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: 9
39
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Bobathon
 


And you have nothing to say about Harvey either, the guy in the video who actually has the credentials?

See, this is what I mean by picking some arbitrary tangential point to focus on, so you can ridicule it into the dirt without actually thinking critically about all of the information presented.




posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 07:43 AM
link   
Infinity is not a number. There is no number that corresponds to infinity. For any real number you give me and I can give one bigger.

Infinity is used in science as a way of saying really, really big. Infinity frequency is laughable. You're telling me that there's no upper limit to the frequencies it operates with?



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 


Well Rodin will claim that, as it is a logical consequence of his worldview - and of mathematics.

You have made my point though... mathematics is infinite. It is a reality.

Pi keeps going. Thats what it is, it is irreducible because it keeps going.

And asymptotes?



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by beebs
reply to post by Bobathon
 


And you have nothing to say about Harvey either, the guy in the video who actually has the credentials?
Nope. He's talking cr@p. Credentials always take second place to substance.

Like the rest of these guys, if he stops randomly claiming that A is possible and B is possible and C has been classified and starts giving some substance, I guess those who've ridiculed him will eat their words. Until then, what's he saying that's not just empty claims?



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 07:56 AM
link   
Infinity frequency would imply that whatever does the oscillating can move at speeds faster than the speed of light. Math may disregard the fact that infinity in not real, but physics certainly has rules.
edit on 1-2-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Bobathon
 



Nope. He's talking cr@p. Credentials always take second place to substance.




One down, plenty to go. You can't call everyone stupid and dumb. This is disregarding concepts and information that you don't like, just because you don't like them.

And what are your credentials to his? What if I said you are talking crap, and have no substance? You would disagree, no doubt... Same as I am sure Fiala would disagree about your comment.

I reserve the right to judge Harvey Fiala on my own terms, and can judge for myself his substance vs. credentials.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bobathon
He's talking cr@p.


Have you done any research at all about suppressed knowledge/technology?



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by beebs
reply to post by Bobathon
 


One down, plenty to go. You can't call everyone stupid and dumb. This is disregarding concepts and information that you don't like, just because you don't like them.
I didn't call him either of those things. But he's making all kinds of extraordinary claims. For example that the coil exhibits no hysteresis. That goes against all physical evidence of how materials behave, except perhaps superconductors at extremely low temperatures (neither of which applies to that coil).

People make claims that violate the laws of physics all over the internet. It's very easy to do. The internet is full of it. And then instead of providing any evidence or substance, they can just 'defend' their claim by calling a conspiracy. There's nothing easier. Why would anyone take that seriously?

What is he doing apart from sitting on a sofa talking to nutters, making claims that ignore the laws of physics?

Come on. It's hardly promising, is it, really.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 



Infinity frequency would imply that whatever does the oscillating can move at speeds faster than the speed of light. Math may disregard the fact that infinity in not real, but physics certainly has rules.


Ok, but has this been discounted by quantum mechanics?

I think this is a primary area in which we still have to explore experimentally, which is why we have such theories as entanglement is it not?

Good articles:
Faster than a speeding photon

Quantum weirdness wins again: Entanglement clocks in at 10,000+ times faster than light



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 08:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Bobathon
 



I didn't call him either of those things. But he's making all kinds of extraordinary claims. For example that the coil exhibits no hysteresis. That goes against all physical evidence of how materials behave, except perhaps superconductors at extremely low temperatures (neither of which applies to that coil).

People make claims that violate the laws of physics all over the internet. It's very easy to do. The internet is full of it. And then instead of providing any evidence or substance, they can just 'defend' their claim by calling a conspiracy. There's nothing easier. Why would anyone take that seriously?

What is he doing apart from sitting on a sofa talking to nutters, making claims that ignore the laws of physics?

Come on. It's hardly promising, is it, really.


I apologize, you are right... you merely said he was 'talking cr@p'.

Are you familiar with Podkletnov regarding his 'alleged' superconductor gravity experiments?

They have provided evidence and done experiments. You just haven't seen them.

There is a difference between paradigm suppression, and government/corporate conspiracy to suppress.

There is a healthy mix of both regarding suppressed physics.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Way to bring up quantum physics. That had to come up at any time where "it's a conspiracy, dude" doesn't work. People bring up quantum physics to justify any weird philosophy they have. Here's the thing: quantum physics only applies to things on a VERY small scale.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 


Yes, I know... but that is an even bigger problem, if you want to go there, because we haven't yet reconciled QM with relativity.

IMO, the most promising field is in quantum gravity theories.

Also, this doesn't change the fact that FTL phenomena are a pretty big issue...



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by beebs
reply to post by buddhasystem
 



ROTFLMAO.


Funny, huh?


Yes, quite!

Did you ever experiment with high-frequency circuitry? Build a few radios? I did when I was a kid, and then had classes in electronics later in my life.

When Rodin plugs his little science project into a wall transformer or other such circuit, he's drawing current at the mains frequency, which is 50 or 60 Hz depending your the locality. That's a pretty low frequency. When you go high up on the frequency range, the electrical impedance becomes prohibitively large. If instead of 60 Hz you use 6 GHz, that's a factor of 100,000,000. That means the coil won't act as a transducer at all, it will act as a very large resistor. He probably doesn't have a 10 GHz range signal source in his lab (which looks really basic).

And 6 GHz is still nowhere near "infinity" or whatever Rodin wants to add to this. The guy's development stopped some time in third grade and he's not even a good tinkerer.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by beebs
reply to post by 547000
 


Yes, I know... but that is an even bigger problem, if you want to go there, because we haven't yet reconciled QM with relativity.



en.wikipedia.org...

Quantum electrodynamics (QED) is the relativistic quantum field theory



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by beebs
Ok, but has this been discounted by quantum mechanics?


Rodin is talking about his COIL. That is not a quantum-mechanical object. You can't feed "infinite" or even large frequencies into it.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   
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.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 09:18 AM
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 Swerdlow guy is great! He really does create something from nothing, I grant you that. He creates money from peddling his DVDs to unsuspecting simpletons. Check this out:


Advanced Hyperspace, Oversoul and Deprogramming Techniques DVDs AND Hyperspace and Oversoul Basics DVDs plus two Free Study Guides FREE Decoding Your Life Book. – $699.00


Mary, please get this set and you'll know everything about vortices you ever wanted to know! Is $699 too much for such priceless knowledge?

Also, the timestamps on this message exchange are weird, i.e. it's still morning on the East Coast and Swerdlow stamps 2 pm.
I assume his server is stuck in GMT... Or he mastered time travel?



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
He creates money from peddling his DVDs to unsuspecting simpletons.


Yeah I've heard that line before.

Whatever.

Think what you will.

I disagree. I find him credible.

"Unsuspecting simpletons." Sounds like the kind of language you use to describe people who find Haramein's work credible.

Name-calling gets old.



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
"Unsuspecting simpletons." Sounds like the kind of language you use to describe people who find Haramein's work credible


You got this right.

So, you are getting the DVD?



posted on Feb, 2 2011 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by buddhasystem
He creates money from peddling his DVDs to unsuspecting simpletons.


Yeah I've heard that line before.
Mary spotted a pattern to what other people are telling her!!


Well done Mary.

Now let's see if you can work out what the implications might be...




top topics



 
39
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join