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: 66
39
<< 63  64  65    67  68  69 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by MIDNIGHTSUN

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by MIDNIGHTSUN
 


You do the same!!



No, I just don't follow false preaching, I follow people's work but I do not worship them like a messiah.

Marko Rodin is just a good story teller after going into Bahai Faith, and the faith inspired him into working
on the eight spoke Dharma wheel. I remember reading somewhere of you mentioning how the faith was
created in Persia long time ago. If that's correct then VBM is for sure a crock that was recently cooked up.

Sounds like a creation by the BEAST the Illuminati worship which they helped to create other religion
such as Jahovah faith. Religion is evil stay away.


Re-read most of what you write. You're summarizing the teaching completely out of context. Rodin doesn't claim he invented anything... It's a rediscovery. He expounds on ancient knowledge for a common day approach and understanding. He's not a messiah unless we're all messiahs.It's in our hands. I'd argue he's more a messenger though. If it wasn't for people of such caliber, we would still be burning witches for reverse engineering nature, popping holes in skulls to allow demons to escape instead of using pain killers, or removing moles on our skin because they're devil marks. We can both agree religious practice doesn't equate to common sense.

Nothing is being cooked up... Only remembered for what it is.




posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Americanist
If it wasn't for people of such caliber, we would still be burning witches for reverse engineering nature, popping holes in skulls to allow demons to escape instead of using pain killers....

I would argue that we have exactly the same amount of proof for Rodin's claims as the claim that popping holes in peoples' skulls allows demons to escape:

Zero

Why you see any difference between that claim and Rodin's claims completely escapes me.



posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by MIDNIGHTSUN

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by MIDNIGHTSUN
 


You do the same!!




Rodin doesn't claim he invented anything... It's a rediscovery. He expounds on ancient knowledge for a common day approach and understanding. He's not a messiah unless we're all messiahs.It's in our hands. I'd argue he's more a messenger though. If it wasn't for people of such caliber, we would still be burning witches for reverse engineering nature, popping holes in skulls to allow demons to escape instead of using pain killers, or removing moles on our skin because they're devil marks.
Nothing is being cooked up... Only remembered for what it is.


He doesn't claim to invent anything, yet Rodin puts his stamp on vortex-based-math, which is a rip off of the I Ching and his math is even a disgrace to the source of origin. He even goes as far as saying how VBM will revolutionize biology to computer science, yet he hasn't proven any language from VBM that is compatible in advancing computing. The people following Rodin as a messiah are so caught up with the whole spiritual talk and tesla tech he speak of including attchment to VBM that they would follow him of a click. LEARN TO LET GO OF THE ATTACHMENT. The more you hold on, the more you will lose it.
edit on 16-4-2011 by MIDNIGHTSUN because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by Americanist
If it wasn't for people of such caliber, we would still be burning witches for reverse engineering nature, popping holes in skulls to allow demons to escape instead of using pain killers....

I would argue that we have exactly the same amount of proof for Rodin's claims as the claim that popping holes in peoples' skulls allows demons to escape:

Zero

Why you see any difference between that claim and Rodin's claims completely escapes me.



You view electricity as the flow of electron while failing to explain where disappearing electrons go (assuming they're particles). You see virtual particles while I see a system. Your line of sight is a vanishing act steeped in darkness (dark matter, dark energy, dark flow)... What I subscribe to has more to do with common sense however you look at it.

Size up a gastropod to a galaxy. Keep a close eye on aspect ratios. On a related note:

Zero is where it's at.



posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by MIDNIGHTSUN

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by MIDNIGHTSUN

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by MIDNIGHTSUN
 


You do the same!!




Rodin doesn't claim he invented anything... It's a rediscovery. He expounds on ancient knowledge for a common day approach and understanding. He's not a messiah unless we're all messiahs.It's in our hands. I'd argue he's more a messenger though. If it wasn't for people of such caliber, we would still be burning witches for reverse engineering nature, popping holes in skulls to allow demons to escape instead of using pain killers, or removing moles on our skin because they're devil marks.
Nothing is being cooked up... Only remembered for what it is.


He doesn't claim to invent anything, yet Rodin puts his stamp on vortex-based-math, which is a rip off of the I Ching and his math is even a disgrace to the source of origin. He even goes as far as saying how VBM will revolutionize biology to computer science, yet he hasn't proven any language from VBM that is compatible in advancing computing. The people following Rodin as a messiah are so caught up with the whole spiritual talk and tesla tech he speak of including attchment to VBM that they would follow him of a click. LEARN TO LET GO OF THE ATTACHMENT. The more you hold on, the more you will lose it.
edit on 16-4-2011 by MIDNIGHTSUN because: (no reason given)


I have very few attachments besides understanding. What Rodin claims is a reference to his endorsements. Look up Russ Blake. It doesn't take a real genius to comprehend advancements with computing. Heat is waste. We've also gone from binary to using DNA. DNA runs on a system as I'm sure we can both agree. Once we're able to mirror nature... Assembling reality becomes part of the equation.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 07:23 AM
link   

I have very few attachments besides understanding. What Rodin claims is a reference to his endorsements. Look up Russ Blake. It doesn't take a real genius to comprehend advancements with computing. Heat is waste. We've also gone from binary to using DNA. DNA runs on a system as I'm sure we can both agree. Once we're able to mirror nature... Assembling reality becomes part of the equation.


Great! No attachment. Any Math is good over no math. I recognize the potential for using DNA in computation but lets not jump off to far ahead of our selves in this moment. My question on computer science is, where has his vortex-based-math been demonstrated to revolutionize the field of computer algorithm. Has there been any evidence published or is it still all talk. I don’t deny his math, right now it is just all speculation.
edit on 17-4-2011 by MIDNIGHTSUN because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Americanist
You view electricity as the flow of electron while failing to explain where disappearing electrons go (assuming they're particles).
Please provide your source of evidence for disappearing electrons.

I have no idea what you're talking about.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Originally posted by Americanist

About Russell Blake, I'll give you my thoughts on him.


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


He sounds like a lunatic. Why would scientist waste their time to even to look into
vortex-base-math.

Why don't you just look into Clifford Algebra It unites math and physics.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 




Say Hello to Elvis for me...



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by MIDNIGHTSUN
Originally posted by Americanist

About Russell Blake, I'll give you my thoughts on him.


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


He sounds like a lunatic. Why would scientist waste their time to even to look into
vortex-base-math.

Why don't you just look into Clifford Algebra It unites math and physics.


You're referring to an engineer inside a seasoned career as a lunatic while quoting the channeling of one Barbara Marciniak in your signature file? Perhaps you can conjure up an alien of your own. Ask if he/she/it will fetch me a burger on the grill. I'll go with flame broiled over your fried brain any day.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Americanist


Say Hello to Elvis for me...
I just watched all of that video. I see something about disappearing electrons in the title, but there's absolutely nothing about disappearing electrons in the entire video, so I have no idea where they got that title from and I still have no idea what you're talking about.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I just watched all of that video. I see something about disappearing electrons in the title, but there's absolutely nothing about disappearing electrons in the entire video, so I have no idea where they got that title from and I still have no idea what you're talking about.


I'm afraid that your interlocutor does not have a clue what he's talking about, either.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 06:56 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 
If the amount of research that went into posting a video which doesn't mention disappearing electrons, as evidence of disappearing electrons is any example of how they research things in general, that would explain why.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   
Astrophysics Quacks: Their false "knowledge" revealed as Corporate owned lies



He makes good point about the state of science.
edit on 18-4-2011 by MIDNIGHTSUN because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by MIDNIGHTSUN

He makes good point about the state of science.
Lots of good why questions.

If the questioner is sincere in his questions then there are some good things for serious discussion here.

If he is just smugly and slimily revelling in accumulating accusational rhetoric to use to push his own ideology that scientists are liars, then that's disingenuous and hollow and pretty low.

Which is it? If it's the first, count me in. I like questions like these. Not that I (or anyone else) would claim to know all the answers. I'd be curious to see why anyone would consider the actual content (rather than the tone) of any of these questions that suggest that anyone is being misled.

Intrigued by his question "you guys think you've got it all figured out?" One thing science has always been crystal clear on is that nobody thinks they've got it all figured out. Of course there are things they don't have answers to. That's why they do science! Surely that's the most obvious thing in the world?

Reeling off a list of things that don't have straightforward answers, and mixing them up with questions that actually do, but that sound like they don't, doesn't really implicate anyone of lying, does it?

So where shall we start.

1 & 3 - it's never been seriously suggested that frame-dragging or gravitational waves must be visible by these experiments. And they haven't been conclusively seen. I don't see what's unreasonable about that.

2. The pioneer anomaly has been investigated in all kinds of ways, out in the open. The questioner says, accusingly, that it "cannot be explained; I'd like to know why." Er, could it be because scientists don't have a definitive answer?If someone admits that they cannot give a definitive answer to something, what's the logic in demanding to know why and then calling them a liar? That's messed up. Here's an interesting article about a recent paper by researchers investigating precisely that question. In the open for everyone to see.

You got any favourites, that you find convincing? (Don't say you're just posting it because you love rhetoric that supports your ideology. You wouldn't do that, now, would you?)
edit on 18-4-2011 by Bobathon because: corrected question numbers, added a bit on the Pioneer anomaly



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by MIDNIGHTSUN
He makes good point about the state of science


I don't think he does. There will always be plenty of things at any given time that we can't adequately explain (otherwise we wouldn't have science at all, for lack of necessity, would we?). And he can ask his epic "why" ten thousand times in a row, but he'll just need to wait for answers, until we find these. To sum up modern physics as garbage is arrogant and self-aggrandizing.

If the guy doesn't get the scientific method, the loss is his. We didn't know neutrinos existed, it was a hypothesis just about as weird as Higgs may seem today (and we don't know if it does exist, that's we try to find out). Now we know a good deal about neutrinos. Same applies to a lot of concepts in nuclear and particle physics. If he doesn't have patience to get answers to these questions, he's just being childish.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by MIDNIGHTSUN
He makes good point about the state of science


I don't think he does. There will always be plenty of things at any given time that we can't adequately explain (otherwise we wouldn't have science at all, for lack of necessity, would we?). And he can ask his epic "why" ten thousand times in a row, but he'll just need to wait for answers, until we find these. To sum up modern physics as garbage is arrogant and self-aggrandizing.

If the guy doesn't get the scientific method, the loss is his. We didn't know neutrinos existed, it was a hypothesis just about as weird as Higgs may seem today (and we don't know if it does exist, that's we try to find out). Now we know a good deal about neutrinos. Same applies to a lot of concepts in nuclear and particle physics. If he doesn't have patience to get answers to these questions, he's just being childish.


I agree with you and the video,
I want the truth now, but the truth is difficult to discern when you don't trust the system your living in, which I don't. The government seems to be funding science beyond what the public knows.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by MIDNIGHTSUN
The government seems to be funding science beyond what the public knows.


Like what? Are you saying there is a higher level of knowledge somewhere which is kept secret?

Nah...



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bobathon

Originally posted by MIDNIGHTSUN

He makes good point about the state of science.
Lots of good why questions.

If the questioner is sincere in his questions then there are some good things for serious discussion here.
I like these types of questions also, in fact I wrote a thread about the last question he asks in that video, here's an excerpt from it showing the source:

Previously Unseen Super-Hot Plasma Jets Heat the Sun’s Corona


The mystery of the Sun’s corona may finally be solved. For years researchers have known - and wondered why - the Sun’s outer atmosphere, or corona, is considerably hotter than its surface. But now, using the combined visual powers of NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory and Japan’s Hinode satellite, scientists have made direct observations of jets of plasma shooting off the Sun’s surface, heating the corona to millions of degrees. The existence of these small, narrow jets of plasma, called spicules has long been known, but they had never been directly studied before and were thought to be too cool to have any appreciable heating effect. But a good look with new “eyes” reveals a new kind of spicule that moves energy from the Sun’s interior to create its hot outer atmosphere.



Multiwavelength extreme ultraviolet image of the Sun taken by the Solar Dynamics Observatory's Atmospheric Imaging Assembly. Colours represent different gas temperatures: ~800,000 Kelvin (blue), ~1.3 million K (green), and ~2 million K (red). New observations reveal jets of hot plasma propelled upwards from the region immediately above the Sun's surface. Image: Bart De Pontieu)
This is a good example of how ever better measuring instruments help answer mysteries in science!



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by MIDNIGHTSUN
The government seems to be funding science beyond what the public knows.


Like what? Are you saying there is a higher level of knowledge somewhere which is kept secret?
Like this for example:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Phage
The reason for charging the leading edge and exhaust is secret. But there is no shortage of ideas.

For reasons not yet de-classified, the B-2 charges its leading edge to a very high electrical potential difference from its exhaust stream.
It has been suggested (by Jane's Defence) that it augments the B-2's low thrust main engines. It is also a well known phenomenon that an ionised gas (plasma) will scatter a radar beam far more effectively than a solid surface of any conceivable shape. This could be the purpose of the high voltage leading edge. Another possibility is that it is for the purpose of reducing drag, since the leading edge of the B-2 might then move through a partial vacuum of ionised air which may be ionised and repelled by the high voltage. In any case, it is however true that Northrop engineers conducted wind tunnel tests using high voltage on a testbed wing leading edge to reduce supersonic drag as far back as 1968. These tests were with a view to breaking up the airflow ahead of the wing using electrical forces in order to soften a sonic boom. How this applies (if indeed it does at all) to the B-2 after an interval of many years is uncertain.

en.allexperts.com...

Is the leading edge really electrified and if so, is the reason to disperse radar reflection, reduce drag, or both? I really don't know, it's a secret. I'd have to guess the purpose is to scatter radar, to improve stealth.

Then again some people think the B-2 or the mythical TR-3B use anti-gravity technology, which seems to be total fantasy. I don't think the secret labs have any secrets that big.



new topics




 
39
<< 63  64  65    67  68  69 >>

log in

join