"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

Originally posted by buddhasystem
you have NO PROOF of anything yet you claim that salient events have happened.

You have no proof that things people are giving their testimonials about don't work.

Your insulting remarks are not proof that they don't work.

People can consider information and do what they wish with it. It is a good thing to be exposed to innovations.

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by buddhasystem
you have NO PROOF of anything yet you claim that salient events have happened.

You have no proof that things people are giving their testimonials about don't work.

Wait... It's quite astonishing that almost 100 pages into this thread you are saying that the onus of proof is NOT on the person who makes outstanding claims, but on his audience? Really, Mary?

Never, not once in multiple moronic videos posted by Rodin was there a simple, comprehensible and conclusive demonstration that he EXTRACTS ENERGY FROM "IMPLOSION OF SPACE TIME". I'm saying exactly this. Now, you want me to PROVE THAT THERE WAS NO ENERGY EXTRACTION FROM THIS SUPPOSED PROCESS that only ignorami are capable of believing in? How can I disprove something that was never explained, demonstrated etc? The only "evidence" that we have is the latest video of a visibly intoxicated Rodin who keeps ranting and raving about how he IMPLODES SPACE TIME. Is that enough of a proof for you, Mary? Because it does smack of lunacy.

reply to post by buddhasystem


No one is going to prove anything on this thread.

Your insulting tirades are of no use.

Calm yourself.

reply to post by Mary Rose

I started to write a reply earlier when you claimed that movies were something other than entertainment and I asked for a source.

When you declined to provide one, I wrote a reply that you're fortunate the thread was moved to skunk works since you can make any claim in this forum without backing it up. Had they left the thread where you posted it, you wouldn't be able to get away with that. After Buddhasystem replied I decided not to send it.

But alas, here, you can make any absurd claim you want with no proof, it's true. That's why it's skunk works. Since you're still going on with the claims I decided to go ahead and remind you that it's only the forum you're in that's saving you from providing sources.

I suppose one could say the location of the topic in skunk works has already relegated it to its proper status, but I'd still say that's not quite true. As I said on page 1, the claim that 9=18 is clearly a hoax and I think this thread should be in the hoax forum.

The latest claim in the video you posted that Rodin has made the combustion engine obsolete is clearly a hoax also. Combustion engines are still in use everywhere, and not one person has replaced even one combustion engine with anything of Rodin's design. Again, it's a hoax.

They're coined pilot waves, but you could probably guess... This sort of medium requires an output source. Admittedly I just started watching the series, but the silicon droplets are static guided by wave function.

I found a way to harness energy from the implosion of space time. Simply take the triple product of two 9-dimensional vectors, and presto! I can't believe such an easy concept eludes the best of minds. It simply goes to show you that mainstream scientists are idiots.

Originally posted by 547000
I found a way to harness energy from the implosion of space time. Simply take the triple product of two 9-dimensional vectors, and presto! I can't believe such an easy concept eludes the best of minds. It simply goes to show you that mainstream scientists are idiots.

I can't help but agree! Those mainstream bozos are something! Just use the tensor math already to implode space time and produce 10|11-2|90 joules of free energy every second, starve the Big Oil and feel important, at last! All of you New Age idiots.

Independent researcher Jason Verbelli is working on the most elaborate Rodin coil I have seen so far:

reply to post by Mary Rose


What he's referring to is modulation... When modulation is observable/ detectable in spin we get layers of rings. These rings stack and twist to form density.


btw, Jason does an exceptional job explaining. I hop on his fb page about twice a week now. The amount of input posted/ tagged by his friends is incredible too... They're all working on solving!

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Independent researcher Jason Verbelli is working on the most elaborate Rodin coil I have seen so far:

That 24 incher is a big one!

So is this paraphrasing of what he says about right?

Einstein was wrong, space-time doesn't curve. I've got some Rodin coils here that are speakers, but they don't make any sound. You can put a magnet in the middle and it will spin. If you stop it from spinning then it will make a sound (but I'm not going to tell you how to do this, or demonstrate this, or explain why you would even want to do this, nor tell you how the speakers would sound. I'm just going to tell you if you put magnets in there they will spin around so you will have speakers that don't make any sound). And here's a drawing of some gyroscopes, and atoms are like little gyroscopes.

I thought I was finally going to see a practical application of the Rodin coil when he started talking about making them into speakers, that was until he said they don't make any sound!

That was the best laugh I had all day, thanks for that! Speakers with no sound!

reply to post by Arbitrageur


It's obvious you don't pay much attention... The Tesla conference had sound pumping out Rodin's coil using stationary metal plates. Jason has done the same, but you'd have to watch a few more minutes of video. I realize this cuts down the amount of time you spend in front of the mirror, on the pot, or a little of both.

reply to post by beebs


If you can't "explain it", well that poses a problem doesn't it? After all, great insight, pearls of wisdom, etc, are not something one can rationally argue, discuss debate and hence employ the scientific method, with out explaining your pattern of logic, at least, if not all the "nitty-gritty". For what it's worth, conventional computer code written in linear stings of 1,0,1,0 etc, is by its nature only capable of expressing a process akin to a glorified adding machine. whoopee ******* du... As to actualization. Self actualized software is in effect having the needed environment to "express" a physical event/outcome, or do an analysis of something by allowing the program to take advantage of self-organizing systems, the very reason things in the biological world "work". But then in nature there is no such distinction as hardware&software. The brain for example is neuro-morphic in nature, it physically changes its topology of any surface that is expressing communications from one neuron to other and beyond. We used to think the majority of the glial cells, the grey-goo that had no demonstrable process in neurological physiology, we thought, was just taking up space. We now know thats not true, of course. Nature is not wasteful or cheap, but effective at change, embracing it and using it not "freaking out" as anything expressed as 10100100etc will in time. You can use digital data storage for a lot of useful capability, storing structural data as text, or image interpretive patterns, or having an encyclopedia auto-accessible. And we are finally able to integrate digital prostectics with the human biology it's connected to thanks to much work by DARPA. In case you thought we wasted all our money with DOD...

Case in point: I don't know the intricate mechanisms of expression starting at some level of the quantum world and moving "to a more classical and demonstrable level of observable cause and effect", that allow me to stick a seed in reasonable soil, a little water, and then what happens? How the hell do I know, I don't have to know, nature knows. Provide an environment, and I am working on designing just a synthetic system, then let nature take it's course. If you want to build a bio-computer or for kicks and practice start with non-living systems, but organic materials if possible like graphene, and with a said self-organizing "box" let it wire itself to maximize communications, or put another way maximize energy utilization. Nature does stuff like that very well indeed. Let THAT design data processing components. Nature's been doing it for several billion years longer then any engineer (I know of). In physics as we perceive it at the macro-physics level. Re-arrange cause and effect at OUR level of perception, something not beyond the realm of possibility, things get, to be kind, very very weird.

My point with that last statement is it's idiotic to think "there is no connection" with what happens at one level of expression, in physics you can start with quantum-to- the key field that connects it to the world we have to deal with, sorry for the moment the world of "ultimate cross-talk, chatter with interpreter provided" the world of expression of form (physics in a definable "place,spacial or not, temporal or not) between quantum&classical, the word eludes me (WARNING! brain fart, god I hate it when that happens...)and the world of mac-expression. Of course its all connected. What just knowing that has to offer is a whole other boring babble. I will spare all...

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Thanks for asking for some basic information before you swallow something, People can get angry, (just f****** rude as well) because you trample on cherished beliefs that by the way have not been defined, or employ enough of the "right words" to make it sound rational, let alone based on anything we can analyze, or test, or reproduce, etc. As far as "space time not being curved", or perhaps better understood by saying the density of space increase's as you move to that which is deforming space time in the first place. Gravity is an expression of "other things", aka mass acting with in a defined area. Looking for a particle that carries gravity (the "graviton" as in Star Trek, TNG) is a convenient plot ploy, also helps explain how they have such things as "grav-plating, or deflector shields" The latter by the way we are working on using both hot, cold, and non-h/c plasma Think of the latter non- hot/cold plasma as akin to non-a or b or c, etc hepatitis. Best way I can explain it with a biology background. In other words we know it's there, just can't give it an appropriate name yet because before said things (Hep A,B,C etc) were isolated and characterized, well we had to call it something...

reply to post by Americanist

Yeah well if the speaker actually made sound, that wouldn't be funny.

But I watched the entire video Mary posted and that WAS funny because he talked about speakers that don't make any sound. And that was the only video I intended to respond to. I'm sure there are 10,000 other videos on youtube I didn't respond to, including the one you mention, that Mary didn't just post.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
But I watched the entire video Mary posted and that WAS funny because he talked about speakers that don't make any sound. And that was the only video I intended to respond to. I'm sure there are 10,000 other videos on youtube I didn't respond to, including the one you mention, that Mary didn't just post.

I should have known better.

My intention was to show a work in progress when I came across it.

I also wanted to show the scope of what independent thinkers like Jason and others I've posted about (and you also ridicule), tackle - explaining the mysteries of the cosmos - the ultimate goal of which is for humanity to do good things with the knowledge.

reply to post by Mary Rose


Mary, -- pray tell -- what's a "centripetal axis"?

Why is the rate of rotation of the ball proportional to the voltage?

And of course...

"Because that's what sound is. It's the difference in spin of waves relative to the waves we are already experiencing"

"because the resistance we interpret of waves is sound"

"centripetal spin is negative energy"

"the magnet will spin on its centripetal axis, searching for space that's not physically available"

Mary, this display of idiocy is about as savory as a glass of horse urine. But certain people would swallow it because the auteur says in his quite pompous preamble:

"I want to you to correlate all that I'm gonna say with legends, myths, ancient stories,and human history, biblical, spiritual, all of that"

Sure thing, dude.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
reply to post by Mary Rose

 

Mary, -- pray tell -- what's a "centripetal axis"?

Why is the rate of rotation of the ball proportional to the voltage?

And of course...

"Because that's what sound is. It's the difference in spin of waves relative to the waves we are already experiencing"

"because the resistance we interpret of waves is sound"

"centripetal spin is negative energy"

"the magnet will spin on its centripetal axis, searching for space that's not physically available"

Mary, this display of idiocy is about as savory as a glass of horse urine. But certain people would swallow it because the auteur says in his quite pompous preamble:

"I want to you to correlate all that I'm gonna say with legends, myths, ancient stories,and human history, biblical, spiritual, all of that"

Sure thing, dude.

edit on 17-10-2011 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-10-2011 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)

BS, you're based at CERN? I thought you'd know better... Spin in relationship to relativity calculating the discrepancy in time while using space based GPS satellites incorrectly analyzed? Not only did this little experiment go on for 6 months without realizing, it was then published by your peers. So many degrees - So much for common sense.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

. . . pompous preamble:

"I want to you to correlate all that I'm gonna say with legends, myths, ancient stories,and human history, biblical, spiritual, all of that"

Pompous it is not, in my opinion.

If we are going to zero in on the truth of how the cosmos works, and what we have it within our power to do according to how Mother Nature operates, we need to put all of the pieces together - all of them.

The scientific method is good, but it's incomplete.

Originally posted by Americanist
BS, you're based at CERN?

As it happens, I'm here at CERN right now next to that statue of Shiva between buildings 39 and 40.

I thought you'd know better... Spin in relationship to relativity calculating the discrepancy in time while using space based GPS satellites incorrectly analyzed? Not only did this little experiment go on for 6 months without realizing, it was then published by your peers. So many degrees - So much for common sense.

Meh... What does GPS or relativity have to do with that babbling idiot on YouTube?

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by buddhasystem

. . . pompous preamble:

"I want to you to correlate all that I'm gonna say with legends, myths, ancient stories,and human history, biblical, spiritual, all of that"

Pompous it is not, in my opinion.

If we are going to zero in on the truth of how the cosmos works, and what we have it within our power to do according to how Mother Nature operates, we need to put all of the pieces together - all of them.

The scientific method is good, but it's incomplete.

Complete or not, it behooves anyone to use it for starters and not post a retarded video on YouTube under pretense of some connection to ancient school of thought. With all "centripetal spin" and all other verbal detritus.