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: 19
39
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Yes it is unfortunate that his life was riddled with economic uncertainty, and harsh criticism is to be expected for such a discovery. The same was endured by Mesmer, Tesla, Reich, Galileo, etc. It is a characteristic of the scientific institution.

Notice, that in the Wikipedia article, every single source but two(one for birth, another a book on perpetual motion) was The New York Times. Very sensationalized headlines.

A quote from the article regarding the 'compressed air tubes':


This tubing, it is asserted[by the inspecting scientists], is of a kind calculated to stand high pressure, and could have been used in connection with the great steel sphere found last week in the laboratory, which the experts intimate was used as a reservoir for compressed air or compressed gases. The tubing could thus form an agency for transmitting the forces thatmoved the motor in the exhibition room. The contention of Mr. Keely and his friends for many years was that no tubing of any kind was needed to work his machines.

The views of Prof. hering and Prof. Goodspeed are that the presence of the tubing and sphere indicates the use of normal forces and possible deception on the part of Keely. In this view Mr. Moore concurs, and Prof. Witmer is of opinion that the possibility of trickery confirms the diagnosis that most psychologists have made as to the delusive character of the Keely mystery.

Prof. Hering says in his signed statement:

"The discovery of so many tubes with couplings, which exactly resembled those shown in the photographs of Keely's apparatus, and were recognized by some of those who had seen the experiments, seems to leave little doubt that Keely probably lied and deceived. Personally I am satisfied now that he used highly compressed air, and that he intentionally and knowingly deceived the public when he held his exhibitions. Moreover, there is nothing wonderful about any of these experiments, of which I have seen descriptions, if he used highly compressed air."

Prof. Witmer, who treats the subject from a psychological standpoint, says:

"The external evidence of reservoirs and tubes was hardly necessary to demonstrate the delusional character of Keely's theories. Even had these objects not been found, the writings of Mrs. Bloomfield-Moore, the pseudo-scientific jargon of Keely, and the official reports of the Keely Motor Company would have furnished, upon critical examination, indisputable testimony to the unsoundness of Keelyism. This mad doctrine struck, to borrow Keely's pharase, a chord that was composed of nearly all the fundamental tones of delusion that vibrate in ill-blaanced mental systems-a revelation of nature's mysteries, the stultifying of current science, a new mechanical contrivance to develop untold power, a process for the manufacture of gold, the cure of the sick, a religion, and a scheme of moral regeneration. Little more is needed to give Keelyism its proper place in a museum of pathological mental products."


Little information on the tubes, lots of speculation on his mental health. In fact, I think it is pretty much a hit piece. Similar things happened with Mesmer, only he didn't have investors. But Tesla did. Reich was thrown into jail and his books burned... So you see this kind of thing is to be expected if anything challenges the status quo.

The problem I have with you, is you have not even quoted Keely in your wikipedia dissertation. Your other source appears to coincide with your preconceived conclusion that Keely is a fraud... good thing you have diverse sources! Here is a quote:


His technical terms were bewildering, intentionally so ; `molecular vibration, ' `sympathetic equilibrium,' `oscillation of the atom, ' `etheric disintegration,' `quadruple negative harmonics,' `atomic triplets,' came glibly from his lips to confuse or to enthrall his auditors.


The author of that article did not try to understand Keely either, instead he towed the easy pseudoskeptic line of assuming him a crackpot - because it is too much work to try to understand his conceptions of physics. Since they differ from your own, you are immediately inclined to disagree with such physics models.

Now, lets let Keely defend himself a bit. I find that if you actually go to the primary source material, it is quite easy to see for yourself he was no crackpot. But since the modus operandi of your team seems to rely on secondary sources only, ones which could clearly have a conscious(or unconscious) bias against revolutionary ideas of any sort - especially physics.

Early version of the liberal application of the uncertainty principle and observer effect:

The true relation between the vibration and the color can only be a harmonic one, as colors commence in the millions and end not lower than in trillions of vibrations per second. The conditions essential of this class of phenomena are, first, a condition relating to the structure in which they take place, free from all extraneous vibrations; the experimenter's presence even influences to a great extent the motions of the molecules used in the experiments.


On aerial navigation, gyroscopes, and magnetic poles:

"A small instrument, having three gyroscopes as a principal part of its construction, is used to demonstrate the facts of aerial navigation. These gyroscopes are attached to a heavy, inert mass of metal, weighing about one ton. The other part of the apparatus consists of tubes, enclosed in as small a space as possible, being clustered in a circle. These tubes, represent certain chords, which were coincident to the streams of force acting upon the planet, focalizing and defocalizing upon its neutral center. The action upon the molecular structure of the mass lifted was based upon the fact that each molecule in the mass possessed a north and south pole, - more strictly speaking, a positive and negative pole, - situated through the center, formed by the three atoms which compose it. No matter which way the mass of metal is turned, the poles of the molecule point undeviatingly to the polar center of the earth, acting almost exactly as the dip-needle when uninfluenced by extraneous conditions, electrical and otherwise. The rotation of the discs of the gyroscopes produces an action upon the molecules of the mass to be lifted, reversing their poles, causing repulsion from the earth in the same way as like poles of a magnet repel each other. This repulsion can be diminished and increased according as the mechanical conditions are operated. By operating the three discs, starting them at full speed, then touching two of them, so as to bring them, according to the tone they represented by their rotation, to a certain vibratory ratio, the weight then slowly sways from side to side leaves the floor, rising several feet in the air, remaining in that position, and as the discs gradually decrease their speed of rotation the weight sinks to the floor, settling down as lightly as thistledown. Where one molecule can be lifted, there need be no limit as to the number in a structure that may be operated upon as easily as one. The vessel in contemplation, the aerial navigator, will be over two hundred feet long, over sixty feet in diameter, tapering at both ends to a point, made of polished steel, and will be capable of being driven under the power of depolar repulsion, at the rate of three hundred miles an hour. It can be far more easily controlled than any instrument now in use for any phase of transit. Another very remarkable feature connected with this system of aerial navigation, is that the vessel is not buoyed up or floated in the air through the medium of the air, so that if there were no atmosphere it would float just as readily; hence, under mechanical conditions most certainly capable of production, involving massive strength of resistance to interstellar vacuity this can be made capable of navigating even the remote depth of space, positions between planets where polarity changes being controlled by other adjuncts of concentration for that purpose.


Nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory(through his lens of vibration, waves, and harmonics):

Thus the human race is immersed in forces whose intensity is vast in proportion to the number of EGOS adding each its quota to the already intense vibration, tending either to love or hate, kindness or cruelty, timidity or bravery. Those who intensify the force of cruelty in the place where they reside, may be strengthening a murders hand to strike the deadly blow in a distant land. This result is brought about through the agency of etheric waves, which transmit forces with undiminished intensity even to uncalculated distances. This phenomenon may be termed transympathetic.



"Every nebula, an embryonic world, is acted upon, created and preserved by this neutral center, and at the termination of its cycle, it is ultimately also destroyed by it, causing its absorption into the Unknown from whence it came.

"The actual neutral center of the earth is, in fact, even infinitely smaller than the billiard ball referred to above. It consists of a compound interetheric point in space, so small that were we to magnify a pin head to the size of the sun, and from that substance take a particle of matter the same size, again magnifying it to the size of the sun, the neutral center would still be invisible, even though the structure of this last substance was examined through the highest powered microscope? ever created, or to be created. For the neutral center is INDIVISIBLE. Its attributes do not belong to matter, and pertain in no way to matter, which is but its exterior manifestation.

"Every aggregate mass consists of molecules, each of which has its neutral center where the three modes of vibration, Dominant, harmonic, and enharmonic, meet in a center of Sympathetic Coincidence and are equated without cancellation of their energy.


Image of how the counter-rotating streams emanate from what could be called a black hole, but Keely calls it the neutral center (neutron). Thats why I think it significant that Rodin's coil has opposite windings charged 180 out of phase:
pondscienceinstitute.on-rev.com...

On Gravity:

"Gravity is transmittive interetheric force under immense Etheric vibration." Keely

"Gravity is the mutual attraction of atomoles." Keely

"Gravity is an eternal existing condition in Etheric space, from which all visible forms are condensed. It is inherent in all forms of matter, visible and invisible. It is not subject to time or space. It is an established connective link between all forms of matter from their aggregation. Time is annihilated by it, as it has already traversed space when the neutral centers of the molecules were established. It is nothing more than an attractive, Sympathetic Stream, flowing towards the neutral center of the earth, emanating from molecular centers of neutrality, concordant with the earth's centers of neutrality and seeking its medium of affinity with a power corresponding to the character of the molecular mass." John Worrell Keely circa 1886, The Snell Manuscript


You can investigate the primary source for yourself, if you have not already made up your mind that he is a crackpot, in which case I can not help you as you have already decided what is true for you.
Here - search in upper left.

Quick bit on Mesmer:

Each body has its poles and its surfaces; the universal fluid, composed of a two-fold stream, penetrates this body by means of each pole. This fluid always keeps the same direction, as long as that direction is not altered by another current which is stronger than the first. ... Everything can be explained by the two-fold stream of electric material and all of these phenomena can also become understandable. ... Therefore, one can easily understand that man is likewise penetrated by the two-fold stream of universal fluid, and that he must have his poles and his surfaces in the same way as do all other substances of nature which are more or less penetrated, according to their own characteristics, by this same universal fluid.

From his Discourse on Magnetsim. Although, I think if he were alive today he would maintain that it encompasses electricity, gravity, and every other force. His 'therapy' was very similar to W. Reich's also.

All of these people share philosophical presuppositions, that the universe is full, space is full, things are interconnected and interdependent, and are wavelike, etc.

Milo Wolff thus comes along nowadays, and repeats the pattern which has been denied continuously in mechanistic science.

They are not all crazy. If that is where this discussion has come to, then I am sorry I will not discuss it any further.

I simply will not concede that these folks are all mistaken, and crackpots. They must be seen in context of one another, since they are all intimately describing the same things, with similar philosophical presuppositions.

A foundation for a more comprehensive model is clearly laid out in front of us, we can either ignore it or learn it as thoroughly as we can to ensure a promising future in physics - and the future of humanity which needs this development to survive the harsh realities we face in this century.

It is a shame that your time as credentialed physicists are being wasted in this discussion, because of your lack of open mindedness and critical thinking about your presuppositions, and of the neurotic institution which you find yourselves representing.

We will have to go about this scientific revolution the hard way yet again, because the embedded status quo and institutionalized elite will not check themselves.

Peace and Love.

Long live the social revolution, and it alone! - Andre Breton



SEE YOU SPACE COWBOY...




posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 03:54 PM
link   
I don't understand most of what yuo just posted - the words are fine, the sentences are meaningless - but I did note that one of your quotes included a comment that gravity is not affected by space?? I'm pretty sure there's an inverse square law that says otherwise.....



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by beebs
It is a shame that your time as credentialed physicists are being wasted in this discussion, because of your lack of open mindedness and critical thinking about your presuppositions, and of the neurotic institution which you find yourselves representing.


a) Don't feel sorry for us, everybody needs a comic relief once in a while and you provide it, so thank you

b) It's a bit rich of you to refer to your interlocutors as neurotic drones, while you exhibit pathological disregard for logic and facts, and instead practice unshakeable trust in somebody's absurd assertions which in all cases, invariably, you aren't capable of comprehending in the first place. You claim that Rodin says 'A', then refer people to a different link that says 'B', and when 'B' is exposed as irrelevant, insist that your opponents should figure it out from scratch. Now that's neurotic. You pile up phrases that to you sound like physics, and which for anyone knowledgeable sound like word soup, and which you repeatedly fail to explain yourself at any, even miniscule, rate.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by beebs
 


harsh criticism is to be expected for such a discovery. The same was endured by Mesmer, Tesla, Reich, Galileo, etc. It is a characteristic of the scientific institution.
I don't like to see that old cliché go by without adding the blatantly obvious follow-up:

Harsh criticism is to be expected a hell of a lot more often for fraud, and when utter bullsh1t is dressed up as if it's science.

I find it so weird when people put forward the existence of criticism as if it supports someone's genius.

It's like pointing to a few artistic geniuses who died of horrific overdoses, and then using death by drug abuse as evidence of artistic talent. It's just SILLY. Don't do it.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by beebs
They are not all crazy. If that is where this discussion has come to, then I am sorry I will not discuss it any further.
I'm not a professional shrink so I don't have the credentials to dismiss Keely as crazy. You provided that quote yourself from Prof Witmer:


Originally posted by beebs
A quote from the article regarding the 'compressed air tubes':


Prof. Witmer, who treats the subject from a psychological standpoint, says:

"The external evidence of reservoirs and tubes was hardly necessary to demonstrate the delusional character of Keely's theories. Even had these objects not been found, the writings of Mrs. Bloomfield-Moore, the pseudo-scientific jargon of Keely, and the official reports of the Keely Motor Company would have furnished, upon critical examination, indisputable testimony to the unsoundness of Keelyism. This mad doctrine struck, to borrow Keely's pharase, a chord that was composed of nearly all the fundamental tones of delusion that vibrate in ill-blaanced mental systems-a revelation of nature's mysteries, the stultifying of current science, a new mechanical contrivance to develop untold power, a process for the manufacture of gold, the cure of the sick, a religion, and a scheme of moral regeneration. Little more is needed to give Keelyism its proper place in a museum of pathological mental products."


Little information on the tubes, lots of speculation on his mental health.
You call it a hit-piece and speculation.

But instead of refuting what you call a "speculative" assessment of his mental health, the quotes you post don't seem to dispute it, because they demonstrate a usage of language that's consistent with the characterizations made in the psychological assessment you quoted.

Psychology aside, I say that it's a fact that he never delivered a real world application to his investors. Even the guy who was supposed to carry on his work packed up everything they sent him and sent it back and wanted nothing further to do with it.

And with all the quotes you posted, where is the real-world proof that any of that is true and not just ramblings totally disconnected from the real world?

The same question Bobathon has been asking you of Rodin, applies to Keely. We see the sea of words they say, but where does anything either one of them say tie into the real world?


Originally posted by beebs
You think I am delusional.
I think that Keely's investors were delusional for 18 years until they woke up in 1890 and realized he had been hoaxing them. If you can tie any of this stuff into the real world, then I won't think you're delusional, but I've been reading page after page of this thread looking for you to tie anything from Rodin, or now Keely into the real world but when you're pressed to do so, you give odd responses like refer to a bunch of others who write similarly and claim they can't all be crazy. Unfortunately I know of no limit on the number of scientifically illiterate people. A survey found twenty percent of Americans think that the sun revolves around the Earth. 20% of 300 million is 60 million, so can I say 60 million people can't be crazy? Does that somehow support their point of view because there are so many of them? I'm not calling them crazy, but scientifically illiterate. So you've got to come up with a better argument than a dozen people can't be crazy (or scientifically illiterate) when surveys demonstrate that over 60 million people are scientifically illiterate, in America alone.

It hasn't come to whether these folks are crazy or not. It's come to picking something that can be observed in the real world, just as Bobathon has been consistently asking for. Yet you still haven't delivered anything that can be confirmed with observations in the real world. Have you?
edit on 16-2-2011 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   




parts 3,4,5 on sidebar on youtube



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I've just posted a question and gotten an interesting answer on Stewart Swerdlow's expansions.com:


Mary Rose says:
February 2, 2011 at 2:03 pm

I have seen the word “vortex” applied as a type of mathematics. It seems that it is based on Pythagorean math and that it is thought to be related to alternative energy technology.

Is the vortex significant in that it is something that is part of suppressed knowledge/technology?


*
Stewart says:
February 2, 2011 at 2:18 pm

A vortex connects different realities together. I explain this in my Simultaneous Existence DVDs.


That about sums it up to me. I wish I could learn about the intuition gained by people with such advanced Top-down concepts.

The Vortex can wipe us all out in a flash. It's too dangerous to play with, so we hide from it. The math behind advanced energy has roots beyond out times... amazing!

The concept is definitely NOT limited to a coil!



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by squandered


Stewart says ... I explain this in my Simultaneous Existence DVDs.


That about sums it up for me too, squan. He won't tell you, but he'll happily dangle a $395 dvd in front of you.

Being a despicable lying piece of sh1t and making shedloads of money out of gullible assholes is obviously the way forward.

Here we are trying to warn people, and they couldn't give a cr@p.

I give in. I'm going to start a cult instead and get my share. I could do with a nice new car. Squandered, I'll tell you all you need to know about the vortex, don't you worry... just one minute while I set up an extortion website, you wait right there...



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Please excuse my language.


I have good reason to not hold these charlatans in very high regard, that's all.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Arb, the source you quoted:


a chord that was composed of nearly all the fundamental tones of delusion that vibrate in ill-blaanced mental systems-a revelation of nature's mysteries, the stultifying of current science, a new mechanical contrivance to develop untold power, a process for the manufacture of gold, the cure of the sick, a religion, and a scheme of moral regeneration.


Looking at some of Rodin's videos, I can't help but notice similarities to that description. At the very least the untold power and the cure of the sick are expressly promised by Rodin.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bobathon

Originally posted by squandered


Stewart says ... I explain this in my Simultaneous Existence DVDs.


That about sums it up for me too, squan. He won't tell you, but he'll happily dangle a $395 dvd in front of you.

Being a despicable lying piece of sh1t and making shedloads of money out of gullible assholes is obviously the way forward.


I believe Mary Rose bought a set of these DVDs, or maybe there was another reason she declined to comment on that possibility after a contact with that guy. He readily promised to her to explain all sorts of vortices.... on the DVD!



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   
I wish he'd promise hair growth - I mean that would be something wouldn't it? He's clearly got it solved for his shoulders.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Bobathon

Originally posted by squandered


Stewart says ... I explain this in my Simultaneous Existence DVDs.


That about sums it up for me too, squan. He won't tell you, but he'll happily dangle a $395 dvd in front of you.

Being a despicable lying piece of sh1t and making shedloads of money out of gullible assholes is obviously the way forward.


I believe Mary Rose bought a set of these DVDs, or maybe there was another reason she declined to comment on that possibility after a contact with that guy. He readily promised to her to explain all sorts of vortices.... on the DVD!



Who gave you a star? That was a contrite, irrelevant put-down.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by squandered
Who gave you a star? That was a contrite, irrelevant put-down.


I don't know either who starred my post, I just wanted to illustrate the point Bob made:

That about sums it up for me too, squan. He won't tell you, but he'll happily dangle a $395 dvd in front of you.


I don't quite get you angle here. I suppose you disapprove of charlatans as much as Bob, I and some others, right?



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by beebs
reply to post by Bobathon
 



There's a pattern to all these threads:

Person A makes a claim for someone's theories
Person B asks for evidence
Person A says some stuff
Person B says "that doesn't seem to make any sense"
Person A blames person B for not understanding what they think is self-evident
and then it descends into bickering for weeks.

Blaming someone for not understanding what you've said never helps.

If the person you're communicating with doesn't understand what you've said, you're not communicating.


Nice, that is your perspective haha. I can tell thats what its like for you, but its totally opposite for me.

Mine is:

Person A: Take a look at this guy's theories.
Person B: Oh yeah, some of it makes sense, some of it doesn't.
Person C: He is a crackpot.
Person B: How do you know he is a crackpot? What is wrong with his idea?
Person C: Look, I have credentials and can do complex abstract math, so trust me hes a crackpot.
Person B: Can you actually discuss his ideas to prove your stance? Because in the context of mysticism, philosophy of science, history of science, Keely, Tesla, Wolff, continuum mechanics, etc. it seems not so farfetched...
Person C: Its nonsense, the words he's using. And there is no maths. And what do all of those unrelated things have to do in this thread?
Person B: I can't do maths, but I can read all of the context which his ideas exist in.
Person C: Since you can't do maths, you don't understand what you are saying either, and are a replication of Rodin and his nonsense.
Person B: No I'm not, have you read those things I posted?
Person C: What is there to read? Its nonsense.
Person B: No, its not.
Person A(thinks to themselves): wtf
Person C: Its plainly nonsense.
Person B: Can you tell me why its nonsense?
Person C: Show me how its not nonsense.
Person B: Okay... look at this... this, read this. look at this diagram here, this word means this. this, this, and this, and your philosophical presuppositions are different than his... etc.
Person C: But this one point you said in one sentence is off, so I will not try to understand you, but instead assume you are making this up as you go, jumbling together random words, and ignore all of the so-called 'context'

etc. etc.


The fact you're still here despite all that, is awesome. He doesn't approve of the notion because it's against his paradigm. Watch him attack me now. I think he's extracting info out of you whilst thinking he's sinning against his God. He afraid of something...

Whatever the case the arguments presented here have worked a treat on me. The way it's been put forward has saved me a lot of research and pout me on the path with some confidence. Without a maths background I wouldn't be able to read the source or know where to start.

I've enjoyed reading quotes in their context about something which is intrinsically tangible. You know, Einstein's quotes cleared my head a lot.

If someone like me can understand and talk about cutting edge quantum / energy patterns and hint to it's application then I'd say science is in for an overhaul.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by squandered
Who gave you a star? That was a contrite, irrelevant put-down.


I don't know either who starred my post, I just wanted to illustrate the point Bob made:

That about sums it up for me too, squan. He won't tell you, but he'll happily dangle a $395 dvd in front of you.


I don't quite get you angle here. I suppose you disapprove of charlatans as much as Bob, I and some others, right?



I'm not looking for charlatans. Science has a habit of building on itself. I don't need to worry about the methods used to gain funds and acclaim. I'm an innocent bystander taking advantage of what's essentially free knowledge.

Maybe, just maybe... I may learn something useful. If it came to it, I would spend money. I am big enough to accept that people need money to survive. I paid enough for my education. The best information usually comes at a price. Don't bother relating this to the argument about a $395 dvd. I saw how it was added along with emotive media to exact a reaction. I also know that $395 is a trifling amount for new research that has a commercial appeal.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 11:23 PM
link   
I really don't understand beebs. He clearly doesn't understand the standard models, doesn't understand the technobabble he spews forth, yet he's so cocksure about how there is something going on that can't be explained by conventional science. He doesn't even understand things like angular impulse and friction, which even freshman in college learn, doesn't understand the math, yet he's cocksure about his nonstandard "model". He can't explain it, but, by God, it has to be true, because scientists who used models that are obsolete said so. They couldn't possibly be wrong; smart people are never wrong. Aristotle must have been correct studying nature by quality rather than quantity. How could such a smart man be wrong!



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by squandered
 


You'd be better off buying a book written by Feynman, Landau, or Dirac. Heck buy How to Teach Physics to your Dog. If you think quantum theory is something intuition can explain you'd be wrong. You need more than "it resonates with me" to understand things.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Looking at some of Rodin's videos, I can't help but notice similarities to that description. At the very least the untold power and the cure of the sick are expressly promised by Rodin.
Yes.

It definitely confirms the claim by beebs that Rodin isn't the only one making up this "taurus" stuff.

His "taurus" stuff was also incorporated in "Sympathetic Vibratory Physics", a merging of science and new age philosophy which is the last sentence in that wiki article before the notes, but when you click the link for "Sympathetic Vibratory Physics" it takes you here: en.wikipedia.org...

I wonder why there's a link if there's no article?


Originally posted by 547000
You'd be better off buying a book written by Feynman, Landau, or Dirac. Heck buy How to Teach Physics to your Dog. If you think quantum theory is something intuition can explain you'd be wrong. You need more than "it resonates with me" to understand things.
I think you make an important point. Mary Rose mentioned her intuition and I said I'm sure it's great for some things....but not quantum physics. I think wanting to trust their intuition trips up a lot of people in physics. Heck I'd like to believe my intuition too, but when observation says something else I've got to go with observations.

And other than playing with his coil, Rodin's observations are severely lacking.



posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by squandered
 


You'd be better off buying a book written by Feynman, Landau, or Dirac. Heck buy How to Teach Physics to your Dog. If you think quantum theory is something intuition can explain you'd be wrong. You need more than "it resonates with me" to understand things.


If that's the way you think, you won't be surprised to to know I'll be concentrating hard on what resonates well with me and not putting much effort into learning the current theories and models or even begin to understand the maths.

As it stands, yes I agree and I'm learning more about taking a scientific position as a start / stop tid-bit that has passed rigorous testing - that shouldn't be trifled with, using misconceptions and assumptions...

I have my own theories and I'm finding some symmetry in the ideas put forward, plus I see an enormous mount of hope in the ongoing science. I have more theories than you've had hot dinners. It's rare that I'm able to apply them. Yes my standards are excessively loose to your scientific mind. I only care about intuition. Science is not my field, obviously...

I'm going to put "Vortex Based Mathematics" under rigorous testing by mediating on natural maths based energy patterns or the language of God, observer-observed interconnectedness and the real life of the 'grain' (what are the forces) and I may spend sometime channelling mad scientists to find out what we're acctively trying to reverse-engeneer. Then I'll go to ssleep and find more important things to ponder.

I've a decent 'idiots guide' to read - just trying to reduce the scope of my future reading. There's just not enough time.



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join