"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

Mary

I had not really looked into this field of study before . Thank you for the link .

reply to post by 23432


You're welcome.

I learned about it on another forum. My understanding is that the principle behind biogeometry is that geometric shapes or constructs give off energy and are in resonance and harmonics with other shapes in other dimensions.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by 23432

 

You're welcome.

I learned about it on another forum. My understanding is that the principle behind biogeometry is that geometric shapes or constructs give off energy and are in resonance and harmonics with other shapes in other dimensions.

Rodin's work is OBVIOUSLY gaining popularity. i hope the anti-Rodin trolls in this thread eyes' bleed when Rodin or Rodin-like work reaches the mainstream. the trolls here are awful, there's no way for Rodin to be RESPECTFULLY discussed thanks to them.shills like BuddhaSystem are STILL using derogatory terms to describe Rodin, 160 pages later and 1,000s of posts later! talk about living in fear! the thing they fear is Rodin's work gaining popularity...to fight this is simply pathetic, and downright self-centered.

as for biogeometry:

i've also heard "Biophysics" by John Martineau, author of Quadrivium and Little Book of Coincidence.
very interesting stuff. link about some of it here :www.halexandria.org...

you should check out his work too.

all of these new types of Biosciences & physics are concurring the Vortex theory proposed by Rodin, no need to fight it off with fear.

Is an Electron really a Photon with Toroidal Topology?

Originally posted by metalshredmetal
i've also heard "Biophysics" by John Martineau, author of Quadrivium and Little Book of Coincidence.
very interesting stuff. link about some of it here :www.halexandria.org...

Is it Dr. Jason Martineau, rather than John, who is the author of QUADRIVIUM, along with three other people?

Anyway, I've heard of QUADRIVIUM before; it's been highly recommended!

Originally posted by metalshredmetal
Is an Electron really a Photon with Toroidal Topology?

I see the above is written by electrical engineers. I love reading stuff by them because they're often more grounded (no pun intended ) than physicists.

Thanks for the links! Good stuff.

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by metalshredmetal
i've also heard "Biophysics" by John Martineau, author of Quadrivium and Little Book of Coincidence.
very interesting stuff. link about some of it here :www.halexandria.org...

Is it Dr. Jason Martineau, rather than John, who is the author of QUADRIVIUM, along with three other people?

Anyway, I've heard of QUADRIVIUM before; it's been highly recommended!

Originally posted by metalshredmetal
Is an Electron really a Photon with Toroidal Topology?

I see the above is written by electrical engineers. I love reading stuff by them because they're often more grounded (no pun intended

) than physicists.

Thanks for the links! Good stuff.

edit on 01/17/12 by Mary Rose because: Format

interesting. John Martineau is definitely the author of Little Book of Coincidences. and he also listed as co-author of Quadrivium. and a few books written by John & Jason are published by the same publishers. (wooden books)

perhaps they're related...? maybe John Martineau is a pseudonym for (some of) Jason's work? now that i see the picture of Jason Martineau, he looks familiar too, but i don't remember from where.

Originally posted by metalshredmetal
John Martineau is definitely the author of Little Book of Coincidences. and he also listed as co-author of Quadrivium.

Looking at two different screens now in Amazon.com I see that in one place they list four authors, one "Martineau," for QUADRIVIUM, and on the other, five authors, including Dr. Jason and John Martineau. How confusing.

Anyway, it's on my reading list! Along with A LITTLE BOOK OF COINCIDENCE. Amazon shows the rest of the title as IN THE SOLAR SYSTEM. Guess it's the same book.

Originally posted by metalshredmetal
Rodin's work is OBVIOUSLY gaining popularity.

Yes! Yes! There are some quality web sites such as this one

The Rodin Coil is a nozzle that can turn mankind into intergalactic citizens by functioning as a vertical lift power propulsion spacecraft due to its massive magnetic field

Never mind that Rodin coil never functioned as anything beyond a bunch of mangled copper wire, and never lifted anything like a feather much less a space cruiser, there is always a moron to hold out hope. Or nozzle. Or both.

Massive magnetic field? How massive? Man, education in the US sucks rabbit's @ss.

Rodin, with his Vortex-Based Mathematics, is able to decode the entire universe from the quantum level to galaxies, using a mathematics so simple even a nine year-old can do it.

Indeed, all sorts of retards can do simple arithmetic at the level somewhat below of what a nine year old can do, i.e. Rodin's "math". However, there is not a sign in any shape or form of "decoding" of anything by Rodin. When I see that he can do energy levels of the hydrogen atom based on his Dunkin Donut tattooed with Sudoku -- I'll be all ears. Until then, sayonara, sucker.

shills like BuddhaSystem are STILL using derogatory terms to describe Rodin

I don't make things up, as much as I wish I could. When the Rodin's coil produces one joule of energy, I'll eat not one hat, but every hat I own. And I have a few. Until then, I have the freedom to sin, i.e. to laugh at certain mentally unsound people and their pinhead admirers -- who nevertheless have the hubris to say that Rodin can manufacture black holes any time, 24/7. Umm, right.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by metalshredmetal
Rodin's work is OBVIOUSLY gaining popularity.

Yes! Yes! There are some quality web sites such as this one

I especially like the part about the obsolete technology:

The Rodin Torus Coil makes much of current technology obsolete, including the following :

* The combustion engine
* Alternating current
* Conventional computer compression schemes
* Current methods of heat dissipation in computer processors
* Conventional wireless communication
* Winged airplanes
* All conventional types of encryption
* Endless repeating decimals are eliminated as a result of being able to compute a whole value for anything

Combustion engine obsolete?

Hey at least in the free energy threads some people claim to run their cars on water...I still haven't seen anyone even claim to run their car on a Rodin coil?

Winged airplanes?

And of course my favorite, Pi = 3. What the heck do you need all those extra digits for anyway?

The blue shows a circle looks just fine with Pi =3.0:



Now the only question is, what do we do with the red section that's leftover?

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Yes! Yes! There are some quality web sites such as this one

The Subtle Energy Research Institute - - a nonprofit - I had not heard of them before. Just watched a video uploaded in 2007 of a presentation by its president Ralph Squire: "Subtle Energy Research Institute."

This is where the action is - subtle energy is the same thing as the aether - and consciousness - God - the source of "free energy" - permeating the entire universe/multiverse.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Now the only question is, what do we do with the red section that's leftover?

Eat it? Anyhow, with pi being the circumvent divided by the diameter, you did not really solve the problem, but made it worse. Only a circle with a discontinuity in it would solve it, but these kind of circles are yet to be observed in reality. I guess that is why some people endorsed the idea that pi=3.

Originally posted by -PLB-
I guess that is why some people endorsed the idea that pi=3.

Rodin didn't say that. He just said whole number.

Yeah I'm still trying to find out what he meant. And Alex Petty doesn't agree with him. Dale Pond just said express it in a different way.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
. . . Rodin can manufacture black holes any time, 24/7.

Black holes are something I find disagreement about among Rodin supporters. I know that the open-source R&D person I've posted about Jason Verbelli is adament that they don't exist. I also wonder why people who talk about black holes don't also mention the white hole at the same time - I thought they supposedly go together.

reply to post by buddhasystem


haha, i've never seen that site before, and of course you link it as a "credible" Rodin science source,, because it has absolutely no official relation to Marko Rodin.

you're little children playing in a sandbox, and kicking other little "dumb" & "inferior" kids out, that's all you've been doing for the past 160 pages and 5,000 posts.

this thread is just a little fan-club for yourselves, it's obvious... to make you feel better and empowered, the feeling of capitalizing over someone else. ....for the past 5000 posts.

I'd like to have your address so I can send you my hat too, i hope it's okay if I # in it first?

Originally posted by -PLB-

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Now the only question is, what do we do with the red section that's leftover?

Eat it? Anyhow, with pi being the circumvent divided by the diameter, you did not really solve the problem, but made it worse. Only a circle with a discontinuity in it would solve it...

Isn't the red section a discontinuity?

I'm not clear on what you mean if that's not it.

In any case I don't think I solved the problem either...maybe all those extra digits after the 3 in Pi really have a purpose after all Using them eliminates the red section and makes the circle whole, which is kinda nice when you're making cylindrical reinforced concrete pillars and what not. It's probably harder to make the pillars in that blue shape.

Originally posted by metalshredmetal
haha, i've never seen that site before, and of course you link it as a "credible" Rodin science source,, because it has absolutely no official relation to Marko Rodin.

So where is Rodin gaining popularity then?

Regarding Rodin's "official" site "markorodin.com", he's taken down most of the things that were on his site when this thread was started, like his wacky article where he claims dark matter is the number 9, and his list of endorsers which included not only a couple of dead people but an ex-Microsoft guy who, when asked, says he thinks Rodin's stuff is mostly fantasy.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
. . . ex-Microsoft guy . . .

The "guy's" name is Russell P. Blake, and here's what he had to say, from page 1 of the .pdf file "Analysis of the Rodin Coil and It's Applications (2001) by Russ Blake" on vortexmath.com:

APPENDIX

ENDORSEMENTS and PAPERS

1. RUSSELL P. BLAKE

Wed, 14 Nov 2001 22:16:11
Subject: The Rodin Coil

To Whom It May Concern:

Two years ago I met Marko Rodin through a mutual acquaintance. Mr. Rodin
shared some of his results with me at that time. It became clear to me that Mr.
Rodin's work was a synthesis of numerical patterns which had previously been
overlooked by conventional science and mathematics. In hopes of bridging the
gap between Mr. Rodin's discoveries and conventional science, I put forth an
analytical framework in which mathematical formulae generate the numerical
patterns of the Rodin Torus. These formulae suggested that the Rodin Torus lies
not just on the surface of the "doughnut" shape, but into the interior as well; in
other words, the Rodin Torus is three dimensional.

This mathematical formulation is as yet incomplete, and the physical meaning of
these numerical phenomena remain unexplored still. Yet in my career I have
several times discovered new mathematical formulations which have led to new
products. In the late 1970's I discovered Atomic Modeling which revolutionized
computer performance modeling, measurement, and sizing. In the early 1990's I
discovered new ways to express the time-dependent behavior of program code,
which led to reductions of program code size of 50% of the original size for all
programs to which it was applied. I mention these facts merely to convince the
reader that my intuition has a history of success in the practical application of
new mathematics.

Now I am completely convinced that the Rodin Torus will likewise lead to new
and revolutionary advances in art and science. Mr. Rodin's work has suffered
from a lack of adequate scientific attention, and I am sure that as the research
momentum builds and the proper relationship between the Rodin Torus and
conventional science is fully understood, both areas of endeavor will attain new
heights. I am very much looking forward to playing a role in this adventure.

Russell P. Blake
Former Senior Researcher
Microsoft Research

As has been pointed out twice on this thread, Blake later decided to pursue his own patent related to Rodin's work.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Regarding Rodin's "official" site "markorodin.com", he's taken down most of the things that were on his site when this thread was started, like his wacky article where he claims dark matter is the number 9, and his list of endorsers which included not only a couple of dead people but an ex-Microsoft guy who, when asked, says he thinks Rodin's stuff is mostly fantasy.

I seriously don't see how being employed by Microsoft, or being an expert in Windows NT (a yesteryear product anyhow) gives any weight to Russ Blake's opinion. He never said WHY EXACTLY and HOW the coil will work. So what remains is "blah-blah" and the usual waving of hands.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
As has been pointed out twice on this thread, Blake later decided to pursue his own patent related to Rodin's work.

And where is the evidence for this?

Blake's response to Aloysius the Gaul doesn't sound like he's confirming that at all:

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
I tacked down Russell Blake to an Australian firm, and have swapped a couple of emails with him.

His comments about Marko's maths are:

Most of Marko’s stuff is fanciful nonsense. I found some of what he was involved with rather interesting, and ended up formalizing some of the mathematics around his various series, which I discovered to be decimal parity series. I wrote this up in a paper for him, but can’t vouch for any of the rest of it.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Page 104:

Originally posted by Mary Rose
. . . I remember seeing a video where he talked about a conflict with endorser Russell Blake because Blake wanted his own patent.

I went through my video notes and can't find this video, so I can't post it.

reply to post by Mary Rose


So it's Marko's word, that Blake was trying to "steal" his "invention"? Yeah well, as crappy as the concept of "endorsements" is (think GOP race), this isn't even an endorsement after all. Marko had a beef with Blake, and that's that. Maybe Blake wised up and told him the bitter truth.