Vigier VII Symposium
2 views
Skip to first unread message
hoek
Jul 2, 2010, 2:30:25 PM7/2/10
to Oscillator/Substance Theory
Hello again, Dr. Sinclair,
In your prompt, inconsiderate, dismissive and unacceptable
response to the below paragraph, which I ask that you read in your
upcoming Vigier VII Symposium address. An address that you asked all
members to help you with as I did below:
It is my pleasure to welcome the Vigier VII Symposium to the Aberdeen
American News here in Aberdeen, South Dakota, USA and to be able to
thank the News and Dr. Amoroso for this opportunity to introduce to
the wider scientific community a framework for a Comprehensive Theory
which seems to be applicable at any scale from sub-atomic to cosmic.
I also wish to thank my friends from two Internet Groups who have
contributed information and support over the last three years since
the first version of this model was published on Helium.com as
"Motion
in a Matrix..." The current version has a working title of the
Oscillator/Substance Model, as it has become clear that the motions
that are involved are in part primarily, if not totally, oscillatory
in nature. One of the groups which I need to thank is the Condensed
Matter
Nuclear Science Group, cmns, which has furnished much information
including the fact that this Symposium existed. Thank you, Jean
Pierre
The other group of which I, Dean LeRoy Sinclair, am founder and
director of is the Oscillator/Substance Theory Group. At
http://groups.google.com/group/oscillatorsubstance-theory
Members, of our group all seek the truth about the nature of the
realm in which we find ourselves existing. We all believe that the
basic mechanics that govern the universe and the workings of the sub-
atomic, quantum, world are oscillatory in nature and mirror each
other
at the largest and smallest of scales. We come from different
backgrounds, with various approaches and models to try to explain
this
phenomenon. >One member of the group, who has a somewhat different
> version from my own, of which I'll return to in a moment, is at
> protoncosmology.com. His model agrees with the current Rutherford-
> Bohr atomic model, but, not the currently accepted quark nucleon
> hypothesis. His model takes an electro-magnetic like, field dynamics
> approach based on neglected and recently verified electron-proton
> scattering data. The model poses the proton as an internally driven
> spherical oscillator, an electro-dynamic like perpetual motion
> machine. It is driven by the conversion of charge energy into mass and
> back again by the function M=E/C2, which is a simple transposition of
> E=MC2 and the fact that no particle with mass can attain the velocity
> of light. Thus, the field deflections always precede the oscillating particles. The full version, which is too lengthy to describe now, can
> be found on line at " http://www.protoncosmology.com”.
You Respond,
“This I will probably find some way to use in the "write up" for
publication,
its too technical a coverage for here, I think that it is better to
note
that you have a different version which may possibly be preferable,
give
your name and the references.”
“Too technical a coverage for here”, Sure Eski , much too technical
for a group of scientists to understand. Dean, I really think they’ll
be able to handle it and probably they'll be accompanied by someone
who’ll explain it to them, if they can't.
Anyway, I realize that it cost you 75 Euros to enter the Vigier VII
Symposium and I will contribute (pay to you) 25 Euros if you’ll just
read the paragraph from, >One member, to " http://www.protoncosmology.com”.
above, the way I’ve written it. I timed it 5 times. I read it aloud,
moderately, concisely, annunciating each word and it took on average,
one minute and 16 seconds for all of it, the longest reading being one
minute and 22 seconds. Send me your mailing address or paypal or
however you would like me to pay you for 1/3 of your submission cost
and I’ll pay you the day I received it. By the way, I and I'm sure
the other members of the O/S group, would like to know the exact time
you'll be broadcasting to the scientists attending the symposium?
What are the call letters and frequency of the station you’ll be
broadcasting from?
I hope you'll find it in your heart to be a fair, responsible and just
group leader. Remember, I'll pay you for a third of your time for
just under a minute and a half of it.
Stay well,
hoek
In your prompt, inconsiderate, dismissive and unacceptable
response to the below paragraph, which I ask that you read in your
upcoming Vigier VII Symposium address. An address that you asked all
members to help you with as I did below:
It is my pleasure to welcome the Vigier VII Symposium to the Aberdeen
American News here in Aberdeen, South Dakota, USA and to be able to
thank the News and Dr. Amoroso for this opportunity to introduce to
the wider scientific community a framework for a Comprehensive Theory
which seems to be applicable at any scale from sub-atomic to cosmic.
I also wish to thank my friends from two Internet Groups who have
contributed information and support over the last three years since
the first version of this model was published on Helium.com as
"Motion
in a Matrix..." The current version has a working title of the
Oscillator/Substance Model, as it has become clear that the motions
that are involved are in part primarily, if not totally, oscillatory
in nature. One of the groups which I need to thank is the Condensed
Matter
Nuclear Science Group, cmns, which has furnished much information
including the fact that this Symposium existed. Thank you, Jean
Pierre
The other group of which I, Dean LeRoy Sinclair, am founder and
director of is the Oscillator/Substance Theory Group. At
http://groups.google.com/group/oscillatorsubstance-theory
Members, of our group all seek the truth about the nature of the
realm in which we find ourselves existing. We all believe that the
basic mechanics that govern the universe and the workings of the sub-
atomic, quantum, world are oscillatory in nature and mirror each
other
at the largest and smallest of scales. We come from different
backgrounds, with various approaches and models to try to explain
this
phenomenon. >One member of the group, who has a somewhat different
> version from my own, of which I'll return to in a moment, is at
> protoncosmology.com. His model agrees with the current Rutherford-
> Bohr atomic model, but, not the currently accepted quark nucleon
> hypothesis. His model takes an electro-magnetic like, field dynamics
> approach based on neglected and recently verified electron-proton
> scattering data. The model poses the proton as an internally driven
> spherical oscillator, an electro-dynamic like perpetual motion
> machine. It is driven by the conversion of charge energy into mass and
> back again by the function M=E/C2, which is a simple transposition of
> E=MC2 and the fact that no particle with mass can attain the velocity
> of light. Thus, the field deflections always precede the oscillating particles. The full version, which is too lengthy to describe now, can
> be found on line at " http://www.protoncosmology.com”.
You Respond,
“This I will probably find some way to use in the "write up" for
publication,
its too technical a coverage for here, I think that it is better to
note
that you have a different version which may possibly be preferable,
give
your name and the references.”
“Too technical a coverage for here”, Sure Eski , much too technical
for a group of scientists to understand. Dean, I really think they’ll
be able to handle it and probably they'll be accompanied by someone
who’ll explain it to them, if they can't.
Anyway, I realize that it cost you 75 Euros to enter the Vigier VII
Symposium and I will contribute (pay to you) 25 Euros if you’ll just
read the paragraph from, >One member, to " http://www.protoncosmology.com”.
above, the way I’ve written it. I timed it 5 times. I read it aloud,
moderately, concisely, annunciating each word and it took on average,
one minute and 16 seconds for all of it, the longest reading being one
minute and 22 seconds. Send me your mailing address or paypal or
however you would like me to pay you for 1/3 of your submission cost
and I’ll pay you the day I received it. By the way, I and I'm sure
the other members of the O/S group, would like to know the exact time
you'll be broadcasting to the scientists attending the symposium?
What are the call letters and frequency of the station you’ll be
broadcasting from?
I hope you'll find it in your heart to be a fair, responsible and just
group leader. Remember, I'll pay you for a third of your time for
just under a minute and a half of it.
Stay well,
hoek
hoek
Jul 9, 2010, 5:11:54 PM7/9/10
to Oscillator/Substance Theory
ATTENTION, ATTENTION!!!!! Where is Eski????
It's been a week since my last posting in which I asked our group
leader to post the time, date and broadcast frequency of his address
to the Vigier VII Symposium. There has been no response and the
symposium starts in only three days!!!! Is he alright, does anybody
know??? It's not like him to be so long in responding to a post,
especially one as important as this. In the past, he's usually
responded to my postings within in a few hours. DOES ANYONE KNOW IF
HE'S ALRIGHT, HUGH, KA-SALA ????
It's been a week since my last posting in which I asked our group
leader to post the time, date and broadcast frequency of his address
to the Vigier VII Symposium. There has been no response and the
symposium starts in only three days!!!! Is he alright, does anybody
know??? It's not like him to be so long in responding to a post,
especially one as important as this. In the past, he's usually
responded to my postings within in a few hours. DOES ANYONE KNOW IF
HE'S ALRIGHT, HUGH, KA-SALA ????
dean sinclair
Jul 10, 2010, 5:08:09 PM7/10/10
to oscillatorsub...@googlegroups.com
Sorry, Hoek. Haven't had a chance to check on things. Was out of town on family business for a week, no computer available... We just, finally got a date and time, 1500 hrs.. London Time. on Wed. the 14th. I think that that is 9 AM. here in SD.
Check the Vigier VII Symposium site, As to "braodcast frequency" and address at/to the Symposium, that probablly won't be available until Nonday. Seems that my contact there is doing everything at the last minute, like everyone else.....Will try to keep you people informed. " Eski"
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Oscillator/Substance Theory" group.
To post to this group, send email to oscillatorsub...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to oscillatorsubstance...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/oscillatorsubstance-theory?hl=en.
ESKI
Jul 15, 2010, 10:05:44 AM7/15/10
to Oscillator/Substance Theory
Well, Folks
,The VigierVIISymposium has come and gone, and, as we might have
expected, if anything can go wrong it will.
It did.
I don't know what happened; but, on July 13, I got word :
"Sorry ...can't get our act together this time (Internal
problems),,,," I wrote back, sending a copy of my final short script,
asking if someone else could give the talk for me so that the time
slot, 1500 hrs., Wed, July 14, 2010, London time, would not be empty
and told my correspondent, in a separate communication, "Como jefe
de este symposio tu tienes la responibilidad ultima por qualquier
'chingandos de patos' que pasan...sea que tu puedes dar la lectura
para mi en person?" In blunter English, this adds up to "You were the
boss, so you bear the ultimate blame for any foul ups (I used the
Spanish translation for an certain English vulgar, slang expression
for messing up thoroughly) so how about you giving the talk?"
Answer this morning July 15, was, "Sorry, we couldn't accommodate....
time to concentrate on (the write-up for the 'Proceedings') ....make
sure it is well referenced...."
Well, there it is.
We got a little exposure as the "abstract" is still posted on the
Vigier VII site, and, possibly in part from there, we seem to be
getting consistent hits here on the site of a hit or so an hour.
When I signed in it said, "100 web views in the last 4 days." Now I
have the problem of getting the final paper done and in by Nov. 1. I
am going to try to put a personal deadline of Sept. l on it,
Incidentally, have not yet received an address to which to send the
final draft. The paper is supposed to be "in Microsoft Word with a
pdf file for comparison" what ever that means? Can someone
translate?
Socio-economics of science... If there had been any way to have a
representative of our group there, we could have probably done a
couple of papers.... As a research group, we are definitely
underfunded.
Well, " back to the drawing board. "
Of course, if I were being a bit paranoid about it, I'd think that we
ran into some scientific politics and got deliberately stalled. There
is more and more information that is showing up that says that O/S is
probably very close to "right on." Some part of the "Establishment"
could possibly have done a sabotage job to stall this set of ideas
giving more time for damage control on the "current frameworks."
After all, no one wants to have some upstarts point out that a lot of
the theory of the last 100 years is "somewhat off base." (A toggle up
of Quantum Mechanics to cover what we are saying might well earn
someone a Nobel Prize and the ever-lasting gratitude of the
"Scientific Establishment." There are rumours of a Russian Group that
seems to be on somewhat of this course.)
An instance of more information showing up is the following bit of
information: Some work that had a preliminary publishing in May says
that certain units, which are shown to oscillate between "Matter and
Anti-matter" states, spend less time in the Anti-matter state. We
can predict this by saying, "In our Universe the expression of the
proton-electron, anti-proton-positron states which we call matter, is
read as 'protons and electrons.' The expression of smaller vortex
oscillators, in the larger vortex oscillator which we call "the
Universe" will be affected by the rotational/inversional sense of that
oscillator..."
It is a bit disgusting to have spent so much time in trying to get a
short talk done. At least 40 hrs. ;or more of typing and retyping,
writing and rewriting. The result probably wasn't that great, but it
is frustrating!!! Eski
> > oscillatorsubstance...@googlegroups.com<oscillatorsubstance -theory%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > .
,The VigierVIISymposium has come and gone, and, as we might have
expected, if anything can go wrong it will.
It did.
I don't know what happened; but, on July 13, I got word :
"Sorry ...can't get our act together this time (Internal
problems),,,," I wrote back, sending a copy of my final short script,
asking if someone else could give the talk for me so that the time
slot, 1500 hrs., Wed, July 14, 2010, London time, would not be empty
and told my correspondent, in a separate communication, "Como jefe
de este symposio tu tienes la responibilidad ultima por qualquier
'chingandos de patos' que pasan...sea que tu puedes dar la lectura
para mi en person?" In blunter English, this adds up to "You were the
boss, so you bear the ultimate blame for any foul ups (I used the
Spanish translation for an certain English vulgar, slang expression
for messing up thoroughly) so how about you giving the talk?"
Answer this morning July 15, was, "Sorry, we couldn't accommodate....
time to concentrate on (the write-up for the 'Proceedings') ....make
sure it is well referenced...."
Well, there it is.
We got a little exposure as the "abstract" is still posted on the
Vigier VII site, and, possibly in part from there, we seem to be
getting consistent hits here on the site of a hit or so an hour.
When I signed in it said, "100 web views in the last 4 days." Now I
have the problem of getting the final paper done and in by Nov. 1. I
am going to try to put a personal deadline of Sept. l on it,
Incidentally, have not yet received an address to which to send the
final draft. The paper is supposed to be "in Microsoft Word with a
pdf file for comparison" what ever that means? Can someone
translate?
Socio-economics of science... If there had been any way to have a
representative of our group there, we could have probably done a
couple of papers.... As a research group, we are definitely
underfunded.
Well, " back to the drawing board. "
Of course, if I were being a bit paranoid about it, I'd think that we
ran into some scientific politics and got deliberately stalled. There
is more and more information that is showing up that says that O/S is
probably very close to "right on." Some part of the "Establishment"
could possibly have done a sabotage job to stall this set of ideas
giving more time for damage control on the "current frameworks."
After all, no one wants to have some upstarts point out that a lot of
the theory of the last 100 years is "somewhat off base." (A toggle up
of Quantum Mechanics to cover what we are saying might well earn
someone a Nobel Prize and the ever-lasting gratitude of the
"Scientific Establishment." There are rumours of a Russian Group that
seems to be on somewhat of this course.)
An instance of more information showing up is the following bit of
information: Some work that had a preliminary publishing in May says
that certain units, which are shown to oscillate between "Matter and
Anti-matter" states, spend less time in the Anti-matter state. We
can predict this by saying, "In our Universe the expression of the
proton-electron, anti-proton-positron states which we call matter, is
read as 'protons and electrons.' The expression of smaller vortex
oscillators, in the larger vortex oscillator which we call "the
Universe" will be affected by the rotational/inversional sense of that
oscillator..."
It is a bit disgusting to have spent so much time in trying to get a
short talk done. At least 40 hrs. ;or more of typing and retyping,
writing and rewriting. The result probably wasn't that great, but it
is frustrating!!! Eski
> > .
Message has been deleted
dean sinclair
Jul 15, 2010, 10:45:57 AM7/15/10
to oscillatorsub...@googlegroups.com
Nope, Ka-Sala, we beat that deadline. We were supposedly "on" to give the talk up until almost the last moment: I could post the interchanges back and forth for the several days as we were trying to set up the teleconferencing net, but consider e-mails as semi-confidential.
We were OK from this end; but. apparently, either they couldn't get a link into the Conference room in London or someone said, "We have some inconvenience in setting this up so, why should we waste our time and effort on what clearly is some Crackpot nonsense." I hope that the comment, "internal problems," meant the former. The fact that we did have--as far as I know, still do have--an abstract posted and had a time slot reserved (those can be checked on the VigierVIISymposium site) tends to indicate that we did everything we could from this end, and, at least at some point, we were scheduled in.
. The collapse of the "talk" was some problem at their end, not ours. We honestly tried. DS
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Irrira Rikki <irri...@gmail.com> wrote:
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Oscillator/Substance Theory" group.
To post to this group, send email to oscillatorsub...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to oscillatorsubstance...@googlegroups.com.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages