. Like Eric Krieg, they also offer to give struggling inventors credibility for their over-unity devices by testing them to verify they actually work.

So do I assume everybody in the field is a crook or a kook? No, only those who don't get the functionality of their model independently verified by the likes of Krieg, or Nelson and House, or the local university as MagnaCoaster mentioned. It's clear that Nelson and House genuinely hope somebody out there actually has a device that works. But you know, if Bearden sent them his device and they say it doesn't do what Bearden claims, then he might not sell as many DVDs so he has lots of incentive to not get it verified if it doesn't work, which is obviously the case.

In the case of Mills, it would take the opinion of a university he's not affiliated with to be convincing, as he has a rather dubious relationship with the university he is somehow a "partner" with.

Rowan University BLP related research

In 2008,[19] 2009[20] and 2010[4] BLP news releases cited research by Rowan University staff as independent verification of BLP claims. None of the reports for this research appears to have been submitted to peer reviewed journals for publication. The current version of the reports for this research can be found on the BLP web site. The reports describe calorimetric and analytical chemistry experiments that according to the summary section of the first report "confirms independently the empirical findings of BLP with respect to anomalous heat generation and chemical analysis".[21] However,BLP and Rowan University have had a long term relationship and characterizing BLP related research by Rowan University as independent might be misleading.

Rowan University staff have been actively involved with BLP for many years. BLP is described as an affiliate company in an undergraduate report of BLP related experiments.[22] Rowan BLP related research has, at least, been partially funded by BLP [23][24] and it has often used materials and equipment supplied by BLP for the experiments.

Hopefully you understand why when "Rowan BLP related research has, at least, been partially funded by BLP", it's difficult to consider the findings of Rowan University staff as an independent investigation.

The fact that none of the cited research reports by Rowan University staff appear to have been submitted to peer reviewed journals for publication doesn't help either.

So yes, this claim of independent verification which is neither truly independent nor published in peer reviewed journals does tend to make me lean more toward the conclusion of "fraud" instead of simple "kook".

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
The fact that none of the cited research reports by Rowan University staff appear to have been submitted to peer reviewed journals for publication doesn't help either.

Well at least Rowan appeared in other journals:

en.wikipedia.org...

Riots took place during Spring Weekend 1986, primarily off campus (though dominated by students) around the Beau Rivage townhomes and the Crossings apartment complex. As a result, Glassboro State College was ranked as the #28 Party School in the nation in the January 1987 issue of Playboy magazine.Coincidentally, in the Greek section of that same issue of Playboy, the Epsilon Eta chapter of Zeta Beta Tau was also named one of the Animal House Contenders.

Though the alcohol-fueled Spring Weekend was cancelled by then-President Herman James (a non-alcoholic version continued for several years), Glassboro State College remained known for its hard partying culture. However in 1988, there began one of the biggest crackdowns in school history. As result of the drinking death of freshman James Callahan at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, Herman James decided to make GSC an example for the rest of the State colleges and universities to follow. He invited the NJ Alcoholic Beverage Control commission (ABC) to the school and began shutting down off-campus parties, and placing undercover agents in the local liquor establishments. This prompted Morton Downey, Jr., who was based in Secaucus, New Jersey, and very popular at the time, to do an untelevised show focusing on the drinking age and the classic argument that an eighteen year old can go off to war and die for their country, but they cannot legally buy and consume a beer. Needless to say, he sided with the student opinion on this issue. The following year, the ABC did not return, and the partying atmosphere that Glassboro State College was known for, returned in earnest and continued into the 1990s and early 2000s

So this University is not completely unknown.

reply to post by buddhasystem

Obviously they're trying, but they're going to have to party harder if they want to move up from that #28 spot as a top party school.



I'm not sure if that's really what a university wants to be famous for though.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

The point is that the topic at hand is Reich’s work. The subject of chemtrails was not even current during his lifetime, so anything an ATS person says on a thread is of no consequence; Reich would not have commented on it or made assertions about them. The subject is off-topic.

The point is that the topic I raised discussed reichs work with his own words, and guess what mary, it's still ridiculous. But you wouldn't know that, you didn't read it.

Reich is a fool.

reply to post by GringoViejo

You realize that Schrödinger's cat was an attempt at satire, right? I'm pretty sure Schrödinger would slap you if he knew you were touting it around as an example of logic.

I don't know, maybe you're talking about something else he did.

What?

I am talking about Schrödinger's work as a whole. That encompasses his interpretation of HIS equations. Which was subsequently thrown out by the physics community in favor of Born's statistical solutions.

I am saying that his entire body of work was logically consistent, the same as Reich's entire body of work.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

The point is that the topic at hand is Reich’s work. The subject of chemtrails was not even current during his lifetime, so anything an ATS person says on a thread is of no consequence; Reich would not have commented on it or made assertions about them. The subject is off-topic.

It's quote on-topic since Reich is discussed. The link in Gringo's post will lead you to:
educate-yourself.org...

which discussed "application" of Reich's theory to solve world's problems.