"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

Wow 230 plus pages...posting this for easy access to this thread. Once I can get up to speed with whats come before this point. I may contribute to the discussion, in some way shape or form.

A quick scan of the last few pages though; a lot of threads have a lot of the same arguments, as other monolith; lost tech, and theory behind them or speculations. So that part is very familiar...as well as some knowledge of the topic in discussion; but its not fair to all the other posters, to just dive in with a post...

reply to post by BigBrotherDarkness


I am interested in your take about the mainstream view on being able to tap into the energy that I understand everyone agrees is in the "vacuum" vs. the "free energy" community's view.

On this thread it has been asserted that Marko Rodin's work should be placed in the same category as John Keely, Ed Leedskalnin, Nikola Tesla, and John Searl, and, that there has been a sometimes brutal suppression of "free energy" technology, and that's why working devices are not on the market generally speaking. The naysayers assert that suppression is baloney and that the persons I just listed are each a fraud, senile, delusional, or crazy.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
On this thread it has been asserted that Marko Rodin's work should be placed in the same category as John Keely, Ed Leedskalnin, Nikola Tesla, and John Searl

It's a huge disrespect to Tesla to have him on his list. He may have been an eccentric and prone to manias, but he was indeed in a genius and guess what, some of his stuff worked and still works, admirably. The rest on the list have nothing to show for it. Not to mention either being sick or charlatans or a mix of the two. Of course there are some ignorant people out there who refuse to crack open a physics book, and who don't care about such subtleties. To these persons who willingly lobotomize themselves, it's OK if Leedskalnin says that the Sun emits a tons of tiny magnets which actually make Earth spin. They willingly swallow this idiocy, and a lot of other retarded stuff.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Mary Rose
On this thread it has been asserted that Marko Rodin's work should be placed in the same category as John Keely, Ed Leedskalnin, Nikola Tesla, and John Searl

It's a huge disrespect to Tesla to have him on his list. He may have been an eccentric and prone to manias, but he was indeed in a genius and guess what, some of his stuff worked and still works, admirably. The rest on the list have nothing to show for it. Not to mention either being sick or charlatans or a mix of the two. Of course there are some ignorant people out there who refuse to crack open a physics book, and who don't care about such subtleties. To these persons who willingly lobotomize themselves, it's OK if Leedskalnin says that the Sun emits a tons of tiny magnets which actually make Earth spin. They willingly swallow this idiocy, and a lot of other retarded stuff.

And yet - All the while I presented you with spin-wave physics, the experiments/ video, the schematics/ topology, addressed single vector "waves" Tesla theorized (their description part of his namesake), his corresponding quote 3,6,9 - he obviously became fixated on later in life, and the infinite bandwidth pasta-shaped communications recently tested.

I'll find my power drill, if you're going down the path of lobotomy... I hate to say it, but a more docile version of you might have better luck.

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by Americanist
Furthermore, the only difference between base 10 and base anything else is that 10 is replaced with the new number.

Wrong, it just shows you have no clue at all about base. What is 10 in base 11? Or base 12? Oh, it is also 10....

Do you have a driver's license? Have you taken the written portion? How about a college exam or any testing resembling job-related licensing requirements?

With the aforementioned: The base 10 - The 10 is replaced. Base 11 - The 11 is replaced. Base 12 - The 12 is replaced - So on and so forth. Hence, the statement: "base anything else." Learn to interpret, or wise up a bit... I'm counting on those two options as propensity.

Originally posted by Americanist
With the aforementioned: The base 10 - The 10 is replaced. Base 11 - The 11 is replaced. Base 12 - The 12 is replaced - So on and so forth. Hence, the statement: "base anything else." Learn to interpret, or wise up a bit... I'm counting on those two options as propensity.

So, you're asking us to interpret because you didn't really mean what you said? You also tried to make this same excuse for Rodin's incorrect equation that 9=18.

Wouldn't it be better if you just say what you mean? I would offer the same advice to Rodin.
Mathematics is a precise language. There's no reason to say 9=18 requires interpretation, it's just wrong.

In base 8, the number after 7 is represented as 10 (base 8), so even with your clarification, it sounds like you're saying the 10 is replaced with an 8, but that's backwards. Your original statement as well as your "clarification" seem to demonstrate you don't really understand bases.

The only other possible interpretation of your statement would be a trivial interpretation like "base 8 means base 8" which is so trivial and non-meaningful, why would anyone even say that, unless they didn't understand bases?

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
You also tried to make this same excuse for Rodin's incorrect equation that 9=18.

Do you have obsessive-compulsive disorder?

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
You also tried to make this same excuse for Rodin's incorrect equation that 9=18.

Do you have obsessive-compulsive disorder?

Good question! And I think that it needs to be directed to people building various "vortex" coils year in, year out, with no semblance of either theory of the "vortex", or any solid experimental data collected. Like that guy who likes to spin a spherical magnet in the alternating magnetic field, and stare at it in amazement, like an idiot. So I invite you to direct your inquiry to these people.

reply to post by Mary Rose

I'm not the topic of this thread, but no I don't have OCD. It's ironic you should ask OCD when the guy who IS the topic of this thread appears to be obsessive when he says "The mathematical fingerprint of God is the number 9", so clearly, Rodin is obsessed with 9, and maybe also 3 and 6.

The only preferences I have for certain numbers or bases are those where I can demonstrate a sound reason for the preference, like the table I posted earlier demonstrating why bases 2, 8, and 16 are so well suited to transistor-based computing applications. I don't really have any obsession for base 2, 8, or 16, they just happen to work well with computers, so I like them for that application because they work well in that application.

Neither Rodin or anybody else has demonstrated how to build a "flux thruster atom pulsar electrical venturi spacetime implosion field generator coil" by using the number 9 as the "mathematical fingerprint of god". Clearly, Rodin is the one you should be asking about his obsessions, such as the obsession with 9 and the obsession with making up fancy names for non-existent devices, which don't even have as much credibility as a retro-encabulator.

POE = Peace on Earth

Published December 18, 2012:

reply to post by Mary Rose


Is there any reason to believe similar results won't be obtained with the coils made on this automatic coil winding machine? (click the "x" on the upper right of the logo in the video to make it go away):

Automatic toroid coil winding machine


That looks over 100 times easier, doesn't it? And therefore more than 100 times cheaper too.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
POE = Peace on Earth

Why is this transformer caller "Peace on Earth"? It certainly doesn't work if this was the claim to its efficacy.

Seriously though, that lady powers the circuit and is marveling at the LEDs that are being lit by the power she supplied, as if it were a miracle. I guess some people stop growing at age 3. Not the worst thing to happen to a person, really.

From "Vortex Technologies: POE Coil / How It's Made":

. . . *Also, please support Vortex Based Mathematics; as the theoretical models presented there can help people to understand that toroidal energy can be mapped using numbers! Vortex Energy is real, and understanding it is our future!*

Originally posted by Mary Rose
From "Vortex Technologies: POE Coil / How It's Made":

. . . *Also, please support Vortex Based Mathematics; as the theoretical models presented there can help people to understand that toroidal energy can be mapped using numbers! Vortex Energy is real, and understanding it is our future!*

"Toroidal Energy" sounds plenty idiotic. And no, regardless of what it is, it's not "mapped" in any way. As to the "Vortex Energy" (apparently toroidal energy is not enough for this moron, so he needs to invent more nonsensical stuff) - no it's not real until someone proves it. With his level of skill, matching that of cavemen, Mr. Nunez is highly unlikely to achieve that.

From 1 Stop Energies on Facebook:

Fun anomaly surrounding Vortex Technologies:

The 'resistance' of a coil is the set value of how hard it is for electricity to flow through the wire. Normally, these values are stable; so it is possible to calculate resistance by factoring the wire length and wire size. Through our research, we have found that this is still somewhat true, but Vortex Coils fluctuate their resistance depending on the orientation of the coils to Earth's magnetic field. Generally, the resistance change is anywhere from 1-3 ohms. . . .

I've received my copy. The publisher is unstated. The Introduction by Dan A. Davidson is dated May 1997.

Looking at the Table of Contents I see some items that are related to posts of this two year discussion (if you can call it that):

• John Ernst Worrel Keely (background history of shape power)
  
• A chapter on aetheric physics
  
• Orgone energy/Wilhelm Reich
  
• Evidence for advanced technology in ancient Egypt
  

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Looking at the Table of Contents I see some items that are related to posts of this two year discussion (if you can call it that):

Hmmm, some might call it a 232 page discussion, but in some ways, it might be more like a one page discussion repeated 232 times, where the names change but the gist if the discussion remains the same, and it usually goes like this:

Paraphrased:

Anti-mainstreamer: This guy I found on the internet says he can travel to another galaxy by putting numbers on a donut etc, basically because 18=9 and so does every other multiple of 9 because the mathematical fingerprint of God is the number 9, etc.

Skeptic: Can he prove it? Or are the men in white coats coming for him? Does 18 really equal 9?

Anti-mainstreamer: I can't prove anything. But let me post this cool looking graphic.

Skeptic: I guess it's time for the men in white coats then?

Anti-mainstreamer: You're not very open-minded are you?

Skeptic: Open minded, but not so much my brain falls out.

We must be at the "post cool looking graphic" part again, or re-post in this case.

From the treatise Shape Power by Dan A. Davidson, publisher unstated, dated 1997, Chapter Two "Background History of Shape Power":

After Keely's untimely death in 1898, several investigators from the Scientific American magazine staf [sic] went to Keely's laboratory looking for evidence to support the idea that Keely was a fraud. . . . they lifted the floorboards . . . found a large cast-iron sphere from which protruded pieces of iron pipe, but the pipes were not connected to anything. . . .

A friend of mine uncovered a newspaper article, written while Keely was still living, which tells the story of how the iron sphere got under the floorboards. . . . The inventor told the reporter that he was making room in his lab by clearing away outmoded equipment. This is the sphere later found by the Scientific American expose group. . . .

Studying Keely's writings and trying to make sense out of them is a painful process. Keely invented his own vocabulary and it took me many years to understand in a small part what he had accomplished. Using sound vibration, Keely had literally unlocked the secrects [sic] of gravity, electricity, magnetism, sub-atomic physics, brain-mind physics, etc. We will probably never know all that Keely did. We can only hope that more modern researchers who rediscover these secrets will share them with the world for our enlightenment.

Things certainly take a long time to happen. Davidson spent many years previous to writing that and he wrote it 15 years ago. Here we are still dealing with the ridicule of the naysayers who can't seem to get our of their own way. Pride is a huge factor in this.

I'm gathering from my research that the word "aether" needs to be brought back into physics and that the term "zero point energy" (ZPE) is an unnecessary substitute which may have been brought about to try to save face in the physics community for their refusal to recognize that the official story that Michelson - Morley proved there is no aether is wrong.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
From the treatise Shape Power by Dan A. Davidson, publisher unstated, dated 1997, Chapter Two "Background History of Shape Power":

After Keely's untimely death in 1898, several investigators from the Scientific American magazine staf [sic] went to Keely's laboratory looking for evidence to support the idea that Keely was a fraud.

Evidence of fraud on a grand scale was undeniable, yet you found someone who denies it anyway? Brilliant! The sphere wasn't the only evidence of fraud:

The Keely Motor Company

The secret was not in the machines; the secret was in the laboratory building itself. Engineer Alexander Scott and Mrs. Moore's son, Clarence, examined the building, accompanied by press and photographers. False ceilings and floors were ripped up to reveal mechanical belts and linkages to a silent water motor in the basement (two floors below the laboratory). A system of pneumatic switches under the floor boards could be used to turn machinery on and off. A three-ton sphere was found in the basement, apparently a reservoir for compressed air. The walls, ceilings and even apparently solid beams were found to have hidden pipework. The evidence of fraud on a grand scale was obvious and undeniable.

Studying Keely's writings and trying to make sense out of them is a painful process. Keely invented his own vocabulary ....

Inventing new words for new things is OK, but twisting the meanings of existing words is what I've called "dictionary hijacking", or as Scientific American said:

Although when new inventions appear it may be necessary to coin appropriate terms, we should not think it essential to resort to heterogeneous cominglement of absurdities. [Scientific American, October 11, 1884.]

Things certainly take a long time to happen. Davidson spent many years previous to writing that and he wrote it 15 years ago. Here we are still dealing with the ridicule of the naysayers who can't seem to get our of their own way. Pride is a huge factor in this.

Pride has nothing to do with this. He never made anything that worked outside his lab rigged for fraud. That should be enough to make anybody a naysayer, even you.