"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

reply to post by buddhasystem


reply to post by buddhasystem


Both your choices of websites to rely on strike me as the kind of site that would be affiliated with a front group. It’s not the information; it’s the tone and apparent goal: Discredit/make someone look bad – publish hit pieces.

“Notes of a Fringe-Watcher”

“Heeeere’s Johnny”

The choice of words indicate where the authors are coming from.

I had to look “curare” up in the dictionary. Interesting. It's a dark resinous extract obtained from several tropical American woody plants, used as an arrow poison by some Indian peoples of South America.

Col. Bearden carries a gun? Good! Because there is no question that he is a target and he needs to protect himself and his loved ones.

Now, let’s talk about the dark side. We all have the same internet at our disposal. There is declassified information about such black projects as MKULTRA and proposals such as Operation Northwoods. There is also whistleblower testimony available through Project Camelot and Red Ice Creations. I’m not going to give you the links. Find them yourself. You might appreciate them, then.

If people know about these resources and don’t take time away from video games or whatever it is they do in their spare time to listen and read and watch, then they’re willfully ignorant.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
“Heeeere’s Johnny”

The choice of words indicate where the authors are coming from.

Yup, Randi was a guest on Carson's show. He seems to be doing a decent job at probing various paranormal claims. Or other weird stuff, like Nadin/Bearden.

Col. Bearden carries a gun? Good! Because there is no question that he is a target and he needs to protect himself and his loved ones.

Can he deflect curare-tipped darts with his concealed gun? Gosh, he must be an expert shot as well!

So, did you have time to read up on cross sections of gamma ray scattering? Come on, you are missing out on seeing for yourself how stupendously moronic Bearden's proclamations are!
EDIT TO ADD:
Learn about plasma frequency and how what Bearden says about "shields" can't possibly be true.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Can he deflect curare-tipped darts with his concealed gun? Gosh, he must be an expert shot as well!

Aren’t you the witty one? Oh, so clever your remarks.

Your flippant attitude indicates your lack of knowledge. Or, perhaps you are lacking in human emotion?

Originally posted by buddhasystem
. . . various paranormal claims . . .

What is “paranormal” can simply be technology that is not yet understood by the mainstream. One can poke fun and ridicule or one can investigate. There are good sources of info for serious, objective, scientific inquiry into the paranormal. Such as William Tiller.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
So, did you have time to read up on cross sections of gamma ray scattering? Come on, you are missing out on seeing for yourself how stupendously moronic Bearden's proclamations are!

So, I take it the BS is an expert on gamma ray scattering and wants to brag about it in reference to Col. Bearden’s writings?

“Stupendously moronic”? Your tone is ever so scientific.

Perhaps you’d like to mention which of his writings you’re talking about? Or, maybe it’s one of your posts I didn’t read! (Better things to do with my time.)

Originally posted by Mary Rose
“Stupendously moronic”? Your tone is ever so scientific.

Yup. If I try to convince you that boiling water naturally gives off radon gas, and not steam, you would probably (even you, Mary) find it moronic, too. So, it's plenty scientific.


If you look at
Fer De Lance

you will see that Bearden claims that ~MeV range gamma radiation is absorbed in plasma created by a discharge in the atmosphere. Since you don't know physics, you wouldn't notice just how stupid this is. But you don't care, do you?

But he sure like to doodle warplanes emitting some kind of "death rays", or being hit by same! Of course, it adds a lot of credibility to what he's saying.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
radon gas

Okay Mr. Expert.

What do you know about radon gas?

I see that Col. Bearden wrote a book entitled Fer de Lance copyright 1986 and that there was a second edition published in 2002.

From cheniere.org:

"In 1999, the Earth's first strategic sub-space
war was silently fought and won..."

Fer-de-Lance
2nd Edition - 2002

The Russians have sustained the largest weapons development program ever launched by any nation, and they have kept it effectively hidden from prying Western eyes. I have called this program “Fer-de-Lance,” after the deadly South American pit viper of that name.

The dreaded fer-de-lance is a snake of great agility and lethal effect. It often ambushes its hapless prey, striking unexpectedly and without warning. Its first sudden strike is usually lethal to its victim, which promptly expires in writhing agony. Since the Soviet development of scalar EM weapons has been designed for the same purpose, the name seems appropriate.

Looking at the Table of Contents for Fer de Lance, I see "Vector Mathematics Has a Fundamental Problem," and "Infolded Systems Are Excluded by Physics," among the 110 headings. Since you reject every bit of information I have posted about Bearden's investigation of the history of electrodynamics and what is actually possible to engineer, then, of course, you're dismissing anything Bearden says about scalar weapons - the dark side of the same phenomena that allows for free energy. No surprise there.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I see that Col. Bearden wrote a book entitled Fer de Lance copyright 1986 and that there was a second edition published in 2002.

Yes, it's full of doodles worthy of a 4th grade schoolboy with some inclination for sci fi. Death ray shooting everywhere, and force fields deflecting missiles. Blah blah blah.

you're dismissing anything Bearden says about scalar weapons

But I'm not. I've read more of this nonsense than I should have, and I see just how pathetic Bearden's "ideas" are.

When he writes f=f1+f2+f3... is a Fourier transform and it helps create a spherical shield... Puh-leeze.

Again, for persons with zero background in, and appreciation of hard sciences (like you, Mary) this will work, and so will doodles of a death ray destroying a tank. For people with capacity to think this is well, laughing stock.

reply to post by buddhasystem


Okay. I'll ask you a second time:

Originally posted by Mary Rose
What do you know about radon gas?

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Again, for persons with zero background in, and appreciation of hard sciences (like you, Mary) this will work, and so will doodles of a death ray destroying a tank. For people with capacity to think this is well, laughing stock.

My research skills are serving me quite well.

Your repeated jabs at me, personally, while claiming to be an expert yourself do not impress me. Your mainstream education and job, coupled with your arrogant attitude, are severely limiting you. I would suggest you stop poking fun at me and my sources of information and start educating yourself about alternative physics and technology.

Again, what do you know about radon gas? (Since you brought it up.)

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

Okay. I'll ask you a second time:

Originally posted by Mary Rose
What do you know about radon gas?

A lot. You have questions? Feel free to ask. Do you still want to know whether it's radon that is coming out of your kettle and not steam, when water boils? Do you want to know about gamma scattering? Do you want to know that Bearden writes complete bullsh!t in his papers?

My research skills are serving me quite well.

And what's the evidence of that?

Your mainstream education and job, coupled with your arrogant attitude, are severely limiting you.

How so? I've built and/or prototyped a few pieced of equipment that work quite well. Your charlatan idols didn't.

I would suggest you stop poking fun at me

Why should I? You are asking for it. I and others suggested that you try and learn something for real, you rejected that, and that deserves ridicule.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
A lot. You have questions? Feel free to ask. Do you still want to know whether it's radon that is coming out of your kettle and not steam, when water boils? Do you want to know about gamma scattering? Do you want to know that Bearden writes complete bullsh!t in his papers?

I'll take that as I don't want to talk about that so I'll deflect the question.

From cheniere.org:

Introduction

This briefing presents the basic concepts of Soviet scalar electromagnetic weapons, some of the major types available, and evidence of their widespread testing.

- Scalar Electromagnetics is Electrogravitation -

Scalar electromagnetics is an extension of present electromagnetics (EM) to include gravitation. That is, it is a unified, and, what is more important, it is a unified engineering theory. Its basis was initially discovered by Nikola Tesla.

In the scalar EM extension, EM field energy can be turned into gravitational field energy and vice versa. This exchange can be patterned and localized. in specific areas or objects. Such a controlled change of electromagnetics to gravitation is not possible in the normal EM or physics presently taught in Western textbooks. However, the bits and pieces of the theory have been scattered through the physics literature for some time, but no orthodox Western scientist seems to have realized that these anomalous portions could be integrated into a startling new physics. Unorthodox experimenters, inventors, and scientists have made discoveries in this arena for several decades, but again have not realized the exact implications or the precise manner in which their results could be combined with present electrical physics. . . .

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by buddhasystem
A lot. You have questions? Feel free to ask. Do you still want to know whether it's radon that is coming out of your kettle and not steam, when water boils? Do you want to know about gamma scattering? Do you want to know that Bearden writes complete bullsh!t in his papers?

I'll take that as I don't want to talk about that so I'll deflect the question.

No, you are wrong, let's talk!

Unorthodox experimenters, inventors, and scientists have made discoveries in this arena for several decades, but again have not realized the exact implications or the precise manner in which their results could be combined with present electrical physics. . .

Yep, that's some proof right there. Plenty of discoveries! Wow. Wonder how we missed that. Wait, what's up with Bearden's own invention? Oops it don't work. Boo hoo.

On the topic of this thread -- Rodin, anyone? What discoveries has he made? Where is the promised cure of all decease and unlimited food for the world? Plus intergalactic travel?

And kooks shall be kooks.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
On the topic of this thread -- Rodin, anyone? What discoveries has he made? Where is the promised cure of all decease and unlimited food for the world? Plus intergalactic travel?

Rodin took all his nonsensical claims off his website.

Now all it says is:

www.markorodin.com...

BENEFACTORS ONLY... N O I N V E S T M E N T O P P O R T U N I T Y O

F F E R E D

Am I the only one seeing a line break in the middle of a word on Rodin's site? I doubt it. It doesn't look too good here.

But more to the point, the message is clear...don't expect anything he ever does to work, or expect any kind of payback on any "investment" .

I will give Rodin credit for one thing, he's a step above Keely in that regard. Keely duped investors into thinking they'd actually get something in return for their $110 million in today's dollars. The investors were disappointed when Keely never made anything that was viable.

Then he got a benefactor, but only after bilking investors out of millions.

At least Rodin isn't trying to bilk investors, like Keely did, or like Blacklight Power is doing now.

I also am wondering about the results of Rodin's work and am aware that as of today , there is no substiantial evidence to confirm what he claims to have re-discovered / un-covered .


Rodin basically says the energy gains mass thru geometric movement !

How does one go about in building a device to test this hypothesis ?

Bearden says the Scalar Waves interact with ALL nucleus in universe !!!

How would one go aobut inbuilding a device to test this hypothesis ?

In this thread , there were many good users who were deflated by nay sayers .

Mary has a lot of patience it seems .

Buddha , will you ever stop beating that dead horse , ever ?

reply to post by 23432

I asked a similar question on page 149:

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Dark Matter: Scientists claim they cannot explain observations they have made in the bullet cluster which show that even modified gravity theories can't explain why the center of mass or dark matter is displaced so far from the center of mass of baryonic matter. Rodin claims that he's solved the dark matter problem, by concluding that dark matter is the number 9. Do you think Rodin's solution is correct, and if so, what is the mass of the number 9? How many number 9s are in the bullet cluster to explain our dark matter observations there the following paper?

A direct empirical proof of the existence of dark matter

An 8-sigma significance spatial offset of the center of the total mass from the center of the baryonic mass peaks cannot be explained with an alteration of the gravitational force law, and thus proves that the majority of the matter in the system is unseen.

Sadly, nobody answered.

The reason is, nobody CAN answer. Rodin's claims are so utterly lacking any formulation which can be tested in the realms of science like physics and mathematics that there is simply no way to test his claim about the number of 9's in the bullet cluster, because his claim is an incomplete formulation which simply cannot be tested. Anybody with half a brain and even the most basic knowledge of the definition of a number and the definition of a particle should be able to recognize that the number 9 is not a particle as Rodin claims, and the conversation should end there. Sadly, some of Rodin's supporters may not meet that qualification, and some people want to know how to test it. There's nothing to test. It's utter nonsense.

Likewise with the questions you asked. CERN's LHC accelerates particles every day in a big circle. Does that qualify as a geometric shape? The particles gain relativistic mass through relativistic effects, and we have precise equations which can calculate this effect. Where is the mathematical formulation Rodin proposes so that we may evaluate precisely how his idea differs from what's observed at CERN?

Arb

Acceleration ----> Collision = Damned Particle ?

I think smaller the resultant particle it is , the bigger the questions will remain to be answered .

Probably this is a direction to discern some information about the nature of particle .

Is it the only direction ?

Probably not .


Rodin asked a question and that question was directed to God .

He got his answer .

it is number 9 .



What does your God say about it ?



Rodin might not have a full understanding of what he is attempting to describe .

Bearden simply could be doing the same imho .

Alas , the proof is in the pudding and according to what we all know , the pudding is suppressed .

If that fact is too much to take into account while discussing on a conspiracy site then cheese & biscuits to all the nay sayers .

Seriously , Rodin has a hypothesis which has God in it's core .... that is what Rodin is about .

Am I the only one to spot the absurdity of debunking his view with the exclusion of God ?

reply to post by 23432

You're kind of all over the map here.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b99e6d4ef5b9.jpg[/atsimg]

I was trying to respond to your inquiry about how to test Rodin's claims about gaining mass.

All spiritual claims which cannot be tested have an equal standing in science, which is simply that they can't be tested scientifically.

In some cases, people have attempted to test spiritually related claims scientifically, like this Harvard-affiliated study which cost millions:

Largest Study of Third-Party Prayer Suggests Such Prayer Not Effective In Reducing Complications Following Heart Surgery

If you have other ideas on how spiritual claims can be tested scientifically and can raise the money to get them tested, more power to you. This goes back to my previous response. Only things that can be formulated in precise enough terms to be evaluated by science, can be evaluated by science. And once again, nothing you've mentioned about Rodin falls into this category.

Arb

What has Cern does got to do with how energy unit naturally follows a geometric shape and in doing so infold - outfold onto itself ?

I think as admirable as these debunking posts of Rodin , they miss the point by a mile imho .

Rodin lives in a world of faith and scientists all live in a world of no faith .

Chasm is unbridgeable and it is no use to shout from the far end because Rodin can't hear you all .

reply to post by 23432

If you want to form a Rodin religion, I don't object. The US has freedom of religion. The Jedi church is still trying to get recognized but they have such cool looking robes, I think they have a chance, and maybe the Rodin religion could get recognized too, who knows?

But a few posts ago you were asking how to test Rodin's idea. I asked you for a precise mathematical formulation which could be tested, to which you replied but didn't respond.

Now you seem to be changing your tune and instead of talking about scientific tests, you want to claim it's a religion. I can't argue with that; that's sort of what I've already said in this thread, that any belief in Rodin's claims appears to be a religious type belief because there's no scientific foundation to believe a single word he says.

Could it be that after 158 pages, we've finally come to an agreement? It sort of looks that way to me.

Originally posted by 23432
What has Cern does got to do with how energy unit naturally follows a geometric shape and in doing so infold - outfold onto itself ?

Short answer is no. Long answer is that rehashing Rodin's nonsense can't possibly create or elucidate any theory or information.

As Arb said, it's perfectly OK to practice religion of any sort, such as to worship Rodin's donut and proclaim him the Ultimate Prophet of the Donut and its Sudoku. No argument there. Religion is not physics and that's that.

Arb

There is a religion called Bahaism , there is no need to start a new one . I believe Rodin follows that religion already .





Precise mathematical formulation to test Rodin's idea ?

I guess I have not formulated anything yet , hell , I haven't even reached out that far in my understanding of what he preaches .

Also , what makes you think the mathematical proof is available in a conventional path of science ?

Presumptions are a must yet in this context they are not required - yet .

Your problem is that you don't reserve judgment .

Isn't there exists , a possibility , that the current science lacks the necessary tools and knowledge to evaluate Rodin's claims properly .

If the answer is No , I am afraid that you are just being Dogmatic with your sceptical approach.

I don't think I have changed my tune but only re-asserted "an open minded " stand - giving the subject's nature - yet again .

I repeat , the claims of Rodin does not fall within the remit of current scientific understanding .

Similarly claims of Lipton and Sheldrake also don't fall within the remit of current scientific understanding .

I am not dismissing these people outright , I require further thinking , investigating , delibrating on the subject of double torroid vortexes .

You have brought many angles on the table of discussion yet never acknowledged the GOD in your assertions .

I think that stand you take may serve a wrong purpose while being upright in it's own right .



There are points which I agree with your stand and there are points which I do not .

Sounds more like a negotiation to me then an outright disagreement.

Originally posted by 23432
Rodin lives in a world of faith and scientists all live in a world of no faith .

Faith in the sense of instinctive knowing by tapping ones intuition for the insights to be gleaned there needs to be incorporated into the world of scientific research.

Focusing only on what the brain perceives using instruments/laboratory equipment and the spoken/written record as tools to gain knowledge is not enough.

True insight requires a holistic approach.