REPEAT of INFINATE VARIABES - Reply to ESKI.

[ka-sala]

>>>O.K. Ka-Sala,
>>>You are just much too bright for this old man.

* Never believe this of yourself Eski... nor of me!

>>>Or maybe you just think too much.

* It has been no secret between us that I have almost completed a
Report/Book. I try to share 'snippets' but cannot give it all away...
yet. OK ?

>>>It seems to me that you are missing a lot of my points, particularly my point about defining what we are talking about.

* If I am, I am sorry. I personally know what I am talking about and
the link is to you all and the Oscillation Substance Theory. You know
that! But I never claimed to speak your theoretical language,
knowing another of my own, and that is hard to translate.

>>>Just what do you mean by 'unified weak and electromagnetic interaction' ?

* To save you the confusion of my language, let me just explain it in
more depth via Wikipedia.
A/ Particle Physics.
1/ Elementary subatomic constituents of matter and radiation, and the
interactive relationship between them. Also called high energy
physics
Read more... Look it up.

B/ The unified description of two of the four fundamental interactions
of nature: electromagnetism and the weak interaction. Though these
two forces appear very different at everyday low energies, the theory
models them as two different aspects of the same force. Above the
unification energy on the order of 100GeV, they would merge into a
single electroweak force. If the Universe is hot enough (approx. 10 to
the power of 15 K, ) a temperature reached after the Big Bang, then
the electromagnetic force and weak force will merge into a combined
electroweak force.

>>>"By my thinking both the "weak" and "electromagnetic" interactions are terms from >>>conventional physics which are meaningless if we consider the "four forces" as all being >>>observational aspects of one "force--" pressures within a "substance-substrate" having the >>>basic characteristics of a liquid at its triple point.

>>>Could you define "atemporality" for me, hopefully in terms of my postulated "Aether?"

* I cannot see that you have not already formulated the timelessness
of this Aether/Ether but if you are moving into the dimentions in
which Alchemy operates, then you are looking at Life's Elixir. So
naturally your 'substance substrate' is very illuminating. The very
catalyst you want.

>>>Also, can you give me a good definition of "Entropy?"

* Which one do you want Eski ? For now, just stay with the catalyst
but...! Once you have your energy interaction and in balance -
therefore equal - what you term 'repair' becomes in quantum
thermodynamics a propellent beyond any shock waves, and in absolute
silence the interacting forces within your term, 'Aether' wraps itself
around the electromagnetic forces of your Oscillation, as if in a safe
cocoon. ( Inclusive of pragraph below's answer.)

>>>I've never seen a really good one, and I must admit that I'm not sure how to fit the concept >>>in. Does it fit in with the concept of Mass as I define it, with the problems of Kinetic Energy, >>>or is it a measure of some sort of the "degree to which some action-reaction sequence >>>somehow repairs the chaos behind a shock wave in which we exist?

>>>"Infinity," to me, has a practical definition of "the point, instant,or number just beyond where >>>we stop, quit counting, quit examining, or our means of information gathering or transfer >>>fail...." Eternity would have a similar connotation.  An extent just beyond the extent of >>>our "Perceptual Universe."

* Who can measure Infinity Eski. But while you are working on this O/
S I believe the 'google' will be big enough to measure what you want.

>>>As long as we've been co-workers in this, I don't think that you have listened closely to old >>>Eski...

* You wait this long to tell me ??? Then forgive my efforts to
contribute.

>>>It could, of course, be that Old Eski, "the Pretend Genius," a person of admittedly slow and >>>limited intellectual abilities, who can only try to be intelligent by looking for different ways to >>>interpret what others take for granted, is totally lost in comprehending the ideas of those who >>>have true genius level capabilities.  I only vaguely discern what either you or O'Sullivan is >>>saying a great deal of the time.

* That was the problem I had when trying to explain the incident of my
Profile. No-one seemed to understand, until it was found that I had
what was 5 months prior to the announcement of the 1979 Nobel Prize.
At least even some-one like me had it! Your earth language is not
easy !!! Facts are I cannot 'pretend'... only extend. And to you
Eski my friend, it was a helping hand. I proclaim no qualities of a
genius. I'm just a bit alien to many thoughts and ideas which have
been boxed in by their theoretical masters.

>>>I do hope that some how, Eski can put together something that is at least rational for a 30 >>>min. presentation at the Vigier Symposium so we don't end up appearing a bunch >>>of "nincompoops."

* I am sure you know what it is you want to say and have to offer. Do
it your way as we do offer ours. One cannot be a ' nincompoop ' to
make such a presentation. Just be sure of what it is you have!

>>>If you were to suggest one point that you think he should make in that presentation, what >>>would it be?

* Don't ever think it's too late, nor that what you have is not
presentable. Anyone with enough insight will see through your efforts,
and if I – little me – can come up with Nobel material. Anyone can!
One just has to know what it is that you are presenting, and that it
is fact..

Would we be behind you if we were not with you ?

>>>Allaha asmaladik...DLS

' Ve size' dear Dr Dean L(eRoy) Sinclair
Kind regards Eski,
Ka-sala

PS.. Have just been requested to submit material re. radio-active wate
issue to Federal Minister for Enviroment; Australian Parliment !

[ka-sala]

PS> Correction typo. Radio-active waste