"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

reply to post by buddhasystem

Wait

Exactly... still waiting.

you told me you don't care what I say

I still don't care what you have to say, but has it stopped you from replying to me even when I am not "talking" to you? Yes.

Answer my questions.

Do they have smileys for champagne toast? Beer on Valentine's is so low class.

Here in the South, Champagne is for sissys.

Originally posted by MamaJ
Here in the South, Champagne is for sissys.

So I heard, and TP is for sissys, too, right? Real Southerners use corn cob. And they have both kinds of music - country and western.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by LawrenceWippler

 

Additional text from the section "Energy":

. . . The unique properties of each element are determined by the amount of magnetic lines of force that element is able to hold and the lines’ relative positions from the core of the element. These are what create the different frequencies of the electromagnetic spectrum, as well. This difference also affects how the elements react with each other and how atoms transform energy from one form to another.

Are you saying that changes in elements are caused by both the amount of magnetic lines of force the elements are able to hold and the relative positions of them from the cores of the elements?

Correct.

reply to post by LawrenceWippler


In your video on Electrolysis, are you talking about the relative strength and positions of magnetic lines of force, albeit in different words?



(Also, I noted that you said that the North monopole is slightly stronger and that's why the Earth tilts on its axis.)

So I heard, and TP is for sissys, too, right? Real Southerners use corn cob. And they have both kinds of music - country and western.

reply to post by buddhasystem


No.

Originally posted by MamaJ

So I heard, and TP is for sissys, too, right? Real Southerners use corn cob. And they have both kinds of music - country and western.

reply to post by buddhasystem

 

No.

Actually, yes.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by LawrenceWippler

 

In your video on Electrolysis, are you talking about the relative strength and positions of magnetic lines of force, albeit in different words?

(Also, I noted that you said that the North monopole is slightly stronger and that's why the Earth tilts on its axis.)

That is correct, it's also is responsible for the moon moving above and below the earth's equatorial plain.

reply to post by LawrenceWippler

And Mercury moving above and below the ecliptic?
And here I was thinking it was because their orbits are inclined.

reply to post by Phage


How much have the planets orbits changed since the earth was formed 4 billion years ago (roughly)? in 4 billion years I can imagine the sun must have lost (relatively little) some of its mass. Does this constant loss of mass over the course of 4 billion years affect the gravity which dictates the planets orbits?

reply to post by LawrenceWippler


And this question?

In your video on Electrolysis, are you talking about the relative strength and positions of magnetic lines of force, albeit in different words?

reply to post by ImaFungi

Not sure what it has to do with the topic (or if there actually is one at this point come to think of it)

Does this constant loss of mass over the course of 4 billion years affect the gravity which dictates the planets orbits?

Yes. Lessening mass would result in expanding orbits but as you say the loss of mass is relatively little. I think I remember the number 1% in 10 billion years or something to that effect. A change in mass of 0.5% would not have much effect on planetary orbits. I'm not in the mood to do the calcs but they are pretty simple if you want to.

Originally posted by LawrenceWippler

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by LawrenceWippler

 

In your video on Electrolysis, are you talking about the relative strength and positions of magnetic lines of force, albeit in different words?

(Also, I noted that you said that the North monopole is slightly stronger and that's why the Earth tilts on its axis.)

That is correct, it's also is responsible for the moon moving above and below the earth's equatorial plain.

I don't believe that's correct. Are you under the impression the Earth always tilts toward the Sun? Again this doesn't make sense.

reply to post by Mary Rose


You asked Wippler this question

Are you saying that changes in elements are caused by both the amount of magnetic lines of force the elements are able to hold and the relative positions of them from the cores of the elements?

He answers

Correct.

To what changes in elements are you referring? He already stated they don't change.

They can't, the particle of matter which makes up the atoms core cannot be changed from one element to another.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

But elements can be changed to another as Arb showed here www.abovetopsecret.com...

He also has said

atoms are composed of n/s monopoles and what I call a particle of matter, it's this particle of matter that determines what element the atom will become.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

That sounds like a unique particle for each element to me. Does that pose any problems with the theory for you?

Still my favorite thread on ATS .


I understand that the science operates on " give me a one miracle and I'll explain the rest " principle .

I wonder what Marko is doing lately ?

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

Not sure what it has to do with the topic (or if there actually is one at this point come to think of it)

As broad as the topic is here (which is extremely broad), I'm not sure that question is actually on-topic, unless there's an anti-mainstream conspiracy angle or something.

I think the topic started out exploring the non-mainstream views on how Rodin's "flux thruster atom pulsar electrical venturi spacetime implosion field generator coil" can be used to cure all disease, create unlimited energy, and travel to other galaxies. We didn't have much luck with that, so the topic has expanded into other non-mainstream views, I think along these lines:

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I relate to theories from independent thinkers, as I have said. People who start from scratch rather than assuming that mainstream science is an authority.

So when Mr Wippler says: "Setting aside the presently known theories and laws of physics and attacking the problem from a different perspective", that would seem to be on-topic as far as I can tell.

The prospect of curing all disease and traveling to other galaxies sounded like more fun though...I'm not sure what Mr Wippler's theory is supposed to do any better than existing theory even if it was true. At least Rodin was going to give us infinite energy with his gizmo, if it worked, though I'm not exactly sure how it was supposed to do that, or cure all disease for that matter.

Originally posted by 23432

I wonder what Marko is doing lately ?

It seems that it is up to Randy Powell and Daniel Nunez to continue R&D of vortex math. I've heard Randy say in an interview that he collaborates with Marko.

Randy and Daniel were to be interviewed this evening on a radio program called the Vinny Eastwood Show.

Maths is for dark matter as language is to love,

You cant solve it all with a tiny bit

reply to post by Mary Rose



Thanks Mary Rose

Energy equals fluctuation fluctuation equals inbalance inbalance equals fluctuations fluctuations equal vortex mathmatics mathmatics equals dark matter dark mattrer equals nothing nothing equals balance balance equals

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Speaking of which... It's safe to assume you understand the concept behind a warp drive, correct?