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: 37
39
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 

Yippee, someone else claiming to be 'on the verge' of a free energy device.

I will save the world by violating the laws of physics. Using this ELECTROMAGNET, which I have convinced myself is some kind of magic thing for NO F****NG REASON AT ALL. If I say it's "radically different" to a normal coil, the credulous idiots of the world will chorus "ooh, radically different" and ask no questions, and I will be lauded as a hero.

Add him to the list.




posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 09:06 AM
link   
Or, as Dara O'Briain eloquently puts it...




posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 09:08 AM
link   
From this post showing Col. Bearden’s article about the Rodin coil design:


Originally posted by Mary Rose
From Rodin's website, Col. Thomas Bearden's Introduction to Rodin Coil Design: . . .


the key words which encapsulate what is different about the Rodin coil:


It is not magic, but electromagnetics of a special kind.


and:


Rodin is apparently going by elementary electricity concepts but augmented by excellent native intuition. What he really is doing is attempting to separate the A-potential (i.e., the magnetic vector potential A) from the B field, and utilize the curl-free-A-potential as an independent field of nature in the central “crossover” region. It is known in physics that this is possible; the well known Aharonov-Bohm effect depends upon precisely this separation.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


Mary, if you did read that thread carefully, you would have noticed that people already commented that Rodin's coil leaks magnetic field compared to a conventional toroidal coil, of which purpose is the opposite, i.e. to contain the magnetic field. To Rodin's credit, he does understand the difference and comments on that in one of the videos, in a coherent manner. No "spirits moving in aether", just fact.

Thing is, you can have a conventional solenoid coil and it will leak plenty of field. Just look at ANY speaker or ANY electric motor. So, to translate in terms more familiar to you, this is an analogy:

a fire hydrant is a very old and well used invention. When open, it will "leak" tons of water. Nobody's making a big deal out of it. In addition, most people shower every day and consider it normal for water to spout out. Now comes Rodin with a bucket (or a barrel). He paints the bucket with a sudoku pattern. He then pokes a hole in the bottom of his vessel (next to the center of his sudoku) and watches the water gush out. Then he proceeds to say that this hole is superior to any hydrants known to man and that it creates a "macroscopic singularity", where he discovers an "emanation point" and where "space-time collapses". He puts a ping-pong ball and marvels for hours that it spins really fast in that stream of water. Must have something to do with a "man-made black hole", I suppose. Further, he promises his bucket will produce unlimited energy, money, food and cure for all decease. Laughable? Yes it is.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 
So now it's "special" as well as "radically different". Cor.

The Aharonov-Bohm effect is a quantum effect in a region of zero magnetic field. You can very easily tell that you're being bull#ted here, if you note that the Rodin coil is:
(a) not a quantum system, and
(b) a magnet.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
. . . Col. Thomas Bearden . . .


Checking out his website, I'm happy to see he's still active working on energy from the vacuum.

I see a reference to the struggle with the powers that be, who suppress the technology that would provide us with energy from the vacuum:


(6) Why they viciously tore negative energy out of Dirac's theory, in 1934 (only one year after he and Schrödinger were jointly awarded the Nobel Prize), and why a severely threatened Dirac kept his mouth shut for the rest of his life. Today, there is finally a strong movement (headed by Dr. Daniel Solomon and his colleagues) to remove that ARBITRARY mutilation of Dirac's theory by deliberately removing its negative energy.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 

Yes, it's very easy to claim that anyone who criticises you is exactly the same as the movement to suppress this or that genius in history. Everyone with their own version of reality uses this trick. It's a big fat paranoid new age cliché.

Some drawbacks of this kind of claim (for thinking people, anyway – sorry to leave you out Mary):
1. the claim can obviously be used by someone whose theory is bollocks but wants to put down critics
2. it's a cop-out one-size-fits-all response to any criticism at all, and doesn't answer criticisms in any way
3. it indicates that they are unwilling to accept any form of debate



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Bobathon
 


Wait, there is more:

thus prevent them from gaining the ability to totally control and alter our physical world at will! We could eliminate all diseases, reverse ageing (a little jellyfish already does it since 1990 or so), and make any physical change desired


www.colinandrews.net...

Sounds familiar? Cure for all decease. Sure. In addition, eternal youth -- all from Dirac equation!

But I must admit, this should be easy once we learn "to alter our physical world at will"!



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Americanist

As soon as I saw the number map I realized the Universe is an assembly based on fractal patterns.


From the Fractal Universe website, does the following relate to what you're saying?


Benoit Mandelbrot announced in 1977 that the distribution of galaxies in space shows a fractal pattern.

Images from the best telescopes, equipped with CCD cameras and backed by digital processing, now show enough detail to add support to his observation.

The implications are immense.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
From this post showing Col. Bearden’s article about the Rodin coil design:


Originally posted by Mary Rose
From Rodin's website, Col. Thomas Bearden's Introduction to Rodin Coil Design: . . .


the key words which encapsulate what is different about the Rodin coil


If you actually cared to read this piece of word soup, you would find that it contradicts Mr. Rodin's statement, actually.

Bearden writes:

trapping the B-field inside the coiled wiring, so that in a very good torus coil most of the B-field can be contained within the coil, and the curl-free A-potential will still radiate from the coil (both to its inside or center space and outside and beyond into space.).


...whereas Rodin clearly says that his coil creates the magnetic field in its center region. In this case, Rodin's right and it's Bearden's turn to be caught talking absolute nonsense.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Americanist

As soon as I saw the number map I realized the Universe is an assembly based on fractal patterns. The torus number map provides a solid example of 3 spatial dimensions originating from said mapping while creating conduits for energy to line/ bind/ wind/ wrap around (the egg shell we experience as mass/ matter).

Rodin is extremely intuitive... He's also removed the blinders.


Americanist,

Does this graphic sort of illustrate what you're saying?





posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 03:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by Americanist

As soon as I saw the number map I realized the Universe is an assembly based on fractal patterns.


From the Fractal Universe website, does the following relate to what you're saying?


Benoit Mandelbrot announced in 1977 that the distribution of galaxies in space shows a fractal pattern.

Images from the best telescopes, equipped with CCD cameras and backed by digital processing, now show enough detail to add support to his observation.

The implications are immense.




I posted a fractal pattern earlier in your thread... Menger Sponge. Look for it again...



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 03:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Americanist
 


By using advanced google search, I found that you mention menger sponge on page 22.

That's all I found.

Did you post a graphic?



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 05:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


menger sponge

I don't remember when he posted the image, that probably won't show up in any searches.

But it is in the wikipedia article.



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 06:01 AM
link   
reply to post by beebs
 


I don't think an image was posted.


Originally posted by Americanist

If you'd like to imagine our structure, start with the menger sponge then substitute the volume of voids with vortices and remainder with tori.


I need a graphic showing the substitutions.

Maybe someone can create one in photoshop and post it.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Been reading the thread and a few things I would like to add:

First, VBM is easier to understand for those who don't have a fortress like foundation of "math" already built around them. Basically those who are less educated in traditional math can understand VBM easier as they don't have to break down as many walls.

Personally I feel base 9 illustrates "number mechanics" far better then base 10 or any other base for that matter.

second, it doesn't matter what base you operate in the same mechanics are present.

THIS IS WHAT I PERSONALLY BELIEVE:

The largest part of a set will show the characteristics of 9... the smallest part of the set will show characteristics of 1. there is a "nothingness" between each set "zero", "origin", "singularity" or whatever you want to call it. It is where positive and negative numbers spawn from.

They spin around in a spiral which creates symmetry and perceived cycles. This also creates the dimensions. this allows for "finite" to be expressed "infinitely". You see this absolutely everywhere in nature from the smallest part to the largest part. It is HOLOGRAPHIC in the sense that the everything is a self-replication process in a fractal type of structure. There is a reason the solar system looks like an atom...just as there is a reason 9=18=27=36=45=54=72=81

this is not coincidence of structures...

There is no such thing as a straight line as space is curved and even the slightest curve will fold back on itself eventually.

Space doesn't shoot off in any 1 direction infinitely in a straight line as that would go against the second law of conservation of energy, there would need to be an infinite amount of energy to continuously spread "outward" in a straight line.

Instead everything is curved back in on itself...this is a no duh "recycle" process where as matter/energy travels across curved space after its creation and it will circle back on itself in destruction. The ZERO is where destruction and creation meet.

Ever wondered what happens when the unstoppable force meets the immovable object? ZERO, singularity, origin, creation and destruction, etc etc...

This toroid model makes absolutely more sense than ANY other possible model I have seen presented so far in terms of how the universe works. It doesn't violate any known laws and in fact it accommodates a nice compromise between the contention between a finite and infinite universe.

Where it gets interesting is understanding dimensions...

I'll post more of my thoughts on this regarding VBM and Marko Rodin in a separate thread with some visuals.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sly1one
First, VBM is easier to understand for those who don't have a fortress like foundation of "math" already built around them. Basically those who are less educated in traditional math can understand VBM easier as they don't have to break down as many walls.
Less mathematically educated people are also more easily baffled with mathematical BS. Like the old saying, "If you can't impress them with intelligence, baffle them with BS".

It's not so much breaking down walls as redefining. For example:

there is a reason 9=18=27=36=45=54=72=81

The equals sign in mathematics has a definition...look it up.
Those terms are NOT equal according to mathematics no matter how many walls you knock down.
As Beebs suggested, maybe Rodin is trying to portray some kind of relationship between those numbers, but mathematically that relationship is something other than equal.


Personally I feel base 9 illustrates "number mechanics" far better then base 10 or any other base for that matter.
Why are you talking about base 9?

Rodin's whole system revolves around 9 and the symbol "9" doesn't exist in base 9. The largest numeric character in base 9, is "8", just as the largest numeric character in base 10, is "9".



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Less mathematically educated people are also more easily baffled with mathematical BS.


If you were to expand your tunnel vision and take the time to consider Rodin’s endorsers and take the time to read up on suppressed technology and related science/mathematics, you would come to understand that VBM is not “BS.”



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
If you were to expand your tunnel vision and take the time to consider Rodin’s endorsers and take the time to read up on and related science/mathematics, you would come to understand that VBM is not “BS.”
On the contrary, I've read 37 pages of this thread to see if I'm missing something, so I'm trying to expand my vision. But so far I have yet to see one single thing supporting your claim of his stuff relating to any "suppressed technology" (or anything else in the real world).

Far from being suppressed, I see more than dozens of Rodin and Rodin-related videos on youtube. It's the opposite of suppressed. I don't even know why you would suggest anything is "suppressed" in relation to Rodin.

I was just reading about some claimed technology by a Chinese inventor that was supposedly temporarily suppressed by the Chinese government with a top secret classification:

Wang Shum Ho Generator

Claim that his information had become "classified" (or "suppressed"):

Mr. Wang sent me the following photos. Mr. Lee Cheung Kin and I helped to promote him in 2006 at Tsinghua University, Beijing. He got funding from the Chinese Government and State Electricity Companies. He asked us not to promote him any more as all information became classified.


Claim that the motor was freed from "top secret" restrictions (end of suppression):

Wang Shen He magnet motor freed from Chinese 'top secret' restrictions - Having received funding from the Chinese Government and State Electricity Companies, Wang Shen He's generators (1 kW and 5 kW), that use coupling of ferro-liquid and permanent magnets, were classified 'top secret.' However, that status changed recently. (PESWiki; December 13, 2010)
I haven't verified that claim but if it's true, that's what "suppression" would look like. He was asked to not talk about it and it was allegedly given a top secret classification.

By 2010, I'm guessing they figured out it was another useless scam like the other over unity claims so that's why they released the top secret clearance if it really had one.

Rodin's coil isn't enough to get anyone that excited to even classify his stuff, it's just another coil, and his paper about the mathematics behind it is total nonsense so nobody takes him seriously. At least Wang's contraption apparently garnered some attention from China while they investigated it (if those claims are true).
edit on 1-3-2011 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
If you were to expand your tunnel vision


It's decidedly comical when people with zero knowledge of the subject ascribe "tunnel vision" to educated persons.

If God forbid you ever are in surgery, Mary, I fully expect you to refuse an operation from a qualified surgeon and member of the board, because his "tunnel vision" would surely prevent him from doing what's needed. Instead, you'd enlist a shaman or a local butcher with his assortment of knives to do the job. No tunnels there.



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join