The formal proof for the existence of the "other world" ("afterworld" - "counter-world") completed with the use of methods of mathematical logic

0 views
Skip to first unread message

janp...@gmail.com

unread,
Sep 23, 2007, 10:50:16 PM9/23/07
to
As it turns out, it is an objective and scientifically verifiable
truth, what religions and folklore describe for us under the name of
"other world" or "afterworld" (scientifically this other world is
called "counter-world"). This world does exist (although is hidden
from our insight into it), and the existence of it can be proven
scientifically in an objective manner. Below I am going to repeat for
your convenience and for your critical review, a most recent formal
scientific proof that this world inhabited by God (and also by us -
after we die) in fact does exist objectively. This most recent proof
is published, amongst others, on the web page "dipolar_gravity.htm" -
addresses of which are listed below. Because it is very short, I am
going to repeat it here, but firstly a few words of introduction and
explanations.

The historically first formal physical proof for the existence of the
counter-world was published in 2000 (means quite a long ago) in
subsections H1.1 to H1.1.3 from volume 4 of scientific monograph [1/4]
entitled "Advanced magnetic devices" (available free of charge from
the web addresses of the page "text_1_4.htm" listed below). In fact
this proof was repeated three times in the indicated subsections, each
time completed with a different physical methodology of scientific
proving. This in turn illustrates that the scientific proving of so
obvious matter as the existence of the counter-world, can be carried
out not just on one, but on many entirely different ways. The
scientific proof that "counter-world does exist" is quite important.
It confirms scientifically facts which are explained to us by
religions for thousands of years. Namely, it proves that this another
world, popularly called the "other world" (e.g. consider the saying
"they send him to the other world"), or "afterworld" (e.g. consider
the saying "he shifted to the afterworld"), in fact does exist
objectively. In turn this objective existence of the counter-world can
be confirmed in a scientific manner. From this in turn is just a small
step away from the scientific proving, that whatever religions and
folklore claim about God living in this other world, and about us
going in there after our death, is also an objective truth and can be
confirmed objectively with scientific methods. The scientific proof
that "counter-world does exist" is for us equally binding as all other
scientific proofs - for example as the proofs that the Earth is
spherical, or that sides of a right-angled triangle fulfill the
Pythagoras equation. For our own good we should rely on indications
resulting from this proof in everything that we do. After all, if we
do not consider it, then we are to stick to views and undertake
actions which run against truth - means which contradict the true
operation of the counter-world and the universe. In turn thinking and
acting contradictively to the truth and to reality, inevitably brings
not very pleasant consequences to us. In turn if we consider in our
lives indications resulting from this proof, then in almost everything
that we do, we are inclined to make corrections for the existence and
influence of the counter-world on our lives and on the world around
us. This in turn is the key to us reaping fruits and rewards in the
future, which await for these who learned the truth and who recognize
it.

During my professorship at a Korean University in 2007, by some
strange act of God in the second semester - which coincided with the
update of the fifth edition of my most important scientific monograph
[1/5], I was granted the privilege of giving a series of lectures from
the mathematical logic. (My autobiography can be found on the
totaliztic web page named "pajak_jan.htm", my scientific findings
regarding God - including a formal proof that "God does exist"
completed with methods of mathematical logic similar to these
described here, can be found on the totaliztic web page named
"god.htm", while copies of free monograph [1/5] are available from the
web page "text_1_5.htm" at addresses provided below.) A "by product"
of these lectures was that to three previous versions of the formal
proof for the existence of the counter-world completed before with the
use of physical methods, I could add another version of the formal
scientific proof for the existence of the counter-world which this
time is completed with the use of methods of mathematical logic.
Because this proof is short, I am quoting it below for the use of
these readers who would like to get familiar with it, or wish to check
the validity of it. However, I would still encourage to reach for
further information regarding it, which is provided on the totaliztic
web page "dipolar_gravity.htm", and also in subsection H1.1.4 from
volume 4 of the newest monograph [1/5] (currently still in process of
writing) available free of charge from the web page "text_1_5.htm" at
addresses provided below. The base propositions of the above proof for
the existence of counter-world stem from attributes of so-called
"transverse waves" - the more extensive description of which is
provided in the web page "dipolar_gravity.htm" devoted entirely to the
description of the Concept of Dipolar Gravity - see items #D1, #D2,
#D2.1 in there. But in order to save the reader reading these other
descriptions, I remind here briefly that "every wave is simply a
moving oscillation". Thus in every wave two directions of motion are
coexisting, namely the main direction in which a given wave moves, and
also the main direction in which occurs the oscillatory motion that
forms this wave. The "transverse waves" are simply such waves in which
the main direction of a given oscillatory motion is perpendicular to
the direction into which the entire wave moves. Most common examples
of "transverse waves" are waves on water. The "transverse waves" must
be clearly distinguished from the so-called "longitudinal waves" in
which both above componential directions of motion occur along the
same line. A most common example of longitudinal waves is probably a
home toy in which steel balls hang on strings in a row, like
pendulums, touching each other sideways. When we lift a first of these
steel balls and provide it with a pendulum motion, then with the use
this longitudinal wave this pendulum motion is transferred onto the
last ball, which repeats it, then then the motion is transferred back
onto the first steel ball, etc. So here it is, the entire formal proof
for the existence of the counter-world, completed with the use of
methods of mathematical logic:


Theorem:
"The counter-world does exist".
Basis propositions:
(1) "The electromagnetic waves display all attributes of the so-called
"transverse waves", and according to the present knowledge the
electromagnetic waves must propagate in exactly the same manner as all
known to us kinds of transverse waves do propagate. All known kinds of
transverse waves propagate exclusively along the border between two
mediums.
(2) The belonging of electromagnetic waves to the category of
transverse waves which propagate along the border between two mediums
means that in the space which these waves cross must either exist a
border of some sort between two mediums which occupy our physical
world, or must exists a border which remains invisible to our senses
and undetectable to our instruments and which separates our physical
world and the counter-world (the counter-world also remaining
inaccessible for us and undetectable for our instruments) - each of
these two worlds being filled up with a different medium. The fact
that electromagnetic waves propagate across space in which our
advanced physical instruments nor excellently provided and well paid
scientific laboratories are unable to detect neither the existence of
two different mediums, nor detect the existence of a border between
two different mediums, eliminates completely the possibility that
electromagnetic waves could propagate along a border between two
different mediums that fill up our physical world.
(Explanation complementing this set (2) of premises: The cross-volume
propagation of electromagnetic waves researched by our science,
occurring through the space which for our measurement instruments
appear as filled up with an uniform medium, combined with simultaneous
behavior of these waves as if they propagate along the border of two
different mediums, may only then take place, when these waves
propagate along the surface of two different worlds, means along the
border of our physical world, and some other world which remains
inaccessible to our senses and undetectable to our instruments, and
which is filled up with a different medium than our physical world.
Since this other world had no scientific name so-far, the Concept of
Dipolar Gravity which discovered and described it, named it the
"counter-world".)
(3) The counter-world does NOT exist, or does exist. The propagation
of electromagnetic waves along the border between our physical world
and this counter-world eliminates completely the possibility that the
counter-world does NOT exist.
Proof:
(1) The first basis proposition is to be transformed with the use of
tautological form of the method known under the name of "hypothetical
syllogism". This form can be written as [(p =>q) && (q => r)] => [p =>
r], in which the assertion "p" says "the electromagnetic waves display
all attributes of the so-called transverse waves", while the assertion
"q" says "according to the present knowledge electromagnetic waves
must propagate in exactly the same manner as all known to us kinds of
transverse waves do propagate", in turn the assertion "r" states "all
known kinds of transverse waves propagate exclusively along the border
between two mediums". The transformation of these propositions implies
the conclusion that "the electromagnetic waves propagate exclusively
along the border between two mediums".
(2) Accepting this previous conclusion for an assertion in the next
phase of inference, and using the method of "disjunctive syllogism",
the tautological form of which can be written as: [(p || q) && !p] =>
q, we obtain a next conclusion which states that "the electromagnetic
waves must propagate along the border between our physical world and
the counter-world."
(3) The last couple of propositions allows us to derive the final
conclusion with method called the "disjunctive syllogism", the
tautological form of which can be written as: [(p || q) && !p] => q.
In this form the assertion "p" says "the counter-world does NOT
exist", while assertion "q" states "the counter-world does exist".
Thus the final conclusion states "the counter-world does exist"!
Conclusion:
The above inference chain unambiguously and conclusively proves the
truth of the theorem that "the counter-world does exist".

For the use of these readers who are NOT familiar with the notation
that is applied in the above proof, I would like to explain that
symbols "p", "q", and "r" mark subsequent "assertions" utilized in
this proof as logical variables. In turn symbols "&&", "||", and "=>"
mark logical operators "and", "inclusive or", and "implies" (if ... =>
then ...").

It is also worth to mention about the validity of the above proof.
Because this proof utilizes exclusively tautological forms of
subsequent methods, it remains valid for all values of variables it
uses. Thus practically it is error-proof. If someone would like to
undermine it, he or she would need to undermine first the validity of
mathematical logic. In turn this logic is a foundation for countless
mathematical proofs which with a large success were used by the
effective and precise discipline of mathematics. Thus, since so strong
proof for the existence of counter-world finally we were able to
develop, it is worth to check now whether we live according to this
proof. After all, the guesses to-date about the existence of the
counter-world this proof replaces with the reliable knowledge and
certainty of the existence of counter-world.

At this point I would like to appeal to other lecturers of logic.
Namely, I propose to take notice of the lack of meaning, motivation,
and the absence of engagement in examples of proofs presented in
textbooks of logic - as an example consider the textbook proof "modus
ponens" of the kind, quote: "Samson is strong", and "If Samson is
strong, then it will take a woman to do him in." We can conclude "It
will take a woman to do Samson in." (End of quote.) So instead in our
lectures we use such examples deprived of actuality and sense, I would
rather suggest for example of proofs use e.g. the proof explained
above, or the proof indicated below. After all, these proofs are to
inspire students to thinking and to searches for truth, give more
sense to their lives, will be agreeable with indications of our
conscience, and in a non-imposing manner are going to add our own
contribution to the fight for the prevalence of truth.

The proving procedure presented above was also utilized in one more
proof that is extremely important for each one of us. Namely it
allowed to formally prove that God does exist. A formal scientific
proof for the existence of God completed with the use of methods of
mathematical logic, is presented in item #B3 of a separate web page
about the secular and scientific understanding of God (see the
totaliztic web page named "god.htm") and also in subsection I3.3.4
from volume 5 of the newest monograph [1/5] (available free of charge
from the web page "text_1_5.htm" available at addresses provided
below).

The formal proof for the existence of counter-world repeated above is
described more extensively on the totaliztic web page named
"dipolar_gravity.htm", and also in subsection H1.1.4 from chapter H
(volume 4) of the scientific monograph [1/5]. I have listed below
internet addresses under which thisweb page "dipolar_gravity.htm" can
be viewed. From the same addresses you can also download, free of
charge, a copy of monograph [1/5] (just in the process of completion)
in the PDF format (Adobe Acrobat) - you just only need to change the
last segment of these addresses, means the page-name
"dipolar_gravity.htm" into the name "text_1_5.htm", and then click on
volumes that you wish to download, e.g. onto "Text of volume 5, PDF".

http://energy.atspace.org/dipolar_gravity.htm
http://evidence.ueuo.com/dipolar_gravity.htm
http://evil.thefreehost.biz/dipolar_gravity.htm
http://fruit.sitesled.com/dipolar_gravity.htm
http://god.pandela.com/dipolar_gravity.htm
http://karma.freewebpages.org/dipolar_gravity.htm
http://mozajski.atwebpages.com/dipolar_gravity.htm
http://nirvana.scienceontheweb.net/dipolar_gravity.htm
http://one.fsphost.com/parasitism/dipolar_gravity.htm
http://parasitism.about.tc/dipolar_gravity.htm
http://parasitism.xphost.org/dipolar_gravity.htm
http://rubik.hits.io/dipolar_gravity.htm
http://wszewilki.greatnow.com/dipolar_gravity.htm

Please notice that under each address indicated above in fact all the
web pages of totalizm should be available (unless some of these web
pages were sabotaged in the meantime). Thus, if someone wishes to view
descriptions from any other web pages of totalizm, e.g. from web pages
listed in this message, or in other sources/blogs, then in the above
addresses the name "dipolar_gravity.htm" is just enough to exchange
for the name of the web page that one wishes to look at, e.g. the web
page "text_1_5.htm", "evil.htm", page "changelings.htm", etc.

"God, and also the separate world inhabited by God, do exist, and will
exist, independently of whatever evil forces are going to lie about it
to the naive folk."
With totaliztic salute,
Prof. Dr Jan Pajak (Prof. Dr Eng.)

Androcles

unread,
Sep 23, 2007, 11:18:58 PM9/23/07
to

<janp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1190602216.6...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
: As it turns out, it is an objective and scientifically verifiable

: truth, what religions and folklore describe for us under the name of
: "other world" or "afterworld" (scientifically this other world is
: called "counter-world"). This world does exist (although is hidden
: from our insight into it), and the existence of it can be proven
: scientifically in an objective manner. Below I am going to repeat for
: your convenience and for your critical review, a most recent formal
: scientific proof that this world inhabited by God

Drooling fuckhead.
*plonk*


Al

unread,
Sep 23, 2007, 11:22:03 PM9/23/07
to
On Sep 24, 12:50 pm, janpa...@gmail.com wrote:
> As it turns out, it is an objective and scientifically verifiable
> truth, what religions and folklore describe for us under the name of
> "other world" or "afterworld" (scientifically this other world is
> called "counter-world"). This world does exist (although is hidden
> from our insight into it), and the existence of it can be proven
> scientifically in an objective manner. Below I am going to repeat for
> your convenience and for your critical review, a most recent formal
> scientific proof that this world inhabited by God (and also by us -
> after we die) in fact does exist objectively. This most recent proof
> is published, amongst others, on the web page "dipolar_gravity.htm" -
> addresses of which are listed below. Because it is very short, I am
> going to repeat it here, but firstly a few words of introduction and
> explanations.
<SNIP>

Well, that's the longest pseudo-science babble I've read in a long
time. I've got to say I got the the waves bit before deciding it was
total drivel. Up till then it was "X can be proven cos I proved X,
which leads me to infer X.".
And then it devolves into pseudo-logic and babble. I find it hard to
believe the author believes it. It would seem to require too much
carfeul manipulation of false logic to be believable as something a
person has nutted out. And then there are the dodgy web-links.
What's wrong with posting on the University's web-site, Mr Prof. Dr.?

rupert....@gmail.com

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 12:05:00 AM9/24/07
to
On Sep 24, 2:50 pm, janpa...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip verbal diarrhoea]

Shorter Jan Pajak (or Pajak Jan, apologies if I've mangled your name):
1. Electromanetic waves look like tranverse waves
2. therefore electromagnetic waves *are* transverse waves (argument by
analogy)
3. transverse waves only propagate along a boundary between two media
4. there is no media in our universe for em waves to propagate along
(unless Florian, by some bizarre coincidence, is right about his
ether)
5. therefore there is another universe, and em waves propagate along
the boundary between the two universes
6.
7. therefore that universe is inhabited by god
8. therefore that universe is inhabited by us when we die

I think #6 could use more detail.


janp...@gmail.com

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 1:14:36 AM9/24/07
to
On Sep 23, 8:18 pm, "Androcles" <Engin...@hogwarts.physics> wrote:
...
> Drooling fuckhead.
> *plonk*

Ooo, we have a bully here in this group. Or more strictly several
bullies. You sound very loud, and you obviously are good in spitting
at others. But where are your arguments and your facts? If you
originate from the Earth, you should realize that this civilization
progresses around 10 times faster than any other known civilization
just because it relies on facts and on arguments, NOT on spitting and
on loud mouths. So where
are your arguments? Forgotten to learn these in schools, or not
finishing a school at all? Then you are on the wrong group. You should
start a group "how to finish a primary school and learn basics of
science, technology, logic, and constructive discussion". Then we
could discuss about proofs, logic, "transverse waves", etc. Until this
happens, I would suggest that you do not manifest here your ignorance,
your tendency to scare others by your loud mouth, and your efforts to
sabotage the constructive discussion on the forum which supposed to be
designated to discussions (not to bullying).

In the meantime I would suggest you look at the totaliztic web page
named "parasitism_pl.htm", which you can find at following addresses.
Perhaps it lets you categorize yourself to appropriate category of
creatures. Good luck.

http://energy.atspace.org/parasitism.htm
http://evidence.ueuo.com/parasitism.htm
http://evil.thefreehost.biz/parasitism.htm
http://fruit.sitesled.com/parasitism.htm
http://god.pandela.com/parasitism.htm
http://karma.freewebpages.org/parasitism.htm
http://mozajski.atwebpages.com/parasitism.htm
http://nirvana.scienceontheweb.net/parasitism.htm
http://one.fsphost.com/parasitism/parasitism.htm
http://parasitism.about.tc/parasitism.htm
http://parasitism.xphost.org/parasitism.htm
http://rubik.hits.io/parasitism.htm
http://wszewilki.greatnow.com/parasitism.htm

"Social parasites are those people who do NOT wish to learn or do
anything, but believe that the world owns them everything".

janp...@gmail.com

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 1:31:21 AM9/24/07
to
On Sep 23, 9:05 pm, "rupert.morr...@gmail.com"
<rupert.morr...@gmail.com> wrote:
...
> Shorter Jan Pajak ...

> 1. Electromanetic waves look like tranverse waves

Yes I agree, this proof can be presented shorter. After all, "all
roads lead to Rome". However, the problem is that because of the
immense importance of this proof, there is a lot of people out there,
who would undermine it - if it is NOT formulated in a "skeptic-proof"
or "bullet-proof" manner.

I disagree with your statement "1" though. Electromagnetic waves
"display all attributes" of transverse waves, NOT just "look" like
transverse waves. There is a logical difference between "look like"
and "display all attributes". E.g. an appropriately groomed "dog" may
look like a "cat", but still will bark and seek female dogs. However,
if something looks like a cat, behaves like a cat, makes noises like a
cat, and displays all other attributes of a cat, than this something
must be a cat. So let us leave physical side of the proof to
physicists, and consider rather problem of methodology of it, which
makes it "bullet proof" for all attempts of individuals the secret
agendas of whose this proof undermines. After all, this is an
immensely important proof for our civilization and needs to be
examined from all angles very carefully.

Thanks for a constructive contribution.
With totaliztic salute, Jan Pajak (Prof. Dr Eng.)

Jeckyl

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 1:32:56 AM9/24/07
to
<janp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1190610876....@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

> On Sep 23, 8:18 pm, "Androcles" <Engin...@hogwarts.physics> wrote:
> ...
>> Drooling fuckhead.
>> *plonk*
>
> Ooo, we have a bully here in this group.

No .. he's pretty much on target right .. there is no scientific proof as
you claim .. You're simply lying (and crossposting). you post is a rather
large pile of utter crap and not a bit of legitimate science or physics in
there. You don't fool anyone (other than other fools).


Al

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 1:40:20 AM9/24/07
to
On Sep 24, 3:31 pm, janpa...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 23, 9:05 pm, "rupert.morr...@gmail.com"<rupert.morr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Shorter Jan Pajak ...
> > 1. Electromanetic waves look like tranverse waves
>
> I disagree with your statement "1" though. Electromagnetic waves
> "display all attributes" of transverse waves, NOT just "look" like
> transverse waves.

No, EM waves are NOT transverse waves. Did you miss the last century
of science? It's been a long long time since such a simplistic view
of EM waves has been defendable.
You've also managed to ignore the two main criticisms, one that you
are making unfounded assumptions in regards to likening transverse
waves to EM waves, and that at what rupert has labelled step 6, there
is a total disjoint between your premise and your conclusion.

Please proove that EM waves are transverse waves requiring a media
border.
And please provide the missing logic between "there are media" and
"there is life after death".

Jeckyl

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 1:37:07 AM9/24/07
to
<janp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1190611881.5...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...

> On Sep 23, 9:05 pm, "rupert.morr...@gmail.com"
> <rupert.morr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
>> Shorter Jan Pajak ...
>> 1. Electromanetic waves look like tranverse waves
[snip]

> After all, this is an
> immensely important proof for our civilization and needs to be
> examined from all angles very carefully.

No .. it is simply crap (ie and wild guesses with no scientific support) It
is only a proof of your own stupidity.

snex

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 1:39:52 AM9/24/07
to

you cant declare that EM waves display all attributes of transverse
waves because that would require you to assume your conclusion. thus,
your argument is viciously circular and therefore useless.

Jeckyl

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 1:35:46 AM9/24/07
to
<rupert....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1190606700.4...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...

Further, #3 is wrong


josephus

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 2:30:38 AM9/24/07
to
Jeckyl wrote:

so is #5 the problem with "outside" the universe is it does not have
coordinates. there is no inside and outside. If there is another
universe it may have matter and different coordiates. so ANOTHER
UNIVERSE could be a source of Dark Matter. But the trouble is how do
you transverse NOT SPACE. we cannot move in 11, 7, 6,or 5 space. we
move in a 4 space. it is a problem in coordinates.


josephus
--
I go sailing in the Summer and
look at STARS in the Winter.
"Everybody is igernant, jist on differt subjects"
Will Rogers Jr.
"it aint what you know that gets you in trouble
it is what you know that aint so"
Josh Billings.

Bodega

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 2:49:24 AM9/24/07
to
On Sep 23, 10:14 pm, janpa...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 23, 8:18 pm, "Androcles" <Engin...@hogwarts.physics> wrote:
> Ooo, we have a bully here in this group. Or more strictly several
> bullies. You sound very loud, and you obviously are good in spitting
> at others. But where are your arguments and your facts? If you
> originate from the Earth, you should realize that this civilization
> progresses around 10 times faster than any other known civilization
> just because it relies on facts and on arguments, NOT on spitting and
> on loud mouths. So where
> are your arguments?

Typical loonie post. If you make an assertion. it's up to *you* to
provide the evidence. If you wish more polite comment, or no comment
at all, submit your theory to a scientific journal.

These other civilizations, the ones that progress around 10 times
slower than Earth's ... what planets are they on, exactly? Perhaps you
should forget t.o. and try to get a gig on the History Channel.

P.S. On rereading your post, I think you truly believe that some here
actually live on other planets.

rick_...@hotmail.com

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 3:10:27 AM9/24/07
to
On Sep 24, 3:50 am, janpa...@gmail.com wrote:
> As it turns out, it is an objective and scientifically verifiable
> truth, what religions and folklore describe for us under the name of
> "other world" or "afterworld" (scientifically this other world is
> called "counter-world"). This world does exist (although is hidden
> from our insight into it), and the existence of it can be proven
> scientifically in an objective manner. Below I am going to repeat for
> your convenience and for your critical review, a most recent formal
> scientific proof that this world inhabited by God (and also by us -
> after we die) in fact does exist objectively. This most recent proof
> is published, amongst others, on the web page "dipolar_gravity.htm" -
> addresses of which are listed below. Because it is very short, I am
> going to repeat it here, but firstly a few words of introduction and
> explanations.


Well gravity is caused by the expansion of the universe. It is a one
directional force, because the universe expands out only.

Two balloons in the void, with rulers painted on them and expand the
balloons and stand one of the balloon expanding yourself also, and you
feel gravity because the earth pushes up under your feet. Measure
anything with those painted rulers and you cannot see any size
difference.
But everything is expanding into the void.

So why doesn't space shrinking between them until they are touching,
because atoms give off waves, which counteracts the force of gravity,
and keeps the universe from collapsing in on itself. We usually just
call that dark energy the repulsive force associated with gravity, or
the Cosmological Constant portion of GR.

And so an atom gives off a spherical wave, and it crests at the
electron radius, and those shells they are where the energy is
sufficient to call them electrons.
Now those spherical waves, are like magnetism.
Electro Magnetism, EM waves are transverse waves which are created,
not by an atom, but when those spherical waves intersect with
sufficient energy.
A photon for instance.

So the difference is, that the spherical waves, spread out spherically
because the atom the nucleus is spherical, and transverse
waves, are not spherical, because how they are created is different.
When two waves intersect.

So, should there be a containing boundary, to keep them transverse, or
are they transverse, because of the way they originate?
You would think that would be easy to find out by experiment.


josephus

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 3:49:38 AM9/24/07
to
rick_...@hotmail.com wrote:

> On Sep 24, 3:50 am, janpa...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>As it turns out, it is an objective and scientifically verifiable
>>truth, what religions and folklore describe for us under the name of
>>"other world" or "afterworld" (scientifically this other world is
>>called "counter-world"). This world does exist (although is hidden
>>from our insight into it), and the existence of it can be proven
>>scientifically in an objective manner. Below I am going to repeat for
>>your convenience and for your critical review, a most recent formal
>>scientific proof that this world inhabited by God (and also by us -
>>after we die) in fact does exist objectively. This most recent proof
>>is published, amongst others, on the web page "dipolar_gravity.htm" -
>>addresses of which are listed below. Because it is very short, I am
>>going to repeat it here, but firstly a few words of introduction and
>>explanations.
>
>
>
> Well gravity is caused by the expansion of the universe. It is a one
> directional force, because the universe expands out only.
>

not exactly, it is the curvature of space by mass.

> Two balloons in the void, with rulers painted on them and expand the
> balloons and stand one of the balloon expanding yourself also, and you
> feel gravity because the earth pushes up under your feet. Measure
> anything with those painted rulers and you cannot see any size
> difference.
> But everything is expanding into the void.
>

yes but not for the reason you give.

> So why doesn't space shrinking between them until they are touching,
> because atoms give off waves, which counteracts the force of gravity,
> and keeps the universe from collapsing in on itself. We usually just
> call that dark energy the repulsive force associated with gravity, or
> the Cosmological Constant portion of GR.

no it does not. it does not expand atoms. and the WAVE FUCTION does not
have these properties.


>
> And so an atom gives off a spherical wave, and it crests at the
> electron radius, and those shells they are where the energy is
> sufficient to call them electrons.
> Now those spherical waves, are like magnetism.
> Electro Magnetism, EM waves are transverse waves which are created,
> not by an atom, but when those spherical waves intersect with
> sufficient energy.
> A photon for instance.
>
> So the difference is, that the spherical waves, spread out spherically
> because the atom the nucleus is spherical, and transverse
> waves, are not spherical, because how they are created is different.
> When two waves intersect.
>
> So, should there be a containing boundary, to keep them transverse, or
> are they transverse, because of the way they originate?
> You would think that would be easy to find out by experiment.
>

this is word salad. you see it is all analogy and very very little
information. Hertz thinks you are nuts. and Maxwell cant even talk to
you because you are too stupid.

Harold Saxon

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 4:00:37 AM9/24/07
to

Some may claim to have lived on other planets, but have - for their
own reasons - decided to set up shop on this small world.

rick_...@hotmail.com

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 4:05:20 AM9/24/07
to

So why are em waves, not rays? Why are they transverse?
Well it must have something to do with the quantum foam. The medium
they travel in. And it is expanding, so the transverse waves as the
get farther away from inception, expand as well. They may start out
almost like a ray, at Plank Length.
That is why the inverse square law works, is because along the t axis,
the waves spread out from expansion getting weaker in strength.

You see that magnetism, those spherical waves are predominantly
repulsive, only when the waves cancel each other out, does it appear
to be attractive. What forces things together to look like attractive
magnetism, is the expansion of the universe, shrinking away the space
between things. If it weren't for those waves being generated in the
quantum foam, the universe would collapse. As it turns out, those
waves being generated are stronger than the force of expansion. Just
slightly stronger, so that the universe appears to be open.
And hence the moon appears to be moving away from the earth.


Bobby Bryant

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 4:14:57 AM9/24/07
to
In article <1190606700.4...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,

6. The two universes are "reality" and "fantasy", so write whatever
you please in 7-n.

--
Bobby Bryant
Reno, Nevada

Remove your hat to reply by e-mail.

Bobby Bryant

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 4:13:03 AM9/24/07
to
In article <1190620837....@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>,

I, for one, couldn't get a decent internet connection from Ikxo2q.

Greg G.

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 5:26:18 AM9/24/07
to
On Sep 24, 4:13 am, bdbry...@wherever.ur (Bobby Bryant) wrote:
> In article <1190620837.935227.53...@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>,

> Harold Saxon <saxon.har...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>
> > On 24 Sep, 07:49, Bodega <michael.palm...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >> P.S. On rereading your post, I think you truly believe that some here
> >> actually live on other planets.
>
> > Some may claim to have lived on other planets, but have - for their
> > own reasons - decided to set up shop on this small world.
>
> I, for one, couldn't get a decent internet connection from Ikxo2q.

My home planet was obliterated in an irony meter accident involving
the words "invulnerable logic".

--
Greg G.

This is just a notice to say that I've automatically withdrawn $200
from your bank account. Please knock yourself unconscious when you
have time in your schedule.
.

traveller

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 6:38:08 AM9/24/07
to
On Sep 24, 12:05 am, "rupert.morr...@gmail.com"

no one knows

Vend

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 6:59:10 AM9/24/07
to
On Sep 24, 7:40 am, Al <alwh...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> On Sep 24, 3:31 pm, janpa...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Sep 23, 9:05 pm, "rupert.morr...@gmail.com"<rupert.morr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Shorter Jan Pajak ...
> > > 1. Electromanetic waves look like tranverse waves
>
> > I disagree with your statement "1" though. Electromagnetic waves
> > "display all attributes" of transverse waves, NOT just "look" like
> > transverse waves.
>
> No, EM waves are NOT transverse waves. Did you miss the last century
> of science? It's been a long long time since such a simplistic view
> of EM waves has been defendable.

EM waves ARE transverse waves.
The rest is BS.


Vend

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 7:15:17 AM9/24/07
to
On Sep 24, 4:50 am, janpa...@gmail.com wrote crap.

Since the topic is electromagnetism, I wonder why talk.origins act as
a magnet for kooks.

josephus

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 7:25:48 AM9/24/07
to

because it is supposed to keep kooks out of proffesional ng.

Geoff

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 7:44:34 AM9/24/07
to
janp...@gmail.com wrote:
> As it turns out, it is an objective and scientifically verifiable
> truth, what religions and folklore describe for us under the name of
> "other world" or "afterworld" (scientifically this other world is
> called "counter-world"). This world does exist (although is hidden
> from our insight into it), and the existence of it can be proven
> scientifically in an objective manner. Below I am going to repeat for
> your convenience and for your critical review, a most recent formal
> scientific proof

Proof is for moonshiners and mathematicians.

> Prof. Dr Jan Pajak (Prof. Dr Eng.)

Jeezus, why does it always have to be engineers. I'm embarrassed.


Robert Weldon

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 11:23:49 AM9/24/07
to
On Sep 24, 5:44 am, "Geoff" <geb...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:

Yes, me too. I think he should go talk to George Hammond, the
dialogue could be quite entertaining.

Mich...@gmail.com

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 12:04:11 PM9/24/07
to

>
> > After all, this is an
> > immensely important proof for our civilization and needs to be
> > examined from all angles very carefully.
>
> No .. it is simply crap (ie and wild guesses with no scientific support) It
> is only a proof of your own stupidity.

If it smells like BS and looks like BS please don't do the taste test.

Tom McDonald

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 3:54:37 PM9/24/07
to
janp...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 23, 8:18 pm, "Androcles" <Engin...@hogwarts.physics> wrote:
> ...
>> Drooling fuckhead.
>> *plonk*
>
> Ooo, we have a bully here in this group. Or more strictly several
> bullies. You sound very loud, and you obviously are good in spitting
> at others. But where are your arguments and your facts? If you
> originate from the Earth, you should realize that this civilization
> progresses around 10 times faster than any other known civilization
> just because it relies on facts and on arguments, NOT on spitting and
> on loud mouths. So where
> are your arguments? Forgotten to learn these in schools, or not
> finishing a school at all? Then you are on the wrong group. You should
> start a group "how to finish a primary school and learn basics of
> science, technology, logic, and constructive discussion". Then we
> could discuss about proofs, logic, "transverse waves", etc. Until this
> happens, I would suggest that you do not manifest here your ignorance,
> your tendency to scare others by your loud mouth, and your efforts to
> sabotage the constructive discussion on the forum which supposed to be
> designated to discussions (not to bullying).

You will find that talk.origins, at least, is very hard on
prophets of scientific proof for the otherworld.

You should really search out George Hammond. He is probably the
only person living in this particular time-space continuum that
could possibly critique your work, or even understand it.

I think George has a ng of his own. Or you could just Google
'George Hammond proof' and find him.

Good luck. Please fight the good fight, and don't let the howlers
discourage you from taking this up with George.


<snip gems for which we are unworthy>

rupert....@gmail.com

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 7:34:48 PM9/24/07
to

You're welcome. Now please address #6.

Al

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 7:46:28 PM9/24/07
to

Not in the sense he's taking it. In many ways EM waves aren't waves.

Androcles

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 7:52:30 PM9/24/07
to

"Al" <alw...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:1190677588....@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

A valid point, although "many ways" is vague.
Define "wave", perhaps the two of you can reach agreement.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/AC.htm

Raving

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 7:55:06 PM9/24/07
to
On Sep 23, 10:50 pm, janpa...@gmail.com wrote:
> As it turns out, it is an objective and scientifically verifiable
> truth, what religions and folklore describe for us under the name of
> "other world" or "afterworld" (scientifically this other world is
> called "counter-world"). This world does exist (although is hidden
> from our insight into it), and the existence of it can be proven
> scientifically in an objective manner. Below I am going to repeat for
> your convenience and for your critical review, a most recent formal
> scientific proof that this world inhabited by God (and also by us -
> after we die) in fact does exist objectively. This most recent proof
> is published, amongst others, on the web page "dipolar_gravity.htm" -
> addresses of which are listed below. Because it is very short, I am
> going to repeat it here, but firstly a few words of introduction and
> explanations. ...
[trimmed]

Those words or ideas which are quoted below are not my own. Nor do I
feel comfortable flogging the thread which I started to discuss
such ...

(For thread, See http://tinyurl.com/2hwmba )


I simply wish to point out that ...

... ' The formal proof for the existence of the "other world"
completed with the use of methods of mathematical logic ' ...

Is similar in form to both ...

- 'angels on the head of a pin'

..and..

" ... Berkeley philosophy "in our own day has won far more general
support than ever before." Thus, "today some physicists...are inclined
to argue exactly as he did, that physical theory is not a matter of
factual truth, but essentially of mathematical and predictive
convenience." (G. J. Warnock, The Principles of Human Knowledge, p.
25.) ... " See http://tinyurl.com/3ajkdt


"..The value of any theory or hypothesis is ultimately determined
by whether it can be applied successfully to reality, whether it
enhances our knowledge of the world and our control over our lives. A
hypothesis which does none of these things is good for nothing, the
product of idle speculation, like the disputations of the mediaeval
Schoolmen about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. A
colossal amount of time has been wasted in universities on endlessly
debating this kind of thing. ..." See http://tinyurl.com/3ajkdt

Cordially,

Raving

Cory Albrecht

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 9:50:45 PM9/24/07
to

Has anybody ever made an educated attempt at figuring out why it so
often seems to be engineers?

Al

unread,
Sep 24, 2007, 11:03:04 PM9/24/07
to
On Sep 25, 9:52 am, "Androcles" <Engin...@hogwarts.physics> wrote:
> "Al" <alwh...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message

OK, EM waves are waves for many purposes except for the stupid ideas
he's tried to infer in regards to media boundaries. The original
author clearly had a very simple idea of what waves, and in
particular, transverse waves are. EM waves are not transverse waves
on the border between two fluids. So, specifically the way in which
the author meant transverse waves, not what EM Waves really are.

Androcles

unread,
Sep 25, 2007, 4:25:21 AM9/25/07
to

"Al" <alw...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:1190689384.4...@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

: On Sep 25, 9:52 am, "Androcles" <Engin...@hogwarts.physics> wrote:
: > "Al" <alwh...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
: >
: > news:1190677588....@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
: > : On Sep 24, 8:59 pm, Vend <ven...@virgilio.it> wrote:
: > : > On Sep 24, 7:40 am, Al <alwh...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
: > :
: > : > > No, EM waves are NOT transverse waves. Did you miss the last
century
: > : > > of science? It's been a long long time since such a simplistic
view
: > : > > of EM waves has been defendable.
: > : >
: > : > EM waves ARE transverse waves.
: > : > The rest is BS.
: > :
: > : Not in the sense he's taking it. In many ways EM waves aren't waves.
: >
: > A valid point, although "many ways" is vague.
: > Define "wave", perhaps the two of you can reach agreement.
:
: OK,

I left you a reference
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/AC.htm
which you snipped and ignored, so I've snipped and ignored
whatever it was you said. That's a good way to get along.
BTW, EM waves ARE transverse waves.


Vend

unread,
Sep 25, 2007, 5:24:34 AM9/25/07
to

In many ways? Name three

josephus

unread,
Sep 25, 2007, 7:25:56 AM9/25/07
to
Vend wrote:

light rays acoording to Maxwell are sine waves that oscilate in
orthogal ways. they do not vibrate space that would require ether. and
ether does not exist. Maxwell said light does not need a medium.

Errol

unread,
Sep 25, 2007, 7:43:51 AM9/25/07
to
On Sep 25, 5:03 am, Al <alwh...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> > :

>
> OK, EM waves are waves for many purposes except for the stupid ideas
> he's tried to infer in regards to media boundaries. The original
> author clearly had a very simple idea of what waves, and in
> particular, transverse waves are. EM waves are not transverse waves
> on the border between two fluids. So, specifically the way in which
> the author meant transverse waves, not what EM Waves really are.- Hide quoted text -
>
NO EM waves are NOT just waves. They are transverse waves. You were
wrong in your eagerness to discredit old Prof/Doc/whatever else.
Transverse waves do NOT only exist on the borders of two fluids.
Having said that though, I don't get the next huge leap of faith that
proves that god and dead people exist in the "counter-world".

Kermit

unread,
Sep 25, 2007, 11:51:03 AM9/25/07
to

No, Rick. You're grabbing pretty thoughts out of the aether and
stringing them together like Christmas tree lights.

No, no, no.

Kermit

Kermit

unread,
Sep 25, 2007, 11:56:29 AM9/25/07
to
On Sep 23, 7:50 pm, janpa...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

So, Professor Doctor, could you give an example of something which
your theory predicts which other models do not?

And of course this would also be a means of falsifying it, in
principle. If your prediction does not turn out to be true, then your
model has to be modified or discarded.

Thank you sir. Oh! One more thing. Could you cite a journal which has
published one of your papers on this subject (not on your
programming / engineering)?

Kermit

rick_...@hotmail.com

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 2:33:19 AM9/26/07
to
On Sep 24, 8:49 am, josephus <dogb...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> rick_so...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Sep 24, 3:50 am, janpa...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >>As it turns out, it is an objective and scientifically verifiable
> >>truth, what religions and folklore describe for us under the name of
> >>"other world" or "afterworld" (scientifically this other world is
> >>called "counter-world"). This world does exist (although is hidden
> >>from our insight into it), and the existence of it can be proven
> >>scientifically in an objective manner. Below I am going to repeat for
> >>your convenience and for your critical review, a most recent formal
> >>scientific proof that this world inhabited by God (and also by us -
> >>after we die) in fact does exist objectively. This most recent proof
> >>is published, amongst others, on the web page "dipolar_gravity.htm" -
> >>addresses of which are listed below. Because it is very short, I am
> >>going to repeat it here, but firstly a few words of introduction and
> >>explanations.
>
> > Well gravity is caused by the expansion of the universe. It is a one
> > directional force, because the universe expands out only.
>
> not exactly, it is the curvature of space by mass.

>
> > Two balloons in the void, with rulers painted on them and expand the
> > balloons and stand one of the balloon expanding yourself also, and you
> > feel gravity because the earth pushes up under your feet. Measure
> > anything with those painted rulers and you cannot see any size
> > difference.
> > But everything is expanding into the void.
>
> yes but not for the reason you give.

>
> > So why doesn't space shrinking between them until they are touching,
> > because atoms give off waves, which counteracts the force of gravity,
> > and keeps the universe from collapsing in on itself. We usually just
> > call that dark energy the repulsive force associated with gravity, or
> > the Cosmological Constant portion of GR.
>
> no it does not. it does not expand atoms. and the WAVE FUCTION does not
> have these properties.

>
>
>
> > And so an atom gives off a spherical wave, and it crests at the
> > electron radius, and those shells they are where the energy is
> > sufficient to call them electrons.
> > Now those spherical waves, are like magnetism.
> > Electro Magnetism, EM waves are transverse waves which are created,
> > not by an atom, but when those spherical waves intersect with
> > sufficient energy.
> > A photon for instance.
>
> > So the difference is, that the spherical waves, spread out spherically
> > because the atom the nucleus is spherical, and transverse
> > waves, are not spherical, because how they are created is different.
> > When two waves intersect.
>
> > So, should there be a containing boundary, to keep them transverse, or
> > are they transverse, because of the way they originate?
> > You would think that would be easy to find out by experiment.
>
> this is word salad. you see it is all analogy and very very little
> information. Hertz thinks you are nuts. and Maxwell cant even talk to
> you because you are too stupid.
>

I know you are but what am I.

One Hertz is one wave from the nucleus, to the electron shell radius
in the Hydrogen atom.
Maxwell is dead. He's not talking to anyone.

Its word salad to you because you know very little about physics.


Cory Albrecht

unread,
Sep 27, 2007, 12:29:21 AM9/27/07
to

Compared to yours, I'm sure his knowledge of physics is infinite.

BTW, Hertz has nothing to atomic nuclei or their electron shells. It is
a unit of frequency with base of cycles per second. For example, if I am
breathing 60 times a minute, I am breathing at a frequency of 1 Hertz
(Hz).Nothing to do with electron shells there.

You're a loon, Rick.

kevin...@gmail.com

unread,
Sep 27, 2007, 2:14:12 AM9/27/07
to
On Sep 23, 7:50 pm, janpa...@gmail.com wrote:
> As it turns out, it is an objective and scientifically verifiable
> truth, what religions and folklore describe for us under the name of
> "other world" or "afterworld" (scientifically this other world is
> called "counter-world"). This world does exist (although is hidden
> from our insight into it), and the existence of it can be proven
> scientifically in an objective manner. Below I am going to repeat for
> your convenience and for your critical review, a most recent formal
> scientific proof that this world inhabited by God (and also by us -
> after we die) in fact does exist objectively. This most recent proof
> is published, amongst others, on the web page "dipolar_gravity.htm" -
> addresses of which are listed below. Because it is very short, I am
> going to repeat it here, but firstly a few words of introduction and
> explanations.
>
> The historically first formal physical proof for the existence of the
> counter-world was published in 2000 (means quite a long ago) in
> subsections H1.1 to H1.1.3 from volume 4 of scientific monograph [1/4]
> entitled "Advanced magnetic devices" (available free of charge from
> the web addresses of the page "text_1_4.htm" listed below). In fact
> this proof was repeated three times in the indicated subsections, each
> time completed with a different physical methodology of scientific
> proving. This in turn illustrates that the scientific proving of so
> obvious matter as the existence of the counter-world, can be carried
> out not just on one, but on many entirely different ways. The
> scientific proof that "counter-world does exist" is quite important.
> It confirms scientifically facts which are explained to us by
> religions for thousands of years. Namely, it proves that this another
> world, popularly called the "other world" (e.g. consider the saying
> "they send him to the other world"), or "afterworld" (e.g. consider
> the saying "he shifted to the afterworld"), in fact does exist
> objectively. In turn this objective existence of the counter-world can
> be confirmed in a scientific manner. From this in turn is just a small
> step away from the scientific proving, that whatever religions and
> folklore claim about God living in this other world, and about us
> going in there after our death, is also an objective truth and can be
> confirmed objectively with scientific methods. The scientific proof
> that "counter-world does exist" is for us equally binding as all other
> scientific proofs - for example as the proofs that the Earth is
> spherical, or that sides of a right-angled triangle fulfill the
> Pythagoras equation. For our own good we should rely on indications
> resulting from this proof in everything that we do. After all, if we
> do not consider it, then we are to stick to views and undertake
> actions which run against truth - means which contradict the true
> operation of the counter-world and the universe. In turn thinking and
> acting contradictively to the truth and to reality, inevitably brings
> not very pleasant consequences to us. In turn if we consider in our
> lives indications resulting from this proof, then in almost everything
> that we do, we are inclined to make corrections for the existence and
> influence of the counter-world on our lives and on the world around
> us. This in turn is the key to us reaping fruits and rewards in the
> future, which await for these who learned the truth and who recognize
> it.
>
> During my professorship at a Korean University in 2007, by some
> strange act of God in the second semester - which coincided with the
> update of the fifth edition of my most important scientific monograph
> [1/5], I was granted the privilege of giving a series of lectures from
> the mathematical logic. (My autobiography can be found on the
> totaliztic web page named "pajak_jan.htm", my scientific findings
> regarding God - including a formal proof that "God does exist"
> completed with methods of mathematical logic similar to these
> described here, can be found on the totaliztic web page named
> "god.htm", while copies of free monograph [1/5] are available from the
> web page "text_1_5.htm" at addresses provided below.) A "by product"
> of these lectures was that to three previous versions of the formal
> proof for the existence of the counter-world completed before with the
> use of physical methods, I could add another version of the formal
> scientific proof for the existence of the counter-world which this
> time is completed with the use of methods of mathematical logic.
> Because this proof is short, I am quoting it below for the use of
> these readers who would like to get familiar with it, or wish to check
> the validity of it. However, I would still encourage to reach for
> further information regarding it, which is provided on the totaliztic
> web page "dipolar_gravity.htm", and also in subsection H1.1.4 from
> volume 4 of the newest monograph [1/5] (currently still in process of
> writing) available free of charge from the web page "text_1_5.htm" at
> addresses provided below. The base propositions of the above proof for
> the existence of counter-world stem from attributes of so-called
> "transverse waves" - the more extensive description of which is
> provided in the web page "dipolar_gravity.htm" devoted entirely to the
> description of the Concept of Dipolar Gravity - see items #D1, #D2,
> #D2.1 in there. But in order to save the reader reading these other
> descriptions, I remind here briefly that "every wave is simply a
> moving oscillation". Thus in every wave two directions of motion are
> coexisting, namely the main direction in which a given wave moves, and
> also the main direction in which occurs the oscillatory motion that
> forms this wave. The "transverse waves" are simply such waves in which
> the main direction of a given oscillatory motion is perpendicular to
> the direction into which the entire wave moves. Most common examples
> of "transverse waves" are waves on water. The "transverse waves" must
> be clearly distinguished from the so-called "longitudinal waves" in
> which both above componential directions of motion occur along the
> same line. A most common example of longitudinal waves is probably a
> home toy in which steel balls hang on strings in a row, like
> pendulums, touching each other sideways. When we lift a first of these
> steel balls and provide it with a pendulum motion, then with the use
> this longitudinal wave this pendulum motion is transferred onto the
> last ball, which repeats it, then then the motion is transferred back
> onto the first steel ball, etc. So here it is, the entire formal proof
> for the existence of the counter-world, completed with the use of
> methods of mathematical logic:
>
> Theorem:
> "The counter-world does exist".
> Basis propositions:
> (1) "The electromagnetic waves display all attributes of the so-called
> "transverse waves", and according to the present knowledge the
> electromagnetic waves must propagate in exactly the same manner as all
> known to us kinds of transverse waves do propagate. All known kinds of
> transverse waves propagate exclusively along the border between two
> mediums.
> (2) The belonging of electromagnetic waves to the category of
> transverse waves which propagate along the border between two mediums
> means that in the space which these waves cross must either exist a
> border of some sort between two mediums which occupy our physical
> world, or must exists a border which remains invisible to our senses
> and undetectable to our instruments and which separates our physical
> world and the counter-world (the counter-world also remaining
> inaccessible for us and undetectable for our instruments) - each of
> these two worlds being filled up with a different medium. The fact
> that electromagnetic waves propagate across space in which our
> advanced physical instruments nor excellently provided and well paid
> scientific laboratories are unable to detect neither the existence of
> two different mediums, nor detect the existence of a border between
> two different mediums, eliminates completely the possibility that
> electromagnetic waves could propagate along a border between two
> different mediums that fill up our physical world.
> (Explanation complementing this set (2) of premises: The cross-volume
> propagation of electromagnetic waves researched by our science,
> occurring through the space which for our measurement instruments
> appear as filled up with an uniform medium, combined with simultaneous
> behavior of these waves as if they propagate along the border of two
> different mediums, may only then take place, when these waves
> propagate along the surface of two different worlds, means along the
> border of our physical world, and some other world which remains
> inaccessible to our senses and undetectable to our instruments, and
> which is filled up with a different medium than our physical world.
> Since this other world had no scientific name so-far, the Concept of
> Dipolar Gravity which discovered and described it, named it the
> "counter-world".)
> (3) The counter-world does NOT exist, or does exist. The propagation
> of electromagnetic waves along the border between our physical world
> and this counter-world eliminates completely the possibility that the
> counter-world does NOT exist.
> Proof:
> (1) The first basis proposition is to be transformed with the use of
> tautological form of the method known under the name of "hypothetical
> syllogism". This form can be written as [(p =>q) && (q => r)] => [p =>
> r], in which the assertion "p" says "the electromagnetic waves display
> all attributes of the so-called transverse waves", while the assertion
> "q" says "according to the present knowledge electromagnetic waves
> must propagate in exactly the same manner as all known to us kinds of
> transverse waves do propagate", in turn the assertion "r" states "all
> known kinds of transverse waves propagate exclusively along the border
> between two mediums". The transformation of these propositions implies
> the conclusion that "the electromagnetic waves propagate exclusively
> along the border between two mediums".
> (2) Accepting this previous conclusion for an assertion in the next
> phase of ...
>
> read more »

snip*
>* Below I am going to repeat for


> your convenience and for your critical review, a most recent formal
> scientific proof that this world inhabited by God (and also by us -
> after we die) in fact does exist objectively.

I don't really understand what you mean when you say GOD. What is
that, seriously! Do you base all or your hypothesees on a book? You
start with the assumption that as dead people there is a place that we
go. How do we go? Who is the we? What do you mean by place to go?

You see you can use the science to attempt to prove something that is
mere fantasy. Accept that we, as with all things that live, die. The
end. No sadness. No fear. No reasons. Live now, love now, laugh now
and just be in the now. Fantasy is fun and distracting lets not base
our life on it, we will just ruin the wonder and the gift that is now.


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages