Brad Guth - secret agent of DARPA
Borked Pseudo Mailed
He would like to portray himself as against
the conspiracy, but he uses double think.
He is really an agent provocateur trying
to divert us all from the real truth.
Guth what did you do with the stars on
the original Apollo 11 film? You were
the secret agent that first analyzed
the film and modified it. You were the
one that added the fake cities to the
lunar pictures. Tell the truth
or we will tell if for you.
-The Space Vigilantes
BradGuth
get out.
BTW, other than an extremely vibrant and bluish Sirius that should
have been nicely enough recorded, all I've really cared about is why
and/or how Venus was made so WMD stealth or invisible to those
unfiltered Kodak moments, from orbit as well as from those NASA/Apollo
supposed EVAs upon our physically dark as coal Selene/moon (looking
especially darker when using those polarized optics).
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Ian Parker
> I love this kind of feedback, mostly because it's entertaining as all
> get out.
>
> BTW, other than an extremely vibrant and bluish Sirius
I thought it was Aldebaron
>that should
> have been nicely enough recorded, all I've really cared about is why
> and/or how Venus was made so WMD stealth or invisible to those
> unfiltered Kodak moments, from orbit as well as from those NASA/Apollo
> supposed EVAs upon our physically dark as coal Selene/moon (looking
> especially darker when using those polarized optics).
>
> - Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
>
>
>
> Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
> > Brad Guth is a secret double agent of DARPA.
> > He would like to portray himself as against
> > the conspiracy, but he uses double think.
> > He is really an agent provocateur trying
> > to divert us all from the real truth.
> > Guth what did you do with the stars on
> > the original Apollo 11 film? You were
> > the secret agent that first analyzed
> > the film and modified it. You were the
> > one that added the fake cities to the
> > lunar pictures. Tell the truth
> > or we will tell if for you.
>
I don't know. I think Brad Guth has hot to be linked with people like
Pencho Valev that are disputing Relativity. I think that there are
secret agents in the user groups and the prime motivation is Roswell
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/reichblacksun/contents.htm
Now Brad has accused both myself and William Mook of being Nazi and
Zionist. I cannot for the life of me see how you can be those two
things at the same time. This reference gives a blow by blow account
of the weird and wonderful pseudo science perpetrated by the Nazis.
The only problem is that this pseudoscience has found its way into the
US Military and the CIA. This is a telling extract from Roswell
The following elements were analyzed and found to exist in the small
neutronic power plant that was found inside ULAT-1:
a. UF6 in metallic form;
b. Hydrogen-fluoride gas;
c. Water and uranium tetrafluoride;
d. Powdered magnesium and potassium chlorate;
e. Metal similar to lead with a chocolate brown color;
f. U-235 in metallic form;
g. Plastic like material similar to NE 102;
h. Beryllium,
i. Pure aluminium;
h. Thorium isotope material;
j. plutonium powder.24
Scientists from Los Alamos and Sandia Base were alarmed that the power
plant could possibly function as a bomb if the elements described
above were processed in similar fashion as was done for the lens and
shotgun detonators.25
The only evidence of circuitry found on the motor was thin plastic-
like sheets fashioned like platters embossed on the exterior of the
spherically-shaped casing coated by a thin film of pure silver. Under
high power magnification it was observed a series (sic) of fine grid-
like lines intersecting groups of dots arranged in circular patterns.
24 Note that the ordering here is that of the original document. As
the Drs. Wood suggest, this flaw argues strongly for the document's
authenticity. I concur.
25 The lens detonator refers to the implosion device used in plutonium
based atom bombs to compress the critical mass. The device was
described in part one. The shotgun detonator refers to the critical
mass assembly mechanism in uranium-235 based atom bombs.
It is abundantly clear to me.
1) That a lot of the documents were obvious forgeries. A true ET UFO
would NEVER have been powered in this way.
2) That no one in the small select group of people in the secret world
knew anything about Relativity or understood anything about mainstream
Physics.
Fact - Bombarding Thorium 232 with neutrons produces U233 which is
fissile. What the **** do you need 2 fissile isotopes for. Clear
forgery - beginning to end. Forgers didn't seem to understand nuclear
Physics. It was not even a "good" forgery.
It is paralleled by Iraq where the CPA were chosen for their
evangelical credentials. Not one of them spoke Arabic. It seems that
to get on, knowing Physics or speaking Arabic will disqualify you.
Both Roswell and Iraq are monumental messes. Doing things in secret
means that ignorami (my plural alone will disqualify me from
Iraq).Arabic and Latin are both inflected languages where word order
is flexible.
What is the intention of Brad Guth and BTW Pencho Valev? Not to
disprove Relativity or to prove that William Mook/myself are Nazis.
No it is to cast just a slither of doubt. Like Relativity Evolution is
a well found scientific theory. The Discovery Institute however has
not disproved Evolution, but their meddling has cast just the slither
of doubt that has enabled Creationalism to be taught as a scientific
theory alongside Evolution. The US constitution prohibits the teaching
of "religion".
What does this slither of doubt mean? It means that the public and the
courts will be hampered in prosecuting the perpetrators of the Roswell
fraud. The astonishing fact is they got their money.
Relativity is NOT in doubt.
1) In ordinary engineering a Newtonian world may safely be assumed.
Relativity introduces an error, but other errors are more important.
There are cases though where GR is important GPS/Galileo. You cannot
get your position to within centimetres ignoring GR.
2) Experimental/observational tests of Relativity special and
general.
1) Particle decay follows strict relativistic (special) processes.
Time dilation describes the decay of a particle like a muon. Muons are
formed some 20km up and can penetrate to the surface because of their
speed. The mass of a particle (going at a whisker below c) is M(rest)/
√(1-v^2/c^2) The first terms of a Taylor expansion give Newton's
laws.
2) GPS - It uses GR corrections and works.
3) Precession of the orbit of Mercury. In the space age this has been
determined to greater and greater accuracy. GR gives us 43" per
century. Now other factors give us the same or greater. However
Leverrier worked these all out. Modern knowledge makes an unknown
variation of that amount impossible.
4) The speeding up (loss of energy) of pulsar pairs. These
gravitational waves have not been observed directly, but I think they
will be.
5) There are now GR finite element programs. These predict jets from
super massive black holes in just the way observed.
6) Light is bent round heavy objects. This bending is twice what you
would expect from a naive corpuscular theory. Eddington after the
eclipse proclaimed Einstein as the greatest scientist of the age.
With all this evidence why is it that Relativity is doubted? After all
scientific method, as I was always taught is experimental. Relativity
has never been falsified and has been confirmed on umpteen occasions.
There are controversial theories, String Theory and even Super
symmetry, they don't seem to attract the same urge to falsify than
Relativity has. There is much less solid empirical evidence too.
Do the objections of Pencho Valev amount to anything? No way. If we
remember that Chemistry and the properties of structural materials is
governed by the electromagnetic force and quantum electrodynamics.
Quantum electrodynamics is relativistic - unmistakably. Whatever you
do with rotating discs, rods going over holes the materials are
governed by the laws (relativistic) of quantum electrodynamics. We can
in fact construct a theory of QE which is purely mathematical - the
Lorentz transformation being an AXIOM. Paradoxes now become
MATHEMATICAL contradictions. If QE has group symmetry then anything
derived from it MUST have Group Symmetry as well. This can be stated
as a THEOREM.
The science is totally unambiguous. It is in fact rare to be able to
say this, but it is the case with Relativity. In fact Relativity in
many ways has the status of Evolution in terms of its credentials.
Clearly we must look for other reasons. There are various so called
"objections" to relativity. These are based on a variety of political
motivations.
The Nazis objected to the fact that Einstein was Jewish. This led them
to reject Relativity and create a pseudoscience based on Nazi myth.
The slurs directed at both myself and William Mook are as absurd as
Pencho's so called paradoxes. However although the "slither of doubt"
cuts no ice with academic scientists it does sow the seed of doubt
into judicial investigation. I mean Roswell here.
To me the Nazi slur is designed to divert attention away from the fact
that CIA swallowed the "Black Sun" nonsense whole, and obtained large
sums of money for perpetrating what was, in effect, a fraud.
The "Black Sun" the Nazis and the CIA
In 1917 Ludendorff engineered the downfall of Kerensky. Hardly gave
him good anti communist credentials! He organised Lenin's journey from
Zuerich to St. Petersburg (then Petrograd) he then proceeded to
finance the Bolshevic movement. In 1918 Ludendorff was bleating to the
allies about Bolshevic influence in Germany and pleading for an
Armistice. Who caused it in the first place?
Ludendorff was a great friend of Hitler's during the early rise of
Nazism. The engineering of Kerensky's downfall had somehow to be
explained away. The fact that the Kaiser and his generals (Ludendorff
included) had lost the war and had in the process helped to create
World Communism needed explanation.
The Jews! We were stabbed in the back, the Jews created Bolshevism
(what about Ludendorff?). We are surrounded by Jewish plots.
Relativity was not investigated scientifically but assigned to the
status of "Jewish plot". Einstein, despite his endorsement by
Eddington was forced out of the country.
Thus the objections to Relativity are part of a propaganda offensive.
What surprises me is how effective the propaganda was. As a physicist
I tend to think of sociology in terms of a series of interactions.
Opinions form as a collective phenomenon rather like the Ising model
of ferromagnetism.
Danger is when you believe your own propaganda. The Nazis set up their
own organization - The Black Sun. Energy came from Aldebaron.
http://www.amazon.com/Reich-Black-Sun-Secret-Weapons/dp/1931882398
Good book reference
After the war the US obtained captured Nazi documents. Just as no one
could speak Arabic in Iraq, so no one on the debriefing team knew the
first thing about Physics. They preferred to wallow in their own myths
rather than consult any reputable scientists. Needless to add,
absolutely nothing has ever come out of this secret research. All the
US military has ever achieved is the creation of a lot of red herrings
and the myth of little green men.
Rand Simberg is solicitous of my mental health. I only wish the
Pentagon and the CIA would have realised the dangers of "alien
abduction" which we now understand to be a dream state you have while
partially awake.
LIGO is only about 2,000km from Area 51, if they had achieved anything
at all in the way of antigravity the mirrors would have gone off
scale. BTW - LIGO is an excellent example of international
collaboration. Our chance or detecting gravity waves is not only
enhanced but there is a chance of finding polarization and direction.
What do we have now? We have a monumental cover up. Money has been
squandered. Admittedly not on the Iraqi scale but still a fraud. Its
perpetrators are using every trick in the book. Rand Simberg,
completely without evidence I might add, has accused me of
paedophilia. Such are the lengths to which this propaganda machine
will sink
- Ian Parker
Rand Simberg
Parker <ianpa...@gmail.com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:
Consider the possibility that he is even more insane and paranoid than
you are (which, admittedly, is saying something).
<massive snip of paranoid nuttiness>
>Rand Simberg is solicitous of my mental health.
With good reason, as you demonstrate in this very post.
>What do we have now? We have a monumental cover up. Money has been
>squandered. Admittedly not on the Iraqi scale but still a fraud. Its
>perpetrators are using every trick in the book. Rand Simberg,
>completely without evidence I might add, has accused me of
>paedophilia.
No, I never did that. The fact that you don't understand this is why
we question your mental health. Or at least your intelligence. We
have other reasons to question your mental health, such as your
ongoing fantasies that I am a "military man," or that there are secret
agents in the newsgroups whose prime motivation is Roswell.
jonathan
"Borked Pseudo Mailed" <nob...@pseudo.borked.net> wrote in message
news:acc76d5749b6b962...@pseudo.borked.net...
> Brad Guth is a secret double agent of DARPA.
> He would like to portray himself as against
> the conspiracy, but he uses double think.
No, that would be called a 'concern' troll.
A concern troll is a false flag pseudonym created by a user
whose point of view is opposed to the one that the user's
sockpuppet claims to hold. The concern troll posts in web
forums devoted to its declared point of view and attempts
to sway the group's actions or opinions while claiming to
share their goals, but with professed "concerns". The goal
is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group.[10
OsherD
wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 06:21:38 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away, Ian
> No, I never did that. The fact that you don't understand this is why
> we question your mental health. Or at least your intelligence. We
> have other reasons to question your mental health, such as your
> ongoing fantasies that I am a "military man," or that there are secret
From Osher Doctorow
Roswell was a "UFO farce", all right. I think, though, that what
bothers Ian Parker is really that Pentcho Valev and I, independently
and with no connection, keep surviving on sci.physics as
Nonconformists, even though trolls and graffiti artists keep attacking
my posts, while mostly mainstream physicists dislike Pentcho's
disagreement with Einstein.
As for Roswell, not only was it a UFO farce, perpetrated arguably by
Con Artists wanting to sell books and souvenirs and photographs, but
at some point the "USSR Evil Empire is Dead" obsessors made use of the
story to propagandize that Aliens had given the USA stealth and
similar information which enabled destroying the USSR and China and
their allies. Well, now we know that the USSR basically downsized to
Russia, which has exactly the same policies as the USSR except that
it's smarter in de-emphasizing hard propaganda and in using the Free
market to destroy the West, while China never was in trouble from
stealth or any other Western technology. In fact, Russia now has more
allies than before if we count Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Outer
Mongolia, Belarus, as well as nations that it keeps under Military and
Economic threat like Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzebekistan,
Kazakhstan, and partially Ukraine. The USSR's downsizing also
succeeded in winning allies and friends for it in Africa, Latin
America, India, Islamist nations, etc., without having to supply so
much money to them since they were now supposedly "too small" (not so
much in area but population).
I disagree with Pencho about Einstein's "deliberate" frauds or
criminality or intentionally deceiving anybody, and I think that parts
of GR and SR (Special Relativity) are good local approximations in our
part of the Universe, though not likely in very strong gravitational
conditions, the early Universe (quantum-related, etc.), the
microscopic level, or other Universes in the Multiverse, and also I'm
interested in Superluminal motion which I think is a different phase
rather than an impossibility, which (Superluminal motion) Joao
Magueijo and many others are interested in.
Osher Doctorow
Ian Parker
> On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 06:21:38 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away, Ian
>
> >Now Brad has accused both myself and William Mook of being Nazi and
> >Zionist. I cannot for the life of me see how you can be those two
> >things at the same time.
>
> Consider the possibility that he is even more insane and paranoid than
> you are (which, admittedly, is saying something).
>
> <massive snip of paranoid nuttiness>
>
> >Rand Simberg is solicitous of my mental health.
>
> With good reason, as you demonstrate in this very post.
>
> >What do we have now? We have a monumental cover up. Money has been
> >squandered. Admittedly not on the Iraqi scale but still a fraud. Its
> >perpetrators are using every trick in the book. Rand Simberg,
> >completely without evidence I might add, has accused me of
> >paedophilia.
>
> No, I never did that. The fact that you don't understand this is why
> we question your mental health. Or at least your intelligence. We
> have other reasons to question your mental health, such as your
> ongoing fantasies that I am a "military man," or that there are secret
>
my state of mind. I wish you would read the references. What I quoted
was if you like the crown jewels. Throughout the book there is
pseudoscience and fraud.
- Ian Parker
Ian Parker
> On Jul 6, 10:43 am, simberg.interglo...@org.trash (Rand Simberg)
> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 06:21:38 -0700 (PDT), in a place far, far away, Ian
> > Parker <ianpark...@gmail.com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
> > No, I never did that. The fact that you don't understand this is why
> > we question your mental health. Or at least your intelligence. We
> > have other reasons to question your mental health, such as your
> > ongoing fantasies that I am a "military man," or that there are secret
> > agents in the newsgroups whose prime motivation is Roswell.- Hide quoted text -
>
> From Osher Doctorow
>
> Roswell was a "UFO farce", all right. I think, though, that what
> bothers Ian Parker is really that Pentcho Valev and I, independently
> and with no connection, keep surviving on sci.physics as
> Nonconformists, even though trolls and graffiti artists keep attacking
> my posts, while mostly mainstream physicists dislike Pentcho's
> disagreement with Einstein.
Is he independent? I don't know. As I think I said I can understand
Adam, Eve and the Garden - don't agree, but I can understand.
>
> As for Roswell, not only was it a UFO farce, perpetrated arguably by
> Con Artists wanting to sell books and souvenirs and photographs, but
> at some point the "USSR Evil Empire is Dead" obsessors made use of the
> story to propagandize that Aliens had given the USA stealth and
> similar information which enabled destroying the USSR and China and
> their allies. Well, now we know that the USSR basically downsized to
> Russia, which has exactly the same policies as the USSR except that
> it's smarter in de-emphasizing hard propaganda and in using the Free
> market to destroy the West, while China never was in trouble from
> stealth or any other Western technology. In fact, Russia now has more
> allies than before if we count Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Outer
> Mongolia, Belarus, as well as nations that it keeps under Military and
> Economic threat like Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzebekistan,
> Kazakhstan, and partially Ukraine. The USSR's downsizing also
> succeeded in winning allies and friends for it in Africa, Latin
> America, India, Islamist nations, etc., without having to supply so
> much money to them since they were now supposedly "too small" (not so
> much in area but population).
There is quite a lot else. After WW2 the US Government said it was
hunting down Nazis. In fact
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ODESSA
http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/story41.html
They were helping ODESSA to run the pipeline into South America. Their
pet dictators were helping the Nazis all the time. Invade Iraq to
"establish democracy" - what a joke! Democracy seems to mean 2 million
people driven from their country + 2 million more internally
displaced.
Vast sums of money were spent in Area 51 and Roswell to develop
antigravity and other insane schemes.
>
> I disagree with Pencho about Einstein's "deliberate" frauds or
> criminality or intentionally deceiving anybody, and I think that parts
> of GR and SR (Special Relativity) are good local approximations in our
> part of the Universe, though not likely in very strong gravitational
> conditions, the early Universe (quantum-related, etc.), the
> microscopic level, or other Universes in the Multiverse, and also I'm
> interested in Superluminal motion which I think is a different phase
> rather than an impossibility, which (Superluminal motion) Joao
> Magueijo and many others are interested in.
>
The Einstein Fraud. Now as has been pointed out a troll operates under
false colors. Attacks on Relativity are calculated to cover up Roswell
and the giant con.
What is a good way of covering things up? It is to set up a straw
conspiracy. Like Apollo never landed on the Moon. Like the Twin Towers
suffered controlled demolition. Both conspiracies are designed to
cover things up. Roswell up to very recently has been guarded by
little green men. These conspiracies can easily be shown to be false,
but what are they trying to achieve? The answer is that they are a
cover for real conspiracies. Like :-
1) Even the "official" account of 9/11 speaks of monumental (almost
criminal) incompetance on the part of the intelligence servies.
2) There are echoes of the "sealed train" in the relationship between
OBL, the Taliban and the CIA. One point nobody makes is that they
speak Pashtun in Afghanistan, bur "Taliban" is an Arabic word which
means "students". From the very beginning the Arabs were in charge.
The CIA supported him.
3) No one has yet given a saisfactory explation of the Anthrax attacks
that followed 9/11.
On the Moon landings one might ask how it was that the Moon was
reached in 1969, but that the space progran has gone downhill since
then. Partly a question of money, but there have been monumental
blunders, the Shuttle being one of them.
Cover ups in fact demand a climate where there is a suspicion about
the validity of investigations of conspiracy. What better way to do
this than to throw up fake conspiracies.
- Ian Parker
john
>
> I disagree with Pencho about Einstein's "deliberate" frauds or
> criminality or intentionally deceiving anybody, and I think that parts
> of GR and SR (Special Relativity) are good local approximations in our
> part of the Universe, though not likely in very strong gravitational
> conditions, the early Universe (quantum-related, etc.), the
> microscopic level, or other Universes in the Multiverse, and also I'm
> interested in Superluminal motion which I think is a different phase
> rather than an impossibility, which (Superluminal motion) Joao
> Magueijo and many others are interested in.
>
> Osher Doctorow
Not so much a different phase as an ordering.
The atoms are ordered so they don't
project their magnetism in the direction of travel,
eliminating resistance in that direction.
John
Galaxy Model for the Atom
http://users.accesscomm.ca/john/
Ian Parker
All scientific theories are based on models and approximation. It may
well be that Relativity is part of a more general theory. Most
orthodox scientists believe in supersymmetry. This theory states that
each boson has a fermion pair.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-symmetric_operator
Now Fermions have a spin of integer+1/2 while bosons (like the
graviton) have integer spin. This is governed by a symmetry operator.
Now the equations of GR are symmetric, GR can only have bosons. If
however we extend the dimensions.
http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v11/i6/p1521_1
http://www.superstringtheory.com/experm/exper4a.html
We can now say that if we have 8 dimenions we can extend GR so that it
contains antisymmetric operators (ie. fermions).
This is NOT however what the opponants of Relativity have in mind when
they post. As far as not encompassing the whole Universe is concerned
GR successfully describes the large scale properties of the Universe.
Black holes are observed and they behave as one would expect from
putting GR into finite elements. There are now programs that do just
this. The explanation of the energies produced by quasars and the
small volume (< a light month) is to me a vindication of the theory.
Everything has been explained to Pencho et al but they still persist.
My only thought is that it is part of a wider disinformation program -
cover for Roswell?
My main beef is the consistent disinformation. Relativity, the flying
saucer cult, various red herring conspiracy theories to cover other
conspiracies not to mention the consistent personal abuse I have
experienced.
OK - Lie and say you are putting Nazis on trial when you are in
reality setting up a conduit to South America, but don't pay them to
produce nonsense and have some small regard for scientific truth. Also
have some regard for South America as well. It did not want the
dictators the US + their Nazi friends forced on them.
- Ian Parker
Pentcho Valev
> FromOsherDoctorow
"Deliberate frauds", "criminality" etc. belong to style and are
therefore inessential. In my view, the only essential thing in
Einstein's relativity is Einstein's 1905 light postulate:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
"...light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity
c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body."
If the light postulate is true, then miraculous effects (time
dilation, length contraction etc.) do exist and Einstein is at least
one of the discoverers of the fantastic world we live in. However if
the light postulate is false, that is, if the speed of light obeys
Newton's model presenting light as discontinuous bullet-like particles
and disobeys Maxwell's model presenting light as discontinuous field,
then Einstein's 1954 confession resolves all remaining problems:
http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/pdf/files/975547d7-2d00-433a-b7e3-4a09145525ca.pdf
Albert Einstein: "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot
be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures.
Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the
theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary
physics."
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
Ian Parker
> Albert Einstein: "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot
> be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures.
> Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the
> theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary
> physics."
>
scientific theories must be tested. Field theories have never
depateted from invariance under the Lorentz transformation. You know
this I know this.
I have been looking through the thread once more ref. stars on the
Moon. Now if you are in a well lit room at night (on Earth) you cannot
see stars even if the window is taken out ans you look directly into
the night sky. It is said, correctly, that as the Moon has no air the
sky is black and stars can be seen. However there are problems with
dynamic range. The astronauts (and their cameras) could not see stars
any more than I can see stars from a lit room. It is a question of
dynamic range. You cannot see stars at 25 fps either on Earth at night
or on the Moon. Point a normal video at the night sky and you just get
a blank, as indeed they got a blank on the Moon.
These are facts which you could say - I know, they know. The
relativistic paradoxes all have whiskers on them. You are perfectly at
liberty to construct a non relativistic field theory. You have though
to put it relative to something (Aldebaron?) though. If the theory
does not have Lorenz invariance it must be tied to something or other.
These are points of the "I know, you know" variety.
Je remarque que vous avez ajouté "sci.fr.physique". Je souviens que
vous avez fait une critique de la 2ime loi de thermodymamique en
francais. Peut etre je faux dire que j'ai un interet fort en
intelligence artificielle. Je crois que compression est la seul mesure
d'intelligence. C'est a dire Entropie maximale.
fleurs - printemps, source, ressorte - quel mot?
Tout mots sont "spring" en anglais. Donc un epeuve d'intelligence est
un mesure de compression! Je sais beaucoup sur le 2ieme loi!
- Ian Parker
Ian Parker
> Albert Einstein: "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot
> be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures.
> Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the
> theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary
> physics."
>
virtual particles. Quantum Electrodynamics is based on this principle
and the inverse square law is derived from the wavelength of virtual
photons. Nuclear (short range) forces involve the interchange of heavy
particles. Gravity has been looked upon in two ways. It is the
curvature of space. Attempts have been made to produce a quantum
theory of gravity which combines the two concepts.
All fields, all forces are invariant under the Lorentz Transformation.
By all means produce a field theory or a theory of force that is NOT
Lorentz invariant (or relativistic). You will have to tie it to some
absolute frame of reference, possibly Aldebaron.
Up to now the various conspiracy theories have been treated
separately. I feel this is a mistake. I think all this is linked
together. In the case of "the moon landing hoax" and "controlled
demolition of the twin towers" conspiracies like that the aim is.
1) To infiltrate and then discredit liberal groups. Groups that have
got some valid arguments tucked away.
2) To create an atmosphere of mud where investigation of their own
misdeeds is suppressed.
Relativity is a little bit different. You see if the theory of
Relativity is true it follows that Roswell, Area 51 and the myth of
little green men were all giant hoaxes. You can tie Roswell to a more
recent debacle by saying no Physics, no Arabic. The CIA is the Central
Idiocy Agency that never consults anyone who remotely knows what they
are doing. If Relativity is manifestly and unambiguously true this is
the only possible conclusion.
"I know this, you know this". All the "conspiracy" theories whether on
the Moon landings, the twin towers or Relativity all involve points
that are readily falsifiable. Let us take the stars on the Moon as an
example. OK the Moon has no air and you can see the stars at all
times. No, there is the question of dynamic range. To see stars during
a lunar "day" you need a telescope with good baffles. The photographic
equipment the astronauts took with them could not see stars, neither
could the astronauts themselves. Let me put this another way. You have
a starlit night here on Earth. Can you see stars from a brightly lit
room, even with an open door? Of course you can't. A baffled camera
might. - I know this, you know this.
Ludendorff had a sealed train for Lenin. Reagan had a similar
arrangement for OBL. The 9/11 CT draw us away from the fact that
Ludendorff and Reagan both helped obnoxious régimes into power for
essentially short term reasons. In both cases these obnoxious régimes
turned on their erstwhile supporters. This is the reason why the Twin
Towers "is a controlled demolition".
Je vois que vous avez adjoutFields are far as we understand then occur
with the interchange of virtual particles. Quantum Electrodynamics is
based on this principle and the inverse square law is derived from the
wavelength of virtual photons. Nuclear (short range) forces involve
the interchange of heavy particles. Gravity has been looked upon in
two ways. It is the curvature of space. Attempts have been made to
produce a quantum theory of gravity which combines the two concepts.
All fields, all forces are invariant under the Lorentz Transformation.
By all means produce a field theory or a theory of force that is NOT
Lorentz invariant (or relativistic). You will have to tie it to some
absolute frame of reference, possibly Aldebaron.
Up to now the various conspiracy theories have been treated
separately. I feel this is a mistake. I think all this is linked
together. In the case of "the moon landing hoax" and "controlled
demolition of the twin towers" conspiracies like that the aim is.
1) To infiltrate and then discredit liberal groups. Groups that have
got some valid arguments tucked away.
2) To create an atmosphere of mud where investigation of their own
misdeeds is suppressed.
Relativity is a little bit different. You see if the theory of
Relativity is true it follows that Roswell, Area 51 and the myth of
little green men were all giant hoaxes. You can tie Roswell to a more
recent debacle by saying no Physics, no Arabic. The CIA is the Central
Idiocy Agency that never consults anyone who remotely knows what they
are doing. If Relativity is manifestly and unambiguously true this is
the only possible conclusion.
"I know this, you know this". All the "conspiracy" theories whether on
the Moon landings, the twin towers or Relativity all involve points
that are readily falsifiable. Let us take the stars on the Moon as an
example. OK the Moon has no air and you can see the stars at all
times. No, there is the question of dynamic range. To see stars during
a lunar "day" you need a telescope with good baffles. The photographic
equipment the astronauts took with them could not see stars, neither
could the astronauts themselves. Let me put this another way. You have
a starlit night here on Earth. Can you see stars from a brightly lit
room, even with an open door? Of course you can't. A baffled camera
might. - I know this, you know this.
Ludendorff had a sealed train for Lenin. Reagan had a similar
arrangement for OBL. The 9/11 CT draw us away from the fact that
Ludendorff and Reagan both helped obnoxious régimes into power for
essentially short term reasons. In both cases these obnoxious régimes
turned on their erstwhile supporters. This is the reason why the Twin
Towers "is a controlled demolition".
Je vois que vous avez ajouté fr.sci.physique. Je souviens que vouus
avez ecrit un message critique du 2ieme loi de thermodynamique. Je
sens que je vous donne un avis. Je suis fort interesse en Intelligence
Artificielle. Je crois que compression, qui est en effect entropie
maximale est la seul mesure de l'intelligence. En epreuves IQ
raissonament verbale c'est possible de voir
fleurs - ressorte, printemps, source
Tous les mots sone "spring" en anglais. On peut voir donc traduction
comme compression. Je suis interesse en 2ieme loi.
- Ian Parker
Ian Parker
carries out research. It is the CIA that produces disinformation.
- Ian Parker
spudnik
-- he didn't know about partial pressures --
so no "final" value of c, unless it can be calculated
from other known constants & "an ideal region of perfectly empty
space;"
ours is close-enough for all work.
Newton's corpuscles were sum-totally alleviated
by Young's experiments: all essential properties are those
of waves, aside from the seeming ballisticness of the photoelectric
effect, or
when Moon hits your eye like that.
Roswell is strictly a psychological "denial" of the people
of the area about its two elements of cache from around WW2,
as well as a sort of tourist attraction (couldn't be that large,
though .-)
"faster than light" is an idea that is required
by no known physical principles, other than "hard SF,"
the same as multiverses et al ad vomitorium.
> If the light postulate is true, then miraculous effects (time
> dilation, length contraction etc.) do exist and Einstein is at least
> one of the discoverers of the fantastic world we live in. However if
> the light postulate is false, that is, if the speed of light obeys
> Newton's model presenting light as discontinuous bullet-like particles
> and disobeys Maxwell's model presenting light as discontinuous field,
> then Einstein's 1954 confession resolves all remaining problems:
>
> http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/pdf/files/975547d7-2d00-433a-b7e3-4a...
> Albert Einstein: "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot
> be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures.
> Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the
> theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary
> physics."
thus:
he didn't get that with my example of slaloms,
that he applied to skiing, either, but you have to realize that
the "straight line," even if it exists in a particular stretch,
is also a slalom/brachistochrone/tautochrone. so, I just realized,
the fact that it takes longer to fall from a higher heighth,
is partly a result of "terminal velocity" with air drag.
> It seems that the theory from which his "laws of inertia" are derived
> excludes the Sun's gravity as a "physical cause". If it works anywhere
> at all, that could only be in a very small box. ;)
thus:
well, obviously, the gallilean principle of relativity;
--Seargent Barracks Soros McCheeny Pepper,
"Give jihad a chance in The Sudan, Rhodesia, and
other former colonial moments -- Yahoo!TM;
you're going to feel my computerized draft,
boys'n'girls: NO AMERICAN MIDDLESCHOOLER LEFT BEHIND;
NO RHODESIA SCHOLARS IN HARM'S WAY!"
http://larouchepub.com/lar/2008/3526lar_soros_pamph.html
http://larouchepub.com/other/2008/3526save_nations_parasites.html
http://larouchepub.com/other/2008/3526zim_brit_op.html
BradGuth
Venus is not an actual star. Instead Venus is at least twice to
nearly three times as bright as Earth, especially when viewed from the
physically dark as coal surface of our Selene/moon, and rather easily
recorded by an unfiltered Kodak moment.
BradGuth
> "Borked Pseudo Mailed" <nob...@pseudo.borked.net> wrote in messagenews:acc76d5749b6b962...@pseudo.borked.net...
>
> > He would like to portray himself as against
> > the conspiracy, but he uses double think.
>
> No, that would be called a 'concern' troll.
>
> A concern troll is a false flag pseudonym created by a user
> whose point of view is opposed to the one that the user's
> sockpuppet claims to hold. The concern troll posts in web
> forums devoted to its declared point of view and attempts
> to sway the group's actions or opinions while claiming to
> share their goals, but with professed "concerns". The goal
> is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group.[10
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concern_troll#Concern_troll
Why is our Google/NOVA Usenet/newsgroups falling so far behind?
Oddly my readership accounting as reported by way of Google “My
Groups” is telling me that my stuff has been getting reviewed by an
average of 6000+ looks/week. As soon as I post anything that number
goes up, yet the public access to recent topic contributions is often
more than a day behind schedule, making it harder to carry on a good
tit for tat rant with any number of those DARPA spooks, moles or their
army of brown-nosed minions and clowns of their Zionist/Nazi realm
(aka New World Order).
Is this some kind of insider hocus-pocus ongoing damage-control?
Ian Parker
Moon by steradian. However it is typically only a tenth of a millirad
across. You would need a zoom lens. In fact you cannot resolve out the
phases with the naked eye. Neither can a Hasslebad camera. You would
need a reflex camera with a high powered lens.
Venus can in fact be seen in daylight on Earth.
I used to be quite keen on photography as a hobby so I have a fairly
good idea of what was achievable on the Moon. The astronauts BTW never
imagined that the landings would be called into question. Venus was
not a priority.
- Ian Parker
BradGuth
You are so funny. Venus is 2 to 3 times as bright as Earth, and
that's a good 6 to 8 times as bright as our moon that's physically as
dark as coal.
> However it is typically only a tenth of a millirad
> across. You would need a zoom lens. In fact you cannot resolve out the
> phases with the naked eye. Neither can a Hasslebad camera. You would
> need a reflex camera with a high powered lens.
That's very DARPA of yourself. Too bad you have not one such image to
back up that phony statement. However, it seems I have posted links
to multiple images that prove otherwise. (sorry about that)
>
> Venus can in fact be seen in daylight on Earth.
>
> I used to be quite keen on photography as a hobby so I have a fairly
> good idea of what was achievable on the Moon. The astronauts BTW never
> imagined that the landings would be called into question. Venus was
> not a priority.
>
> - Ian Parker
From orbit and from EVAs, Venus would have been next to impossible for
having continually excluded (you'd have to intentionally work pretty
hard at having to continually exclude Venus, not to mention a few
other than Earth or Venus items that should also have photo recorded
on that unfiltered film)
Ian Parker
was to photograph Moon rock in context. Moon rock was gathered with
scientists on Earth needing to know the context. On a late Apollo
mission Harrison Schmidt swung his hammer and his colleague
photographed him. It is of vital importance to have Moon rock in its
setting.
Harrison thought that his samples were fairly recent. A little
disappointingly perhaps all samples turned out to be over 4 billion
years old. The Moon became geologically dead at an early stage.
I would have thought that hoaxers would have put in something a little
more interesting.
- Ian Parker
Willie...@gmail.com
No - not in the least.
Dark coals - like charcoal - is around 4% - about the same as fresh
asphalt. The moon's Lambert albedo is around 7.2% - but because
nearly all objects on the lunar surface have the first few millimeters
filled with pores - light enters and exits again, allowing much of the
light coming from the sun, to be scattered at low angles. So, if you
look at the lunar surface not straight on, but at an angle relative to
the incident light - you get over 11% of the light back when the
appropriate tests are done. .
Photographing objects on the lunar surface would be as difficult as
photographic objects in a conifer forest on Earth - they have the same
average albedos.
The moon is 3x birghter than asphalt - about as dark as weathered
asphalt after its been in the sun a few years.
http://www.historic101.com/Cuesta/Cuesta_South/Location_B.htm
Which makes it about as bright as a meadow or sandy beach.
http://jeff.medkeff.com/astro/lunar/obs_tech/albedo.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Albedo-e_hg.svg
Ice, snow, clouds - have very high reflectivities.
Water, wet soil, forests, - have very low reflectivities.
Sample albedos
Surface Typical Albedo
Fresh asphalt/charcoal 0.04
Conifer forest (Summer) 0.08
Worn asphalt 0.12
Bare soil 0.17
Green grass 0.25
Desert sand 0.40
New concrete 0.55
Fresh snow 0.80–0.90
Of course just as on Earth, different parts of a planet have different
albedos,
On the moon we have;
Darkest areas: 8.6% - 2x brighter than charcoal
Tranquillitatis south of Plinius: 9.1%
Plato's floor: 9.6%
Serenitatis east of Linne: 10%
Imbrium south of Plato: 10.4%
Nectaris: 11.4% - near the average for the moon
Ptolemaeus floor: 13.1% - 3x brighter than charcoal
Arzachel: 17% -4x brighter than charcoal
Tycho ejecta: 20% -5x brighter than charcoal
Aristarchus: 20%
Aristarchus interior: 22%
Bright spot in Deslandres: 24% - brighter than green grass
Proclus E wall: 28%
Stevinus A, Abulfeda E: 30% - 6x brighter than charcoal
So, while older textbooks using inappropriate measuring procedures can
be found that quote 7% to 8% - these numbers are artificially low when
one does a more modern measurement that takes into account phase angle
- and arives at a proper value of 11%
The albedo of planets, satellites and asteroids can be used to infer
much about their properties.
The study of albedos, their dependence on
wavelength,
lighting angle ("phase angle"), and
variation in time
comprises a major part of the astronomical field of photometry.
For small and far objects that cannot be resolved by telescopes, much
of what we know comes from the study of their albedos. For example,
the absolute albedo can indicate the surface ice content of outer
solar system objects, the variation of albedo with phase angle gives
information about regolith properties, while unusually high radar
albedo is indicative of high metallic content in asteroids.
The overall albedo of the Moon is around 11%, but it is strongly
directional and non-Lambertian, displaying also a strong opposition
effect. They are typical of the regolith surfaces of airless solar
system bodies - and to observers on the surface, the brightness of
that surface is rather high.
For anyone who believes the moon is as dark as charcoal, please go out
on a dark night of any full moon, and look at the moon in the sky. It
will appear white against the dark skies.
For anyone who believes the moon is too dark to wash out stars -
compare the number of stars you can see on a clear moonless night to
the number of stars you can see on a night when there's a full moon.
These are rather simple observations to make - its surprising that
anyone who had troubled themselves to actually look at the sky would
believe the bullshit Guthball has been repeating and repeating for
years and years.
BradGuth
Have you ever done the moon crater math, of displaced moon rock?
How many mega tonnes of terrestrial located moon rock would you like?
BTW, their excluding Venus was a very nifty trick, and by no means the
one and only Kodak moment trick of that extremely hocus-pocus, need-to-
know and nondisclosure era that was fully enforced by lethal means
(aka via MIB goons), whereas hardly anything about our mutually
perpetrated cold-was was ever truthfully shared with the general
public that was made to pay for everything on both sides of this
Zionist/Nazi game that you see absolutely nothing the least bit
suspicious about.
Have you found any of those 700+ large boxes of our original Apollo
mission data?
BradGuth
> Moon is as physically dark as coal?
>
> No - not in the least.
>
> Dark coals - like charcoal - is around 4% - about the same as fresh
> asphalt. The moon's Lambert albedo is around 7.2% - but because
> nearly all objects on the lunar surface have the first few millimeters
> filled with pores - light enters and exits again, allowing much of the
> light coming from the sun, to be scattered at low angles. So, if you
> look at the lunar surface not straight on, but at an angle relative to
> the incident light - you get over 11% of the light back when the
> appropriate tests are done. .
>
> Photographing objects on the lunar surface would be as difficult as
> photographic objects in a conifer forest on Earth - they have the same
> average albedos.
>
> The moon is 3x birghter than asphalt - about as dark as weathered
> asphalt after its been in the sun a few years.
>
> http://www.historic101.com/Cuesta/Cuesta_South/Location_B.htm
>
> Which makes it about as bright as a meadow or sandy beach.
>
I gave you all five gold stars because you're an absolute idiot/moron
of the first order.
Thomas
Uzytkownik <Willie...@gmail.com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:f22525f7-91a2-426f...@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Willie...@gmail.com
> On Jul 20, 10:49 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Moon is as physically dark as coal?
>
> > No - not in the least.
>
> > Dark coals - like charcoal - is around 4% - about the same as fresh
> > asphalt. The moon's Lambert albedo is around 7.2% - but because
> > nearly all objects on the lunar surface have the first few millimeters
> > filled with pores - light enters and exits again, allowing much of the
> > light coming from the sun, to be scattered at low angles. So, if you
> > look at the lunar surface not straight on, but at an angle relative to
> > the incident light - you get over 11% of the light back when the
> > appropriate tests are done. .
>
> > Photographing objects on the lunar surface would be as difficult as
> > photographic objects in a conifer forest on Earth - they have the same
> > average albedos.
>
> > The moon is 3x birghter than asphalt - about as dark as weathered
> > asphalt after its been in the sun a few years.
>
> >http://www.historic101.com/Cuesta/Cuesta_South/Location_B.htm
>
> > Which makes it about as bright as a meadow or sandy beach.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
I think this response marks you out as the very thing you are calling
me Brad. I mean what about the difference between 4% and 11% can't
you understand? At the sea of tranquility, its more like 16% - 4x
brighter than coal - and brighter even than a meadow or worn asphalt.
Go out an actually LOOK at the moon on a dark night. It appears white
in the black sky. Look at the number of stars you can see near it.
Now imagine the number of stars you'd be able to see if you were
located on that brilliant surface! Sunlight, nearly twice as intense
as on the surface of cloudy Earth is reflected with the same
efficiency as a brightly lit meadow - with 2x the amount of sunlight
at the surface! While if you take care to let your eyes be dark
adapted by shielding them from this surface, you might see a star or
two - it is absolute rot to believe that cameras adjusted not to
overexpose themselves on the lunar surface would be able to pick up
anything other than nearby Earth reliably.
Do the numbers dude.
At sea level about 850 watts per square meter of direct sunlight
illuminates the surface around you. About 120 watts to 140 watts per
square meter is reflected from a meadow or worn asphalt on a clear
sunny day near sea level. Water reflects far less,about 85 watts per
square meter - except at shallow angles - even so, you can get a
sunburn from water relfection if you're not careful..
On the moon 1,366 watts per square meter of direct sunlight
illuminates the surface. No air. No clouds. Between 200 and 300
watts per square meter is reflected from the lunar surface - depending
on what you're looking and the direction you are seeing it relative to
the angle of sunlight. This is twice a bright as a meadow - or an
old parking lot - on a summer's day. Even without the blue sky
above, would a camera adjusted to take properly exposed pictures in
this environment be capable of registering stars? Obviously not!
Sorry Spongebob - you just aren't thinking clearly on this subject - I
hope this helps.
Willie...@gmail.com
imagination, reflected in the horrifically stupid questions they
ask.
Here's one
Is relativity right?
Of course relativity is right. Hell, relativity showed Newton was
wrong, yet Newton is still right. That should give you a clue.
That's science - one idea subsumes the other - it doesn't compete -
only offers a more complete explanation of what was always right.
Newton is a low speed approximation to Einstein - that doesn't make
Newton wrong - how could it be wrong? The experiments prove its
right. Same with relativity! Same with any idea that subsumes
Relativity - if it exists.
But people with limited imagination must see it as either or - and
miss the point.
Is the government lying to us about UFOs? Of course - there is
testimony that UFO mythology has been used to hide testing of advanced
aircraft like the SR71 back in the 50s. Does that mean they're lying
to us about everything? No. Does that mean UFOs are alien spacecraft
visiting the Earth in secret with terrestrial governments? No.
How can I be certain? Because all this drama around alien contact
assumes aliens that think pretty much like we do. Which is almost
certainly not the case. We have rare individuals like Eckhart Tolle
who sees the world very differently than most people - he doesn't see
time - so he claims - and that changes everything for him. He wrote a
book about it Power of Now. He's human! Do you think aliens would
give one shit about how we're organized? hell no. They likely
wouldn't even understand it. One of the problems John Campbell always
complained about among his writers was that no one could come up with
a credible alien that wasn't a human mind masquerading in a funny
body. Its hard to even think about how alien true aliens might be.
The famous therapist Carl Jung pointed out that the idea of aliens and
the idea of UFOs were very real, as real as the idea of Santa Claus.
He we reported in the press as being a believer - haha - not reported
was the fact that he was talking about how widespread the ideas were
adopted by everyone - it resonated with a deep seated need in our
minds - so, it was real in that context - but he wrote several books
about UFOs - and they all connected back to human experience and human
need - they were like Campbell's fictional aliens- all about human
fears and needs and desires. Not truly alien.
How alien could aliens be? Taking a cue from Tolle, what if they
saw time as an artifact of human thinking? What would that be like?
Einstein Podolsky Rosen experiment and a host of delayed choice
experiments show that there is likely something 'spooky' going on at
the deepest levels of reality. Einstein showed that time is more
flexible than Newton gave it credit. These delayed choice experiments
show that time in certain contexts need not exist at all. In such
contexts miracles might be possible.
Hunh?
Well consider a necker cube illusion
http://www.richardgregory.org/papers/recovery_blind/rec_blind_fig_04a_necker_cube_illusion_sm.gif
Which face appears to be in front can change depending on how you
interpret the ambiguity of how the lines cross. See the lines cross
one way, then one face is in front. See the lines cross differently,
and the other face is in front.
This is a case of you change your mind, and what you see changes.
This is not a visual illusion - its a mental one.
What if much of what we take for granted in the world - is a mental
illusion?
That means that aliens who have a totally different mentality - would
operate differently in the world - than us. So differently in fact,
that much of what we take for granted - things like time - don't exist
for them. If time doesn't exist for them - then space doesn't either.
Is this craziness? Not really. Anyone who has taken a course in
quantum physics realizes that the configuration space in which the
calcualtions take place do not naturally evolve in time - an evolution
operator has to be put in by hand - to 'make sense' to the
'conventional mind' - what about an alien mind? One that never 'got'
the idea of time (or space) to begin with?
Could such an alien perceive things in such a way that by merely
changing its thoughts about a thing could transport itself here? I
don't know - it would mean the universe is put together strangely -
but EPR and delayed choice experiements seemto be able to affect
particles at arbitrary distances - instantly - by observing the state
of another particle - the only way it makes sense to human way of
thinking is that something like a Necker Cube illusion is going on -
in creating the universe humans see.
If someone came up with something really weird like that - with solid
laboratory experiements and such - that would be evidence of alien
knowledge - but the President working out back roomdeals with aliens
who like strawberry ice cream? hahahaha.. This whole concept
suffers from an extraordinary lack of imagination. Its a legend that
speaks to us in our minds - the way the Santa legend speaks to
children. Its so obviously a product of our imaginations that is is
clearly useless to learn about the larger universe beyond our Earth.
An alien arriving on Earth would see scant difference between the
President or a migrant farm laborer - to them the similarities would
outweigh any difference - and anything we learned about them - would
be unimaginable before we learned it, and perhaps indescribable after.
.
Willie...@gmail.com
Here's an experiment I did for several years at the OSU radio-
observatory. We scanned the sky for narrow beam anamolies. Radio
beacons that were too narrow band to be natural, and doppler shifted
relative to Earth's surface just so - as to be certain they were off-
world - either at the Earth bary-center, the solar system bary-center,
the Milky-way barycenter, or the universal bary-center. We could
solve all these simultaneously with a FFT analyzer - and report the
result real time.
Turns out over about a decade of looking, we found 40,000 NBAs - we
call them narrow band anamolies and not alien signals for one reason
and one reason only - whenever we tried to record them - they would
extinguish.
They extinguished in really weird and spooky ways.
We could delay turning on the recorder until we had the signal solidly
in two feed horns - it would extinguish as soon as we turned the
recorder on.
With the ability to move feedhorns laterally inthe telescope we could
track for several minutes and vary the delay time -
the spooky part was that the signal seemed to know when WE turned our
recorder on.
OF course,quantum cryptography is advertised to do the same thing.
You correlate photons in a fiber, and if someone is listening in, its
immediately detected - and you turn your transmitter off.
Could this be arranged to signal information across the universe
instantly.
There exists a proof that you can't. Well, it shows one way you
cannot do this. or a class of ways. Do other classes of ways
exist? Dunno - experts say not.
But what if there are other ways to create a microwave delayed choice
experiment to signal back and forth instantly along a null - surface
connecting two radio telescopes? Someone operating the entangled
photons conventionally will be signalled out immediately as a dummy -
and well, likely not worth talking to. Someone who has figured out
how to use qubits or some other delayed choice paradigmto signal
instantly along the null surface, would be worth maintaining contact
with - or at least have made the first cut.
Then, using some sort of super duper technology - the aliens arrive
instantly after communications are established - and we arrive
instantly back - that's the second cut... I would imagine.
How does that work?
Well if you entangle photons in a weird way to produce instantaneous
signalling, you should be able to entangle particles to produce
instantaneous travel.
But that would require that the particles involved were entangled at
some point in the distant past..
Well, consider that the big bang is a pretty big entangling event -
and that an advanced technical species - perhaps not too advanced
compared to us - within our ken to get it right - has mapped out
common entangling interactions that all particles share - and that by
cleverly manipulating particles here - we can reproduce patterns -
accurate to the quantum level - there- and then send the experiential
data back - like virtual reality - to be 'remembered' or 'expereinced'
by the travellers instantly - or whole populations of 'observers'.
All this is highly speculative, and meant only to suggest the
weirdness possible with alien intelligence - even intelligence
slightly different and slightly in advance of us.
spudnik
although
his statement could refer to raw coal rocks; I'm sure, though, that
there is a tremendous variation in the darkness of seams
of coal!
> For anyone who believes the moon is too dark to wash out stars -
> compare the number of stars you can see on a clear moonless night to
> the number of stars you can see on a night when there's a full moon.
thus:
conjuring scifi is silly; it has always been a haven
of supersillyousness or outright spookery, as per "flatland"
by the ridiculous A.A.Skwared, 4D BS from the British Pyschol.Society
etc., and
the latterday mongering of timespace -- the arbitrary spacialization
of time by means of a diagram, which is supposed to be an *aid*
to comprehension of phasespace, not a "reified" ideal of itself,
per Minkowski's youthful exhuberance. (y'know,
Minkowski's stuff is really mathematically worthwhile,
otherwise ... "no, please, don't, stop -- mathematics ?!?!")
*a priori* assumptions of megalithic structures on Venus,
like Hoagland's Balls on Mars foolishness,
really requires an actual program o'space to investigate, since
nature is capable of quite awesome geometries (or
'hype-D physiques'); however, that was shotdown with Kennedy & Nixon:
just as with our nuclear energy, we are still using '50s technology
from the planet Marduk (per ScientologyTM .-)
> > You can consider them "multidimensional" beings who exist through time
> the clearly intelligent infrastructure that can be seen as rational
> and existing/coexisting on Venus?
thus:
that which causes the matter of "time slowing"
in acceleration, is really the same as matter being energy,
somehow, via their proportionality with c,
the speed of light; that's incredibly obvious, although
I know of no school of quantum, that says,
how many quants of light make a proton e.g. (and,
since the "photons" come in all sizes, it's moot .-)
in any case, this is one of the properties of light
that was experimentally verified in the 19th cce, although
it is carachteristically never even mentioned,
in favor of one of the EinsteinHubbleGodot paradoxi/
doctrines of the Department of Einsteinmania/
the Musical Department!
thus:
superstringtheory at least gets rid of that point,
from the get-go & without further a-do, even if
it's not just a string, a "one-dimensional object" ...
howsoever it is that matter bends space,
as measured by Gauss for the government of France
in the 19th cce, and experimentally adduced
by the classical Greek geometers, light travels
through this bent medium, which apparently also
alters the shape of it -- no timespace utterances needed,
it's so very, blatantly bended-up!
Roswell is a big double-entendre from WW2, but you could see that
those who embrace it could go no further. that is really the gist
of the "Lt.Col. Corso School" of Roswellology, that
virtually *all* of 20th cce science & technology
[http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/]
came out of Corso's very own dyspersal of the pile of crap
that fell out of the sky, there, to "some big corporations;"
mayhap, he also wrote the first press-release -- too bad,
he had to wait til he was at death's door, to reap the deal
for the book.
that is to say,
humans are incapable of generating ideas ... or,
it just applies to Americans!
> > > Einstein was not a hoax, you are. There IS a Roswell hoax, there was
spudnik
of Schroedinger's undead cat (Erwin's little gedanken joke) viz-a-vu
the EPR paradox,
which is just an interpretation (that is,
the Copenhagen Schoolers' mystical write-up of this experiment;
the cat has been dead for a hundred years, so that
you probably wouldn't be able to find the putrid remains
of *that* particular ****, including the extremely damp litter).
what possible phenomenon requires speeds over light,
other than scifi authorships?
> How does that work?
>
> Well if you entangle photons in a weird way to produce instantaneous
> signalling, you should be able to entangle particles to produce
> instantaneous travel.
thus:
excellent quantifications; "BG" will never reply to it, I guess,
although
his statement could refer to raw coal rocks; I'm sure, though, that
there is a tremendous variation in the darkness of seams
of coal!
> For anyone who believes the moon is too dark to wash out stars -
> compare the number of stars you can see on a clear moonless night to
> the number of stars you can see on a night when there's a full moon.
thus:
per Minkowski's youthful exhuberance. (y'know,
Minkowski's stuff is really mathematically worthwhile,
otherwise ... "no, please, don't, stop -- mathematics ?!?!")
*a priori* assumptions of megalithic structures on Venus,
like Hoagland's Balls on Mars foolishness,
really requires an actual program o'space to investigate, since
nature is capable of quite awesome geometries (or
'hype-D physiques'); however, that was shotdown with Kennedy & Nixon:
just as with our nuclear energy, we are still using '50s technology
from the planet Marduk (per ScientologyTM .-)
thus:
superstringtheory at least gets rid of that point,
from the get-go & without further a-do, even if
it's not just a string, a "one-dimensional object" ...
howsoever it is that matter bends space,
as measured by Gauss for the government of France
in the 19th cce, and experimentally adduced
by the classical Greek geometers, light travels
through this bent medium, which apparently also
alters the shape of it -- no timespace utterances needed,
it's so very, blatantly bended-up!
Roswell is a big double-entendre from WW2, but you could see that
those who embrace it could go no further. that is really the gist
of the "Lt.Col. Corso School" of Roswellology, that
virtually *all* of 20th cce science & technology
[http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/]
came out of Corso's very own dyspersal of the pile of crap
that fell out of the sky, there, to "some big corporations;"
mayhap, he also wrote the first press-release -- too bad,
he had to wait til he was at death's door, to reap the deal
for the book.
that is to say,
humans are incapable of generating ideas ... or,
it just applies to Americans!
--Seargent Barracks Soros McCheeny Pepper,
Willie...@gmail.com
> garbage,
not really.
> unless you consider the Alain Aspect version
> of Schroedinger's undead cat (Erwin's little gedanken joke) viz-a-vu
> the EPR paradox,
> which is just an interpretation (that is,
> the Copenhagen Schoolers' mystical write-up of this experiment;
> the cat has been dead for a hundred years, so that
> you probably wouldn't be able to find the putrid remains
> of *that* particular ****, including the extremely damp litter).
clueless rot. There are there interpretations of quantum theory;
1) Standard model (Copenhagen) - which says that the
universe 'collapses' upon observation to a particular
observed state and that prior to observations all
possible states exist simultaneously - the Schroedingers
Cat - it really isn't a paradox, its merely an effort to
provide a concrete example of how the math works.
2) Hugh Everett's Many World's Interpretation - which says
that collapse never occurs - and that an observation
takes us down a particular path, but the other paths
exist right along side - this gives a direction to time
the universe branches like a big tree - with the big
bang being the trunk and all the branches being
every possible configuration evolved from that bang.
We inhabit one of those limbs,and as we look forward
there are lots and lots of sub-branches. This some say
is the reason we can remember the past, but not the
future.
3) Cramer's Transactional Interpretation - which says that
the imaginary terms in the wave equation are properly
included as reverse time solutions - or faster than light
solutions and that a future event transacts with a past
event to determine the outcome in the future - i.e. the
two waves interact to amplify the observed outcome
and erase the unobserved ones.
Cramer's model, which is relatively new (1920s, 1950s, 1980s) is
favored.
It still allows for spooky stuff going on.
.
> what possible phenomenon requires speeds over light,
> other than scifi authorships?
Who said anything about a ftl requirement? You've missed my point
entirely. I'm saying that space and time may be an artifact
generated
in our head by the ways we think about the universe. Obviously if
this
is the case, spooky things can happen that is beyond our understanding
as long as our understanding remains fixed in this spacetime paradigm.
> > How does that work?
>
> > Well if you entangle photons in a weird way to produce instantaneous
> > signalling, you should be able to entangle particles to produce
> > instantaneous travel.
>
> thus:
> excellent quantifications; "BG" will never reply to it, I guess,
> although
> his statement could refer to raw coal rocks; I'm sure, though, that
> there is a tremendous variation in the darkness of seams
> of coal!
Clearly this statement has nothing whatever to do with anything I've
said.
And you've perversely edited what I wrote previously to change the
context to support your insanity - so, I our useful interaction is at
an end.
[snip]
Ian Parker
would still be able to understand us and the way we are organized. I
don't really thibnk there is any difficulty there. As I think I have
said my difficulty is that if we assume that aliens have come though
the same evolutionary path that we have, meaning that they are us N
years down the line, out technology is not moving in the direction of
Area 51 type spacecraft.
Take a simple thing - alien abduction. If aliens really wanted our DNA
they could get it very simply by collecting up the objects we have
handled. No one seems to discuss this basic logical point.
The government is indeed not lying about everything, Apollo did land
on the Moon. However the difficulty they fact in public relations is
that people simply don't know what to believe. If was not simply
aircraft like the B2 and the SR71 that were secret. These aircraft did
after all make it to USAF duty.
There were also a lot of aircraft which did not make it. At the end of
WW2 the nazi scientists had developed lifing aircraft that were
claimed to operate on antigravity. The fact of the matter is that they
worked on vortex lift principles (you know v^2/r suction) and NOT very
well. If decent physicists had been consulted at the time this would
have become apparent quickly. A lot of money was squandered.
In a sense it would be easier to declassify "alien autopies" than what
in truth happened. From an aerodynamiv view point there is one thing
that stands out. A 3GHz 3GB RAM computer is being advertised for less
than $1000. This is quite capable of carrying out hydrocode
calculations. You can simply put a vortex in and it will tell you how
stable it is in various wind consitions and exactly how much lift is
generated. If this were to be done all the research ever done could be
duplicated in a month flat. No need for declassification.
- Ian Parker
Foe sci.math could I point out that the solutions of Navier Stokes are
millenial problems. Somehow I can't see area 51 claiming $million.
teslafan
> On 5 Jul, 21:15, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I love this kind of feedback, mostly because it's entertaining as all
> > get out.
>
> > BTW, other than an extremely vibrant and bluish Sirius
>
> I thought it was Aldebaron
>
>
>
>
>
> >that should
> > have been nicely enough recorded, all I've really cared about is why
> > and/or how Venus was made so WMD stealth or invisible to those
> > unfiltered Kodak moments, from orbit as well as from those NASA/Apollo
> > supposed EVAs upon our physically dark as coal Selene/moon (looking
> > especially darker when using those polarized optics).
>
> > - Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
>
> > Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
> > > He would like to portray himself as against
> > > the conspiracy, but he uses double think.
> > > to divert us all from the real truth.
> > > Guth what did you do with the stars on
> > > the original Apollo 11 film? You were
> > > the secret agent that first analyzed
> > > the film and modified it. You were the
> > > one that added the fake cities to the
> > > lunar pictures. Tell the truth
> > > or we will tell if for you.
>
> I don't know. I think Brad Guth has hot to be linked with people like
> Pencho Valev that are disputing Relativity. I think that there are
> secret agents in the user groups and the prime motivation is Roswell
>
> http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/reichblacksun/content...
>
> Now Brad has accused both myself and William Mook of being Nazi and
> Zionist. I cannot for the life of me see how you can be those two
> of the weird and wonderful pseudo science perpetrated by the Nazis.
> The only problem is that this pseudoscience has found its way into the
> US Military and the CIA. This is a telling extract from Roswell
>
> The following elements were analyzed and found to exist in the small
> neutronic power plant that was found inside ULAT-1:
>
> a. UF6 in metallic form;
>
> b. Hydrogen-fluoride gas;
>
> c. Water and uranium tetrafluoride;
>
> d. Powdered magnesium and potassium chlorate;
>
> e. Metal similar to lead with a chocolate brown color;
>
> f. U-235 in metallic form;
>
> g. Plastic like material similar to NE 102;
>
> h. Beryllium,
>
> i. Pure aluminium;
>
> h. Thorium isotope material;
>
> j. plutonium powder.24
>
> Scientists from Los Alamos and Sandia Base were alarmed that the power
> plant could possibly function as a bomb if the elements described
> above were processed in similar fashion as was done for the lens and
> shotgun detonators.25
>
> The only evidence of circuitry found on the motor was thin plastic-
> like sheets fashioned like platters embossed on the exterior of the
> spherically-shaped casing coated by a thin film of pure silver. Under
> high power magnification it was observed a series (sic) of fine grid-
> like lines intersecting groups of dots arranged in circular patterns.
> 24 Note that the ordering here is that of the original document. As
> the Drs. Wood suggest, this flaw argues strongly for the document's
> authenticity. I concur.
> 25 The lens detonator refers to the implosion device used in plutonium
> based atom bombs to compress the critical mass. The device was
> described in part one. The shotgun detonator refers to the critical
> mass assembly mechanism in uranium-235 based atom bombs.
> It is abundantly clear to me.
>
> 1) That a lot of the documents were obvious forgeries. A true ET UFO
> would NEVER have been powered in this way.
>
> 2) That no one in the small select group of people in the secret world
> knew anything about Relativity or understood anything about mainstream
> Physics.
>
> Fact - Bombarding Thorium 232 with neutrons produces U233 which is
> fissile. What the **** do you need 2 fissile isotopes for. Clear
> forgery - beginning to end. Forgers didn't seem to understand nuclear
> Physics. It was not even a "good" forgery.
>
> It is paralleled by Iraq where the CPA were chosen for their
> evangelical credentials. Not one of them spoke Arabic. It seems that
> to get on, knowing Physics or speaking Arabic will disqualify you.
> Both Roswell and Iraq are monumental messes. Doing things in secret
> means that ignorami (my plural alone will disqualify me from
> Iraq).Arabic and Latin are both inflected languages where word order
> is flexible.
>
> What is the intention of Brad Guth and BTW Pencho Valev? Not to
> disprove Relativity or to prove that William Mook/myself are Nazis.
> No it is to cast just a slither of doubt. Like Relativity Evolution is
> a well found scientific theory. The Discovery Institute however has
> not disproved Evolution, but their meddling has cast just the slither
> of doubt that has enabled Creationalism to be taught as a scientific
> theory alongside Evolution. The US constitution prohibits the teaching
> of "religion".
>
> What does this slither of doubt mean? It means that the public and the
> courts will be hampered in prosecuting the perpetrators of the Roswell
> fraud. The astonishing fact is they got their money.
>
> Relativity is NOT in doubt.
> 1) In ordinary engineering a Newtonian world may safely be assumed.
> Relativity introduces an error, but other errors are more important.
> There are cases though where GR is important GPS/Galileo. You cannot
> get your position to within centimetres ignoring GR.
> 2) Experimental/observational tests of Relativity special and
> general.
> 1) Particle decay follows strict relativistic (special) processes.
> Time dilation describes the decay of a particle like a muon. Muons are
> formed some 20km up and can penetrate to the surface because of their
> speed. The mass of a particle (going at a whisker below c) is M(rest)/
> –(1-v^2/c^2) The first terms of a Taylor expansion give Newton's
> laws.
> 2) GPS - It uses GR corrections and works.
> 3) Precession of the orbit of Mercury. In the space age this has been
> determined to greater and greater accuracy. GR gives us 43" per
> century. Now other factors give us the same or greater. However
> Leverrier worked these all out. Modern knowledge makes an unknown
> variation of that amount impossible.
> 4) The speeding up (loss of energy) of pulsar pairs. These
> gravitational waves have not been observed directly, but I think they
> will be.
> 5) There are now GR finite element programs. These predict jets from
> super massive black holes in just the way observed.
> 6) Light is bent round heavy objects. This bending is twice what you
> would expect from a naive corpuscular theory. Eddington after the
> eclipse proclaimed Einstein as the greatest scientist of the age.
> With all this evidence why is it that Relativity is doubted? After all
> scientific method, as I was always taught is experimental. Relativity
> has never been falsified and has been confirmed on umpteen occasions.
> There are controversial theories, String Theory and even Super
> symmetry, they don't seem to attract the same urge to falsify than
> Relativity has. There is much less solid empirical evidence too.
>
> Do the objections of Pencho Valev amount to anything? No way. If we
> remember that Chemistry and the properties of structural materials is
> governed by the electromagnetic force and quantum electrodynamics.
> Quantum electrodynamics is relativistic - unmistakably. Whatever you
> do with rotating discs, rods going over holes the materials are
> governed by the laws (relativistic) of quantum electrodynamics. We can
> in fact construct a theory of QE which is purely mathematical - the
> Lorentz transformation being an AXIOM. Paradoxes now become
> MATHEMATICAL contradictions. If QE has group symmetry then anything
> derived from it MUST have Group Symmetry as well. This can be stated
> as a THEOREM.
> The science is totally unambiguous. It is in fact rare to be able to
> say this, but it is the case with Relativity. In fact Relativity in
> many ways has the status of Evolution in terms of its credentials.
> Clearly we must look for other reasons. There are various so called
> "objections" to relativity. These are based on a variety of political
> motivations.
>
> The Nazis objected to the fact that Einstein was Jewish. This led them
> to reject Relativity and create a pseudoscience based on Nazi myth.
> The slurs directed at both myself and William Mook are as absurd as
> Pencho's so called paradoxes. However although the "slither of doubt"
> cuts no ice with academic scientists it does sow the seed of doubt
> into judicial investigation. I mean Roswell here.
>
> To me the Nazi slur is designed to divert attention away from the fact
> that CIA swallowed the "Black Sun" nonsense whole, and obtained large
> sums of money for perpetrating what was, in effect, a fraud.
>
> The "Black Sun" the Nazis and the CIA
> In 1917 Ludendorff engineered the downfall of Kerensky. Hardly gave
> him good anti communist credentials! He organised Lenin's journey from
> Zuerich to St. Petersburg (then Petrograd) he then proceeded to
> finance the Bolshevic movement. In 1918 Ludendorff was bleating to the
> allies about Bolshevic influence in Germany and pleading for an
> Armistice. Who caused it in the first place?
> Ludendorff was a great friend of Hitler's during the early rise of
> Nazism. The engineering of Kerensky's downfall had somehow to be
> explained away. The fact that the Kaiser and his generals (Ludendorff
> included) had lost the war and had in the process helped to create
> World Communism needed explanation.
> The Jews! We were stabbed in the back, the Jews created Bolshevism
> (what about Ludendorff?). We are surrounded by Jewish plots.
> Relativity was not investigated scientifically but assigned to the
> status of "Jewish plot". Einstein, despite his endorsement by
> Eddington was forced out of the country.
> Thus the objections to Relativity are part of a propaganda offensive.
> What surprises me is how effective the propaganda was. As a physicist
> I tend to think of sociology in terms of a series of interactions.
> Opinions form as a collective phenomenon rather like the Ising model
> of ferromagnetism.
> Danger is when you believe your own propaganda. The Nazis set up their
> own organization - The Black Sun. Energy came from ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -Hi Re all this The Nazis did have Flying wing experiment aircraft so did the US! They, the Nazis were trying everything but logic to win the war. Understand there was even a Staic(?) eletric power collector too? Riswell? well 1. SOMETHING didhappen. Was it a weather or radar balloon target?(History hannel even said that piecs of t still exists n whatever US National archive!) 2. n experimental aircraft maybe brought he from Japan or German? And it crashed with pilot(s)?3. Exterestrial(forgive my creative speeling/typos!)Something did happen at Roswell,N.M. (If rember Goddar also tested his rockets at near Roswell N.M. in 1930s too!)So what hapopened its eiher lot, or hdden or both. Faith, belief and agenda all play a role!
spudnik
known as "he wouldn't do this to his cat, either;" not a paradox per
se, or
try to tell it to the cat. perhaps, the joke was really
about gedanken "experiments," such as Everett's model,
which is really the same as Solopsism:
David Deutsch write this in a book of his, many years ago,
after I'd already come to this realization; recently,
I read in a magazine that he denies this ideal!
"reverse time solutions" are just more timespace effluvia;
poor Minkowski might have dysowned this crappy statement
about simple phase-spaces, if he'd lived past 31.
FTL is only required by SFStories, but you get it
in your "reverse time" model.... anyway,
there is a useful book, _The Ten Giants_ or some thing,
just out, centrally about the argument
between Schoredinger and Pauli, largely resolved
by Dirac. I mean,
there shouldn't even be any argument, at all, about the "duality"
between waves & particles, since they are formalisms:
you generally only work with one, at a time!
> possible states exist simultaneously - the Schroedingers
> Cat - it really isn't a paradox, its merely an effort to
> provide a concrete example of how the math works.
>
> 2) Hugh Everett's Many World's Interpretation - which says
> 3) Cramer's Transactional Interpretation - which says that
> the imaginary terms in the wave equation are properly
> included as reverse time solutions - or faster than light
> Who said anything about a ftl requirement? You've missed my point
> context to support your insanity - so, I our useful interaction is at
--Welome to the Cheenysphere --
your 24/7/51 channel for everyhting that can be known, and
lots of speculation, about Trickier Dick
form the Nixon Admin. ..."You mean,
Dick was doing his magic, then, two?"
yeah, but *what* he & Rumfseld were doing,
seems to be a national security matter.
http://larouchepub.com
Willie...@gmail.com
How can someone who knows so little say so much with such authority?
haha.. Not only you disconnected from reality, you are unaware that
you are disconnected from reality - which makes you doubly clueless.
For those who are seriously interested in these matters below are
pointers reasonable descriptions of these three interpretations of the
math that describes quantum reality.
Spudnik wrongly believes that each interpretation describes a
different body of knowledge. This is not the case. Each
interpretation describes the SAME body of knowledge - so, his purile
analysis is really off the mark.
Obviously, the math works the same in all cases. The wavefunctions
and matrix mechanics accurately calculate the results of experiments.
That's all we need to DO quantum mechanics. As Richard Feynman said
once to someone who asked which interpretation he followed, 'shut up
and calculate!'
When philosophers ask, what the calculations means, its then that an
interpreation is demanded of us. How to interpret the calculations?
That is how do the calculations relate to the 'common sense notions'
that we have in our heads that allow us to think about what the math
is telling us.
Our intuitive knowledge doesn't cover the very small - so, we rely
upon these deep insights of experts to help guide us and their
interpretations of what the math means.
That is,physicists don't use the interpretations to guide them- rather
they use quantum mechanics itself to guide them- and leave the
interpretations to philosophers of physics..
INTERPRETATIONS
Schrodinger Model
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_interpretation
Everett Model
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many_worlds_interpretation
Cramer Model
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_interpretation
QUANTUM PHYSICS ITSELF
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics
PHILOSOPHY OF PHYSICS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_physics
SOLIPSISM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism
(note: Solipsism is NOT Everett's model)
This is easy to see, in that the INTERPRETATIONS of quantum mechanics
descibe precisely the same results in all cases - haha - so, one
cannot be solipsistic while another is not since they cannot be
describing different things - because they're all interpretations of
the SAME thing.
Ian Parker
I am glad you raised this issue. There were indeed VTOL flying disc
aircraft produced by the Nazis at the end of WW2. A compendium is
given in the reference
http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/
One you get beyond the glam pusses and Nazi propaganda there are some
very interesting articles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Piecraft/Jenseitsflugmaschine From
Wikipaedia
http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/The%20Vril%20Discs.htm Aldebaron
(khayyid?)
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ufo_aleman/esp_ufoaleman_6.htm
2000+km/h endurance 5½ hr was absolutely absurd.
Any aircraft that actually flies, as opposed to building myths works
on aerodynamical principles. Let us start with some very elementary
Physics. A mass going round in a circle has an acceleration of v^2/r.
Hence if a vortex is created the pressure in the centre has to be
lower than that of the ambient fluid. Thus if we create a vortex on
the top surface of a disc, the disc will lift up. Nothing terribly
mysterious in that. I fact building a levitating disc is not in fact
that complicated. In fact a shaped plastic disc will levitate if spun.
This can be seen in parks up and down the country. A Frisbee works by
creating a boundary layer.
All the Nazi discs that actually flew worked on this principle. A
vortex was created by means of a fan of some sort.
How well did these aircraft fly? Let us look at aviation in general
and how aircraft are controlled. A fixed wing aircraft
characteristically has a tail plane in which you have a rudder
sticking up and elevator. On the wing ailerons (small wing surfaces)
control the roll of the aircraft. The pilot usually operates the
rudder with his feet and ailerons and elevator are normally combined
together in the form of a yolk. Move the yolk backwards and forwards
and the aircraft will pitch. Turn it like the steering wheel of a car
and the aircraft will roll. All these controls depend for their
operation on airspeed. Drop airspeed and the controls are ineffective.
One of the problems of VTOL is how to give the pilot attitude control
at low speed.
The helicopter addresses this problem in the following way. A typical
helicopter has a main rotor and a rear rotor that opposes the torque
of the main rotor. A helicopter works by varying the pitch of rotors.
All rotors in fact rotate at a constant speed. The "rudder" operated
by the feet, is the pitch of the rear rotor. The main rotor is
feathered throughout its rotation. Its pitch varies. The pilot has a
stick which varies the feathering of the rotor. There are
eccentrically mounted bearings in the rotor which effect attitude
change. These give the helicopter triaxial control. The helicopter
pilot has pitch and roll and also a lever called "collective". The
collective alters pitch throughout the rotation.
As I said all helicopter rotors move at constant speed. If the
helicopter is moving forwards the tip of the forward rotor is moving
very much faster than the rear rotor. This necessitates feathering as
the aircraft accelerates.
All this tells us about disc aircraft and their aerodynamical
problems. The German aircraft were in fact extremely difficult to
control and could not in fact travel faster that 160km/h let alone
2,000. The reason for this is the fact that in a vortex wind speed is
higher on one side than the other Of course if you have a complex
control system consisting of a large number of nacelles this can be
overcome, but the technology to do this was completely beyond 1945.
This leads me onto another point. The belief was that the aircraft was
not aerodynamic it was linked to Aldebaron. If you state, at once,
that the craft is aerodynamic you have a lot of theory to draw upon.
There was where the waste occurred and where all the lying started.
The fact of the matter was that the CIA did not consult reputable
Physicists or Aerodynamicists. If they had they might not have made
such a hash of things.
Is there anything in this? Yes and no. I believe it would be possible
with modern technology to construct a vortex aircraft that would have
advantages over existing aircraft. BUT I think that anyone starting
out would be well advised to disregard the literature and start from
scratch. A 3GB RAM 2GHz computer costs < $1,000. This can do quite a
reasonable mesh for you. You would be well advised to do this, test
controllability at speed, transition to conventional fixed wing BEFORE
you start to bend metal.
I feel too that lies feed on lies. I think it would be impossible to
propose a vortex aircraft seriously, largely because of all the hype
and lies.
- Ian Parker
spudnik
Occam's laserprinter isn't really dyspositive of any thing.
other than the obvious part of it.
just like in superstrings,
these interpretations are merly aspects of the same thing,
what ever is the phenomenon.
I don't believe in the Big Bang or in "global" warming;
the former is an interpreatation of Hubble's finding,
based upon the ideal that all visible matter is not antimatter;
the latter is an ideal, based upon computerized simulacra,
not any actual datasets.
oh; you just said, what I just said,
before I read what you said -- typed,
with your QWERTYUIOP{} set-up.
> This is easy to see, in that the INTERPRETATIONS of quantum mechanics
> descibe precisely the same results in all cases - haha - so, one
> cannot be solipsistic while another is not since they cannot be
> describing different things - because they're all interpretations of
> the SAME thing.
thus:
superstringtheory at least gets rid of that point,
from the get-go & without further a-do, even if
it's not just a string, a "one-dimensional object" ...
howsoever it is that matter bends space,
as measured by Gauss for the government of France
in the 19th cce, and experimentally adduced
by the classical Greek geometers, light travels
through this bent medium, which apparently also
alters the shape of it -- no timespace utterances needed,
it's so very, blatantly bended-up!
Roswell is a big double-entendre from WW2, but you could see that
those who embrace it could go no further. that is really the gist
of the "Lt.Col. Corso School" of Roswellology, that
virtually *all* of 20th cce science & technology
[http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/]
came out of Corso's very own dyspersal of the pile of crap
that fell out of the sky, there, to "some big corporations;"
mayhap, he also wrote the first press-release -- too bad,
he had to wait til he was at death's door, to reap the deal
for the book.
that is to say,
humans are incapable of generating ideas ... or,
it just applies to Americans!
> > > Einstein was not a hoax, you are. There IS a Roswell hoax, there was
--Seargent Barracks Soros McCheeny Pepper,
spudnik
I'd really meant that Shroedinger wouldn't do that
to *your* cat, either, unless it was very bad. oh, looky;
he didn't open the box to check on the "state"
of that God-am cat, yet; o h , t h e s u s p e n s e - -
when will he do that !?!
Many Worlds is a way of expressing the Copenhagenschool's dicta,
their reification of the math of the probabbilities,
which are contingent upon imperfectable knowledge,
vis-a-vu Heisenberg's principle, which applies
to any pair of correlates, in some way,
that you could think of; certainly, "macro-wise."
--Seargent Barracks Soros McCheeny Pepper,
"Give jihad a chance in The Sudan, Rhodesia, and
other former colonial moments -- Yahoo!TM;
you're going to feel my computerized draft,
boys'n'girls: NO AMERICAN MIDDLESCHOOLER LEFT BEHIND;
NO RHODESIA SCHOLARS IN HARM'S WAY!"
http://larouchepub.com/lar/2008/3526lar_soros_pamph.html
http://larouchepub.com/other/2008/3526save_nations_parasites.html
http://larouchepub.com/other/2008/3526zim_brit_op.html
http://larouchepub.com/other/2008/3526zim_brit_op.html
http://larouchepub.com/other/2008/3526zim_brit_op.html
Willie...@gmail.com
> Solopsism is a *simple* interpretation of "many worlds,"
No its not.
Solipsism (Latin: solus, alone + ipse, self) is the philosophical
idea that "My mind is the only thing that I know exists."
Solipsism is an epistemological or metaphysical position that
knowledge of anything outside the mind is unjustified.
The many-worlds interpretation or MWI (also known as relative
state formulation, theory of the universal wavefunction, parallel
universes, many-universes interpretation or many worlds), is an
interpretation of quantum mechanics which is a theory that
explains the existence of the external world!
Many-worlds denies the objective reality of wavefunction collapse.
Proponents argue that MWI reconciles how we can perceive non-
deterministic events (such as the random decay of a radioactive
atom) with the deterministic equations of quantum physics. Prior
to many worlds this had been viewed as a single "world-line".
Many-worlds rather views it as a many-branched tree where every
possible branch of history is realised.
So, one is a theory that says the external world does not exist.
The other is a theory ABOUT the external world.
THEY'RE OBVIOUSLY NOT THE SAME!
> although
> Occam's laserprinter isn't really dyspositive of any thing.
> other than the obvious part of it.
??? This is known as word-hash. You might think it makes
sense - but it does not.
I mean, you seem to mention Occam's razor - a way of making
judgments, and dispositive motion a particular type of court
proceeding but when you know what these things mean, and
apply it to the sentence you seem to be making - it makes
no sense - either as a stand alone statement, or in the context
of what we're discussing here.
In law, a dispositive motion is a motion seeking a trial court
order entirely disposing of one or more claims in favor of the
moving party without need for further trial court proceedings.
Occam's razor (sometimes spelled Ockham's razor) is a
principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and
Franciscan friar William of Ockham. The principle states that
the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few
assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no
difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory
hypothesis or theory.
None of the interpretations of Quantum theory change the
assumptions of the underlying theory, since they are all
derived from the same theory. Even though I pointed this
out to you in an earlier post you must not have gotten that
yet! lol. You are still acting like each INTERPRETATION
is a different THEORY - they're not - they're interpretations
of the same underlying theory.
> just like in superstrings,
> these interpretations
No, superstring theory is a different theory altogether. If
you'd actually trouble yourself to familiarize yourself with
the basics of what you're talking about - you'd find you
get into far fewer idiotic arguments that you lose.
Superstring theory is an attempt to explain all of the particles
and fundamental forces of nature in one theory by modelling
them as vibrations of tiny supersymmetric strings. It is
considered one of the most promising candidate theories of
quantum gravity
> are merly aspects of the same thing,
> what ever is the phenomenon.
Quantum theory and superstring theory are two different things.
Go out and actually do the math - you'll see they are two totally
different THEORIES. The three interpretations of quantum theory
are interpretations - not theories - they all describe the same
underlying theory. Finally, quantum theory and superstring
theory are theories about how the external universe works.
This by definition makes them distinctly different from solipsism
which presupposes that the external world does not exist.
> I don't believe in the Big Bang
Reality doesn't need your belief in it to be true.
> or in "global" warming;
Reality doesn't need your belief in it to be true.
> the former is an interpreatation of Hubble's finding,
No, Hubble's finding was supportive of Gamow's idea which was
used to explain a) the relative abundance of hydrogen and helium,
and b) the existence of two populations of stars having distinctly
different compositions of elements.
The argument raged between steady state and big bang until
Arno Penzias and Bob Wilson from AT&T detected the universal
3K microwave background radiation in 1963 - which pretty
much settled the argument among anyone who knew anything
about these matters - haha - which obviously does not include
you! lol.
> based upon the ideal that all visible matter is not antimatter;
?? do you suffer from Aspergea Syndrome? are you autistic??
This is the only explanation for these totally meaningless insertions
of unrelated word fragments in a totally unrelated thought process.
And even your unrelated thoughts are sadly lacking in understanding.
Experiments at CERN and Fermilab which measures the decay
of high energy particles explain why the universe is dominated
by normal matter. ESA's gamma ray observatory can detect
the collision of matter and anti-matter in the cosmos - and all
such gamma ray emissions are associated with energetic jets
which suggest that there is no ancient anti-matter - which is
consistent with the decay path of high energy particles.
These are solid experimental proofs that do not rely on any
ideals as you suggest.
> the latter is an ideal, based upon computerized simulacra,
> not any actual datasets.
Rot -
We've been keeping detailed temperature records for
150 years.
Now, analysis of tree rings over the past 150 years
give very good evidence of how tree ring spacing for
various tree species are related to temperature
Analysis of the relative abundance of hydrogen and
oxygen isotopes in ice cores also correlate very well
with the human record of the past 150 years.
Very long lived trees as old as 4,000 years therefore provide
temperature records before human records were kept - these
aren't computer models - they're freaking records written in
wood - correlated with the 150 years of human record to
about 99% accuracy.
Ice core samples are even more interesting. The isotope
variation with temperature is even better established, and
the antarctic has glaciers that are over 800,000 years old!
So, we have actual temperature record nearly 1 million
years - correlated with 99.9% accuracy to the human
record.
Now, these records are then correlated with less reliable
proxies - for example, the existence of forests at the poles,
at some times, or the geological evidence of glaciers in
subtropical regions at other times.
Or the tree rings of extinct fossilized trees before 1 milion
years ago, the thickness of carbon layers and so forth -
are real records of temperature - but less precise 95%+/-5%
accurate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record
The Earth has had wild fluctuations in temperature throughout
its history. This is well established by actual scientific evidence.
Now, the Earth has also had wild fluctuations in carbon dioxide
levels in its atmosphere at other times. The same ice core samples
that give us a good indication of temperature based on the 150 year
written record, also give us something else. Namely, microscopic
bubbles of trapped air! That air can be extracted and measured
directly - to determine CO2 levels - along with temperature.
So, not only do we have a nearly 1 million year long record of
temperatures - we have a nearly 1 million year long record of
CO2 levels to go with it.
Furthermore, the rate at which carbon dioxide is absorbed
by the ocean and forms carbonate ions varies with temperature
and carbon dioxide layers - the rates of various isotopes of
oxygen and carbon vary slightly between isotopes - so, by
looking at relative abundance of atoms in carbonates scientists
can measure CO2 levels of the ancient atmosphere - with less
precision than direct sampling of ice cores - but within 5% or so
of the actual figure - this for millions of years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_the_Earth%27s_atmosphere
When one compares the CO2 level with the temperature of the
ancient earth - BASED ON ACTUAL GEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE
one sees a clear correlation between carbon levels and temperature
and when one compares the present rates of carbon sinks, and
carbon production - we can see the rises in CO2 levels are easily
explained by anthropogenic sources of carbon.
When one goes back to the the data of the ancient atmosphere
one can see that the warming of the past 100 years has been due to
this anthropogenic source of carbon. Furthermore, one can also
see that the warming is LESS than would have been predicted
based on ancient atmospheric data. Why? Because human
activity also kicks up dust clouds - jet contrails and the like -
which reflects more radiation into space - and cools the Earth
through GLOBAL DIMMING
So, not only is our understanding of the geological record precise
enough to see global warming, but it is also precise enough to
see global dimming as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming
> oh; you just said, what I just said,
Nope not at all - that you think I did speaks volumes about the
depths of your ignorance.
> before I read what you said -- typed,
> with your QWERTYUIOP{} set-up.
Definitely - you are autistic - Aspergea Syndrome
> > This is easy to see, in that the INTERPRETATIONS of quantum mechanics
> > descibe precisely the same results in all cases - haha - so, one
> > cannot be solipsistic while another is not since they cannot be
> > describing different things - because they're all interpretations of
> > the SAME thing.
>
> thus:
> superstringtheory
Is a distinctly different theory from quantum theory. Please
understand the difference between the word THEORY and
the word INTERPRETATION of a theory.
> at least gets rid of that point,
> from the get-go & without further a-do,
You have said nothing intelligable here!
> even if
> it's not just a string, a "one-dimensional object" ...
> howsoever it is that matter bends space,
Obviously, your understanding of string theory is
as nonexistent as your understanding of quantum
theory, solipsism, and the various interpretations
of quantum theory! lol.
> as measured by Gauss for the government of France
> in the 19th cce, and experimentally adduced
> by the classical Greek geometers, light travels
> through this bent medium, which apparently also
> alters the shape of it -- no timespace utterances needed,
> it's so very, blatantly bended-up!
Rot. Gauss' first love was mathematics, but the Duke who
supported him didn't believe math was that important, so he
sought to strengthen his reputation as an astronomer. So,
when Piazzi discovered Ceres, only to lose it in the glare of
the Sun, he was unable to find it again. Gauss saw his chance.
So, he recast the cumbersome mathematics of Kepler into the
more elegant and tractable conic sections - and easily computed
the precise position of Ceres one year later -after that he
was appointed to the much more secure position of astronomer
for the Duke - with a pay raise.
Gauss published several works on calculation of orbits after that
and these were quite popular and built his reputation as an astronomer
Gauss invented the heliotrope and then carried out a survey of the
city of Hanover using it 15 years later. This is the only space
he measured in the manner you suggest - and while he did work
out wonderfully efficient ways to combine data sets into a two
dimensional
curved surface - it had nothing whatever to do with Einstein's great
insights - 70 years later - well after his death.
But there is an interesting connection between Gauss and Einstein's
theories. Gauss worked on non-euclidean geometries at this time, but
never published his work. Yet, one of his students, Wolfgang Bolyai,
was aware of this work - and Wolfgang's son, Janos Bolyai, used this
as
a starting point in his own studies, and 11 years after Gauss made
his
notes on geometry, Bolyai discovered non-euclidean geometry and
published a proof of it 3 years later. Gauss congratulated Bolyai,
and
throughout this period - spawned by his survey of Hanover (for which
he
was paid a considerable sum) Gauss created the field of differential
geometry that enlarged and expanded on Bolyai's work.
Minkowski taught Einstein Bolyai's theory - 70 years later, which
Einstein used to generalize his special theory of relativity - which
sought to measure 4 dimensional spacetime - in ways similar but
not identical to that used by Gauss to measure hanover 84 years
earlier.
> Roswell is a big double-entendre from WW2, but you could see that
> those who embrace it could go no further. that is really the gist
> of the "Lt.Col. Corso School" of Roswellology, that
> virtually *all* of 20th cce science & technology
> [http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/]
> came out of Corso's very own dyspersal of the pile of crap
> that fell out of the sky, there, to "some big corporations;"
> mayhap, he also wrote the first press-release -- too bad,
> he had to wait til he was at death's door, to reap the deal
> for the book.
UFOs, starmen waiting in the sky with ancient and powerful
knowledge, are ideas that resonate with many people on an
emotional level - and so, these all have an existence similar
to that of other emotionally satisfying ideas - for example,
Santa Claus, or the Easter Bunny, exist as cognitive elements
in our world - and rumors of such get repeated ad infinitum for
the emotional satisfaction such ideas provide those who
repeat the legends. Yet, it is painfully obvious,nearly as
obvious as the Santa Claus legend, that these are products
of the human imagination - and not real happenings in every
day mundane reality.
Jung wrote at length about this - and his translations are
available in English through the work of RC Hull. You should
really trouble yourself to read these if you're at all interested
in UFO legends.
> that is to say,
> humans are incapable of generating ideas ... or,
> it just applies to Americans!
It is a common psychological mechanism to imagine others
as inferior to oneself. This is a compensation mechanism
that allows those engaging in this activity to feel better
about themselves. Often those who engage in such imaginary
activity have this as the only means by which they can
achieve this important human end.
> > > > Einstein was not a hoax, you are. There IS a Roswell hoax, there was
>
> --Seargent Barracks Soros McCheeny Pepper,
> "Give jihad a chance in The Sudan, Rhodesia, and
> other former colonial moments -- Yahoo!TM;
> you're going to feel my computerized draft,
> boys'n'girls: NO AMERICAN MIDDLESCHOOLER LEFT BEHIND;
> NO RHODESIA SCHOLARS IN HARM'S WAY!"http://larouchepub.com/lar/2008/3526lar_soros_pamph.htmlhttp://larouchepub.com/other/2008/3526save_nations_parasites.htmlhttp://larouchepub.com/other/2008/3526zim_brit_op.html
You sir are a clueless idiot. You would be better served if you
took the trouble to actually learn a thing or two about the subjects
you post publicly on.
Willie...@gmail.com
> I was adding, before a 15' time-out got me, that
> I'd really meant that Shroedinger wouldn't do that
> to *your* cat, either, unless it was very bad. oh, looky;
> he didn't open the box to check on the "state"
> of that God-am cat, yet; o h , t h e s u s p e n s e - -
> when will he do that !?!
All three interpretations of the theory are seeking to provide
interpretations of the same theory. Please get that. Furthermore
the cat is immaterial. What the Schrodinger was trying to get
across was the fact that a distinct event like the decay of the
atom, or the death of your cat, was described by the wave
function as a superposition of probabilities of BOTH states.
Now when dealing with quadrillions of atoms - and a detector
we can see a rate of decay - the trouble only comes when we
look at a single atom - or a single cat - and observe it for a period
of time... BOTH states exist at the same time.
> Many Worlds is a way of expressing the Copenhagenschool's dicta,
No, the standard model and MWI are two distinct interpretations of
the same underlying theory.
> their reification of the math of the probabbilities,
There is no fallacy - the superposition principle is the real thing.
> which are contingent upon imperfectable knowledge,
No, you haven't done the math, so the explanation of the math
makes no sense to you - so you make nonsensical statements.
Please trouble yourself to learn how to invert a matrix and apply
it to a wavefunction - and do a few calculations - then read the
interpretations again - you'll see what's going on. Until then, you
are writing with authority about things you are totally clueless
about.
> vis-a-vu Heisenberg's principle,
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is distinctly different from
Quantum Theory, the interpretations of quantum theory, or
string theory, or solipsism. haha..
Heisenberg used quantum theory to prove his uncertainty
principle, but the principle itself is not quantum theory.
To put this in perspective consider Newton's invention of
the calculus to describe his theory of gravity. The fundamental
theorem of calculus is distinctly different than Newton's theory
of gravity - even though Newton used the calculus to prove his
theory.
Same here. Quantam mechanical mathematics is used to
prove Heisenberg's uncertainty principle - yet both are
totally and distinctly different things.
A simple way to interpret Heisenberg's findings is to consider
that according to quantum theory particles are waves of
probability. The position is where the wave is concentrated, yet
the wave has associated with it a wavelength - and so, its position
and momentum is spread out in spacetime which Heisenberg
showed meant that momentum and position cannot be known
with absolute certainty.
> which applies
> to any pair of correlates,
You don't understand the basics - these leaps of fancy have
absolutely no basis in reality.
> in some way,
> that you could think of; certainly, "macro-wise."
a totally meaningless word fragment..
> --Seargent Barracks Soros McCheeny Pepper,
> "Give jihad a chance in The Sudan, Rhodesia, and
> other former colonial moments -- Yahoo!TM;
> you're going to feel my computerized draft,
> boys'n'girls: NO AMERICAN MIDDLESCHOOLER LEFT BEHIND;
> NO RHODESIA SCHOLARS IN HARM'S WAY!"http://larouchepub.com/lar/2008/3526lar_soros_pamph.htmlhttp://larouchepub.com/other/2008/3526save_nations_parasites.htmlhttp://larouchepub.com/other/2008/3526zim_brit_op.htmlhttp://larouchepub.com/other/2008/3526zim_brit_op.htmlhttp://larouchepub.com/other/2008/3526zim_brit_op.html
If you would trouble yourself to actually learn about the subjects
you write about online, you could save yourself a helluva lot of
embarassment.
Willie...@gmail.com
Just because you think that, doesn't make it so.
> I
> don't really thibnk there is any difficulty there.
Just because you think that doesn't make it so.
Why don't you go read something like THE POWER OF NOW or the TAO TE
CHING - really read it - if you have zero difficulty understanding how
the authors of these work (Eckhart Tolle, Lao Tzu) organized their
thoughts - then okay. But I suggest that you will be clueless after a
first reading - and being clueless will be proof that your two
statements are wrong.
Now, consider, that these two individuals are HUMAN!
If humans have trouble understanding one another - why do you have
such faith that non-human intelligences won't have a problem?
Clearly you faith is unfounded in reality.
> As I think I have
> said my difficulty is that if we assume that aliens have come though
> the same evolutionary path that we have,
This is an unfounded assumption.
> meaning that they are us N
> years down the line,
There is more than one line - even on Earth - between species - you
need to get that - Every species as a result, is as individual as a
snowflake.
> out technology is not moving in the direction of
> Area 51 type spacecraft.
Since WE are creating Area 51 type spacecraft and are using UFO
legends to obscure their operation outside that area - your statement
is obviously wrong. Area 51 spacecraft IS human technology, created
by human imagination skill and understanding - relying not in the
least on alien spacecraft since no alien spacecraft are visiting
Earth.
> Take a simple thing - alien abduction.
haha.. the legend of alien abduction you mean.
> If aliens really wanted our DNA
> they could get it very simply by collecting up the objects we have
> handled.
Like I said, a singular lack of imagination.
Assume for a second the outrageous claims of abductees reflect what is
going on in mundane reality. On one level, if we want to get a DNA
sample of a bee, do we extract it from the bee, or from the flowers it
has pollinated? Obviously, getting it from the bee directly is a
superior method - if that is your goal.
Even this idea is the product of a limited imagination.
Humans are more than their intellect. Humans possess emotions,
spiritual qualities, innate abilities. It is foolish in the extreme
to believe that aliens wouldn't have evolved different if not superior
emotional and spiritual capacities - why do we think only their
intellect is superior?
Now, imagine an alien race that is far in advance of us emotionally
and spiritually - as well as intellectually. They observe the human
race - and what are WE interested in? hmmm.??? What motivates US
emotoinally? I'll give you a hint - what's the biggest money maker
bar none on the internet? What's the biggest user of bandwidth?
Pornography! Sex sites.
Don't you think that an emotionally superior race of creatures might
be curious about what makes us tick sexually? Obviously, of course
they would.
So, these abductions that seek to stimulate an psycho-sexual response
could be explained that way. Now this doesn't really hold up I
hasten to had because when one looks at the population of abductees
one sees common psychological features in their makeup - which suggest
- along with the nature of abduction legends - that it is a product of
their imagination produced for powerful emotional reasons.
> No one seems to discuss this basic logical point.
Because its so obviously stupid.
I've discussed it a little above in response to your comments here.
Here are other reasons - many humans frequently handle the same object
- how do we know which human goes with which dna - and how do we know
the importance of dna unless we see it operating in a complete
organism? There are so many holes in your observations I don't have
time or energy to repeat them all.
> The government is indeed not lying about everything,
Only the important stuff.
> Apollo did land
> on the Moon.
Yes.
> However the difficulty they fact in public relations is
> that people simply don't know what to believe.
Because people are generally not interested enough to educate
themselves, so, as a result, are profoundly stupid on a variety of
important topics.
> If was not simply
> aircraft like the B2 and the SR71 that were secret.
um.. secrets are not lies...
> These aircraft did
> after all make it to USAF duty.
yes, both before and after they were secret.
> There were also a lot of aircraft which did not make it.
but only the ones that wern't important.
> At the end of
> WW2 the nazi scientists had developed lifing aircraft that were
> claimed to operate on antigravity.
No, at the end of world war 2 in the face of growing interest in UFOs
the LEGEND of anti-gravity arose.
> The fact of the matter is that they
> worked on vortex lift principles
Nonsense.
> (you know v^2/r suction)
I know nothing of the kind, and sadly, neither do you.
> and NOT very
> well.
If you are saying such systems don't work at all - then I agree.
> If decent physicists had been consulted at the time this would
> have become apparent quickly.
You are babbling on about rumors that have become legend in the
imagination of people - these are products of human imagination and
have nothing whatever to do with mundane reality.
> A lot of money was squandered.
That's true - but nothing you said before this is true.
> In a sense it would be easier to declassify "alien autopies"
If they existed - sure.
> than what
> in truth happened.
Which has nothing whatever to do with anything you've said here.
> From an aerodynamiv view point there is one thing
> that stands out. A 3GHz 3GB RAM computer is being advertised for less
> than $1000.
These two sentences have nothing whatever to do with none another.
> This is quite capable of carrying out hydrocode
> calculations
Hydrocode is a nonsensical word. However, Navier Stokes equations can
be carried out in 3 dimensions to design wing sections and so forth -
with far less power than you cited. So what?
> You can simply put a vortex in
No you can't.
> and it will tell you how
> stable it is in various wind consitions and exactly how much lift is
> generated.
No it won't since there's no such thing as an anti-gravity vortex.
Now, there are vortices that occur at aircraft wingtips - these induce
drag not lift.
> If this were to be done all the research ever done could be
> duplicated in a month flat.
No it couldn't since what you believe exists does not exist.
> No need for declassification.
Well, even assuming all the crap you're spewing is true - which it
ain't - this isn't true. Consider a nuclear pile. Neutron flux
mediates the rate of fission which produces a neutron flux. Its a
rather simple numerical problem to solve this in 3 dimensions to
figure out how to design a reactor core, or a nuclear weapon right?
No need to classify the codes for doing this right? haha.. of course
there is. How about re-entry vehicles? What happens when objects
travelling at Mach 30 enter the Earth's atmosphere? Its again a
simple numerical problemto solve in 3 dimensions - to design a re-
entry vehicle - no need to classify the codes for that right? haha..
nope, plenty of reasons still.
> - Ian Parker
>
> Foe sci.math could I point out that the solutions of Navier Stokes are
> millenial problems. Somehow I can't see area 51 claiming $million.- Hide quoted
That doesn't mean i can use it to design a re-entry vehicle
reliably.and easily.
And I can point to neutron cross section data too and the diff eq to
produce a 3d flux - that doesn't mean i can reliably and easily
design a nuclear reactor with them.
Ian Parker
DNA - Examination on the sexual organs does not get you any further.
It is true that the relationship between DNA and the final organism is
extremely complex.
Why do I suppose aliens could understand us.
Are you in effect saying that we cannot translate languages by
computer. I would have thought that ET if he existed would have long
since passed this stage. You have in fact implicitly made the claim
that we will never have AI which can understand natural language. That
is what you are in effect saying.
When you look at Arabic (I mean here Google Translate) I can see what
you mean. There is a lot of research going on at quite a high level.
Some of it is statistical, some of it is linguistic. Kurzweil has
claimed that heuristics can produce a translator and you don't need to
know Arabic (Sounds like the CPA where you had to have been a fervent
evangelical). His point though was that grammar could be heuristic.
This is not quite true at our present level of understanding. GT
Arabic is clearly NOT parsed as it even puts adjectives after the noun
in a number of cases (Arabic normally has adjective after noun).
However these temporary difficulties must never persuade us that the
problem is impossible. I think BTW that FTL/Antigravity is impossible
but fluent grammatically correct Arabic is possible. ET will have
solved these problems yonks ago.
Great strides are being made
http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&cluster=6755595999402083731
Describes research into parsing in Arabic. Compression is the essence
of AI
http://www.mail-archive.com/a...@v2.listbox.com/msg03469.html
1GB has been compressed to 130MB. This is quite astonishing and has
implications for language. My own researches show that the best
English (the most reasonable) is the most compressible. Thus
compression could help to resolve the ambiguities of the first
reference. One of the user groups is sci.math. It is important for
users in that group to appreciate the arguments on compression.
Why is loss free compression important in AI. Let us do a gedanken
compression. Let us split our text up into words and assign one
integer for each word or punctuation mark.
Let n1 ,n2 ,n3 ,n4 ,n5 ,n6 ,n7 ,n8 ,n9 be the numbers of each word in
the text.
Let Σni = N Then the number of arrangements possible will be N!/Pni!
Now unless we can make some sort of sense of the language the minimum
bit length will be Log2N!/Pni!
This implies that if we can compress further we are making some sort
of sense of the language. We are predicting the words that can be
used. Suppose we are at a particular position. If we can say that the
probability of each word will be :-
Pi and the number of choices we can make if we go through this
probability set M times will be M!/Pmi! where mi is MPi This gives us
the compressive length which will be
(ΣLog2M!/Pmi! )/M We have used M as a weighting factor because to get
statistics we have to perform an action a number of times. My claim
and the claim of Hutter is that this expression defines AI.
It is quite interesting and exciting. To repeat ET (existent?) will
have achieved this yonks ago. To me it is inconceivable that it will
take 1000 + years to get a system. Totally ludicrous in my view.
Does translaton/compression fit in with what we think of as
intelligence?
mDrwbA fY ArbEp ADEAf drjp HrArp sTHh AY : Multiplied by four times
the temperature of any surface:
The transliteration is left/right and is a strict 1 to 1
correspondence. First of all Google is NOT translating what it sees.
drjp refers to degree (power). What you can ponder from the AI
perspective is what happens when we look up "Stephan Boltzmann" or
"Black Body" up on Google we get the correct fourth POWER. What is
understanding? Now there is a fourth power law on Alpha Centuri
remember! We can in fact therefore use information retrieval to help
us in our task of translation.
Let us do a gedanken experiment we construct Google on Alpha Cenauri.
Texts are in Centauran but Google works in a similar way to the way it
works in English. If Centauran is an order language like English or
Chinese it will work in the same way as it does with English. I claim
that if Cenauran can be compressed it can be understood. Centauran has
a mathematical structure. If it did not we would, in effect, be making
the claim that Centauran mathematics, in particular the foundations of
mathematics is different from our view.
Put in this way the claim is quite obviously preposterous. It would in
fact invalidate a lot of mathematics.
You are quite clearly talking through your hat.
On the question of general declassification. You say no work is, or
has, been done on antigravity. I am afraid you are wrong.
http://www.rense.com/general13/djsk.htm
http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/gravity/gravitsapa.htm is a
compendium of resources.
This comes from a source as respectable as Janes.
The points you make about nuclear codes are complete red herrings.
Hydrocodes are pretty freely available. All car manufacturers have
them as well as aircraft manufacturers.
You are right in saying that vorticity represents chaos, and is indeed
the main cause of drag. However a large vortex on the top surface will
cause lift. This has been known for some time. The only thing is that
because it is believed to come from Aldebaran hydrocodes have not been
used. It could well be that the use of hydrocode would prove the whole
thing to be a non starter. I just don't know. All I do know is that if
anyone wants to do "respectable" research they had better either not
do it all all or use hydrocodes.
Your arguments seem to me to be complete drivel. I think Brad Guth may
well be right. I will of course dissociate myself from Venus (it IS at
470C 90A) and from any suggestion of anti Semitism.
- Ian Parker
BradGuth
If our government isn't lying about their Zionist/Nazi DARPA having
safely landed folks of “the right stuff" upon our physically dark as
coal moon, that’s also relatively gamma and Xray saturated as well as
highly electrostatic charged (not to mention physically naked and thus
full-tilt exposed to whatever comes along), then do tell why all the
ongoing delays and hocus-pocus of their having lost track of most all
of our important original Apollo science, and otherwise continually
excluding evidence along with as much topic/author stalking plus
banishing of those suggesting otherwise, as they can muster?
The same can be said on behalf of anyone suggesting that we
technically utilize our Selene/moon L1, of establishing POOF City at
Venus L2, of merely comprehending on behalf of other intelligent life
existing/coexisting on Venus (including those of us via technology),
and of anything Sirius star/solar system being continually need-to-
know or taboo/nondisclosure rated. Those recent missions of Venus
EXPRESS and JAXA Selene are each sequestered as need-to-know, having
most of the essential science excluded or moderated to death, same as
for those recent Mars Phoenix mass spectrometer readings being kept
off-limits, as though we only get to hear their interpretation of such
need-to-know numbers.
I'd go so far as to say our government lies to some bloody and
otherwise spendy cloak and dagger extent by way of excluding evidence
roughly 90% of the time, though even lying 0.1% of the time would have
more than covered their mutually perpetrated cold-war, plus all of
their NASA/Apollo and DARPA butts, and then some, because most of
everything else sort of hangs from the same tether.
The likes of our resident DARPA spook/mole or brown-nosed clown
William Mook is typically going to insist that you and most everyone
else is either dead wrong or simply crazy, if not both no matters what
you bring to the table. At the same time our William Mook is going to
always agree or argue that we’ve supposedly walked on that nasty
Selene/moon of ours, even if there’s no independent peer replicated
objective proof to verify or back any of it, and loads of stuff simply
doesn’t add up.
Say one word or phrase that’s not within the fullest agreement with
the bipolar mindset of lord Mook, and lo and behold everything else
you have to offer is next to worthless, if not less than worthless,
and trust that he keeps very good track of whoever is naughty or
nice. The problem is, even if you’re extremely nice to lord Mook, all
you’ll ever get is that lump of coal in your sock, but never so much
as any gram of his supposed green PV hydrogen unless it’s entirely
created via public funding along with most of those energy and anti-
pollution credits of subsequent profits going into his offshore bank
accounts.
btw; our lord Mook is 100+% republican, and thus a very big and
active supporter of anything Bush and of his puppet-master Deck Cheney
care to do, as well as being a loyal Zionist/Nazi DARPA supporter of
the pretend-Atheist kind, that just so happens to follow the Old
Testament as though he was a devout bible thumping rabbi. Go figure.
As far as I can tell, there’s still more ongoing cloak and dagger than
we’re being lead to believe by those in charge of most everything
mainstream that counts. We’re talking about their job and benefit
security of tens of thousands of folks that are addicted without
remorse to public loot, not to mention those social/political/
intellectual/science and faith-based bragging rights as also funded by
way of public loot.
”Whoever controls the past, controls the future” / George Orwell
meaning those in control of whatever gets recorded as history having
happened or having been discovered are also establishing their
mainstream holy grail as to who gets future credit and/or blame for
whatever, and thus more importantly of who gets first crack at
whatever future credits and that of receiving our public support,
instead of receiving continual denial, avoidance and systematic
banishment. The very root of this orchestrated naysay imposed action
against outsiders is clearly faith-based and otherwise cloaked as to
suggest that no one public agency, private group or individuals are
ever in charge of anything that gets overlooked or goes terribly
wrong.
If the mainstream status quo of damage-control didn’t have fingers,
they’d have to point with something else. (perhaps their brown nose
would have to due)
BradGuth
>
> > - Show quoted text -Hi Re all this The Nazis did have Flying wing experiment aircraft so did the US! They, the Nazis were trying everything but logic to win the war. Understand there was even a Staic(?) eletric power collector too? Riswell? well 1. SOMETHING did happen. Was it a weather or radar balloon target?(History hannel even said that piecs of t still exists n whatever US National archive!) 2. n experimental aircraft maybe brought he from Japan or German? And it crashed with pilot(s)?3. Exterestrial(forgive my creative speeling/typos!)Something did happen at Roswell,N.M. (If rember Goddar also tested his rockets at near Roswell N.M. in 1930s too!)So what hapopened its eiher lot, or hdden or both. Faith, belief and agenda all play a role!
Much has happened that's still under tight wraps, and sustained as
tight as our lethal enforced nondisclosure policy can muster. Spill
so much as one bean and your life plus those of your family and close
friends is essentially over, if not via the ultimate price.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
spudnik
name any other pair of corelative functions -- or "covarying" --
that can be applied to some system. or a pair of systems, or
at least two systems. and, there was a movie about this,
"Scanners," which was suppsoedly a metaphor on Reading Dynamics
TM.... thus,
I prefer to call it, Schroedinger's Head Gasket. you make use
of a "wave" that has no actual shape, which is, like, really cool,
if you're sitting in the Bay waiting for that function
to collapse, dood, and you can just console yourself with the ideal,
"it's in a quantum state of I'm actually surfing, Mom, and
I'm really not surfing, at all ... dood" -- Kowabunga, so,
I'm paddle-boarding ... with a sail ... and a titanium rotor!
I'm telling the cat people about your "problem,"
of not being able to observe "one God-am cat at a time;"
they'll probably refer me to the SPCA, or Catwoman, so,
What should I say?
anyway, how can you say that "many worlds" is not a form
of the Copenhagenschool reification?... OK,
it's infinitely more elaborate ... depending upon how many Solopsists
are floating around in your pool.
um, I'm referring to guests -- don't experiment upon'em!... so,
anyway,
I did learn how to invert a square matrix, if you mean an N by N
one ...
but I forgot, becuase I don't use such things. there's mathematics,
which is the four subjects that eliminate the trivium (as a study),
and
then there's what ever math, you say, you think, I should learn.
may be I should, Daddy!... now, I recall;
it's just a use of Gaussian elimination,
manipulating the rows & columns to cancel,
til you get your X (which could be a matrix, or
a "scalar value".-)
> Now when dealing with quadrillions of atoms - and a detector
> we can see a rate of decay - the trouble only comes when we
> look at a single atom - or a single cat - and observe it for a period
> of time... BOTH states exist at the same time.
> > their reification of the math of the probabbilities,
> > which are contingent upon imperfectable knowledge,
> Please trouble yourself to learn how to invert a matrix and apply
> Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is distinctly different from
> Quantum Theory, the interpretations of quantum theory, or
> string theory, or solipsism. haha..
>
> Heisenberg used quantum theory to prove his uncertainty
> principle, but the principle itself is not quantum theory.
>
> To put this in perspective consider Newton's invention of
> the calculus to describe his theory of gravity. The fundamental
> theorem of calculus is distinctly different than Newton's theory
> of gravity - even though Newton used the calculus to prove his
> theory.
> A simple way to interpret Heisenberg's findings is to consider
> that according to quantum theory particles are waves of
> probability. The position is where the wave is concentrated, yet
> the wave has associated with it a wavelength - and so, its position
> and momentum is spread out in spacetime which Heisenberg
> showed meant that momentum and position cannot be known
> with absolute certainty.
so, when I say, Do the math, dood, it's not a call
for any specific kind of math. in the first place,
all math problems are foremostly wordproblemmas, and, if
I don't agree with your result, what ever "the math"
that you suppose it to require, then I'll stick
with my math, by my framing of the problem ...the quadrivium,
Latin for *mathematica*,
not a New kind of Science!
as far as I know,
Newton stole "the calculus" from Leibniz, although
he could have already had many prerequisites from Barrow,
Fermat, Archimedes etc.;
he did steal the inverse-second-ower law from Hooke, and
then made a joke out of it:
the only calculs in _Principia_ is that little box,
dxdy, by itself, not used in a problem.
and, if you went to a Harry Potter PS,
it's probably your God-am secular religion
-- Isaac Newton, the Holy Economist & Greed is G*d!... OK,
he wasn't a trinitarian --
in addition to that pantheon on Sundays,
"Adam Smith's Money World" on PBS, downstairs,
BBS, upstairs ... al deliverd by Murdochvision -- Yahoo! TM.
spudnik
just before thtey lost those movies & slides in a box?... otherwise,
you rely solely on your DARPAsim of "orbital mechanics,"
using the floating-point ops in your desktop unit, and
what ever they remembered to program?
like, if you were a quadripalegic, I'd dig it. I mean,
you sound as if you're old enough to have live
through the televization of the landings, but
you seem to young to have recalled.
BradGuth
In other words, to the unfiltered Kodak eye (actually outfitted with a
polarized element that should have made the moon record on film as
though substantially darker than coal), the regular laws of physics
and of the best available peer replicated science that's outside of
your NASA still do not count.
Are you deathly afraid to look at those JAXA/Selene images, as well as
at countless others that oddly do not match up to anything of your
NASA/Apollo EVA Kodak moments?
Coal black is still coal black, no matters if it's situated on Earth,
Mars, Venus or that of our moon. In other words, albedo is albedo, no
matters where the reflective surface is situated.
On the other hand, now I understand, that you're also a born-again
liar, as well as a Zionist/Nazi or simply another retired brown-nosed
spook/mole from DARPA.
Willie...@gmail.com
BradGuth
> You are an idiot.Spudnik
But since most of everyone on Earth (at least 99.9%) is an idiot
according to the all-knowing mindset of William Mook, so what's the
difference?
I'm not even all that opposed to allowing your green and dirt cheap
methods of providing commercial hydrogen, but that's obviously not
good enough.
If I suggest anything of utilizing radium, radon, thorium or that of
h2o2 & synfuel is what puts our William Mook into virtual orbit.
Suggesting that we need a global 100 TW worth of clean and affordable
energy, and that of a new and improved national power grid is
apparently asking too much from the New World Order of lord Mook.
spudnik
from your learned response. I had realized that
I am probably doing a dysservice to the Solopsists
-- I'm sure it's not a totally pointless philiosphy -- but
i'm just referring to the gist of their argument,
"Universe is all in my head -- tee-hee!"
thus:
good observational, it applies to the perimeters
of the figures on the sides of the trigons etc.
the main thing is that it applies to any similar figures,
whatsoever; your special case was built on a 45-degree right trigon
(equiangular & equilateral).
the *really* main thing is that
you have to construct the circles, in any case,
to actuallly "construct" the proof with compasses,
so that Hipparchus' proof is the minimal effort. essentially,
"Einstein's proof," which is actually in Eculid, but
not labelled per the pythag. theorem, and which would
have been seen by him in the gymnasium, is the same
as Hipparchus, only it is merely diagrammatical,
without bothering with the constructive part of it.
now, apply it to the spatial cases.
spudnik
a silly example of uncertainty, applying to everday life,
is the absurd "paradox" of mallapropism of Lord Berty,
"I'm lying?..." and, which applies to most of his paradoxes,
such as the barber's; barbers just don't cut their own hair!
y'know, when someones tells you some thing,
you immediately have to ask yourself, Why?, and
how that changes the relationship.
don't get too longwinded in reply, please; or,
just think about for a day or ...9999.
--Seargent Barracks Soros McCheeny Pepper,
"Give jihad a chance in The Sudan, Rhodesia, and
other former colonial moments -- Yahoo!TM;
you're going to feel my computerized draft,
boys'n'girls: NO AMERICAN MIDDLESCHOOLER LEFT BEHIND;
NO RHODESIA SCHOLARS IN HARM'S WAY!"
spudnik
it sort of evokes Broglie's "guide wave," or Bohm's ideals, but
I don't consider those to be really necessary and, in any case,
you can use models that build with waves or particles, but
not necessarily at the same time. after all,
they are dual *mathematically*, as in the "two-column proofs"
of projective geometry; they're simply equivalent.
yes, all of these theories are interpreting the same reality,
Universe; to pluralize that definition is itself an absurdity.
spudnik
Ockham's thingy doesn't allow for the rejection
of any experimental data, unless that data was shown
to be improperly acquired or used, or dysinterpreted
per the phenomena being considered; kowabunga --
no simpler than necessary!
so, if you're in a superposition of not looking
at the cat & looking at it, 'swell as possibly not really caring
so much for cats, or hunting big game ... may be,
you have an obsessive-repulsive dysorder?
put the mental picture of Schroedinger's cat, down!
thus, for instance:
you could find a suitable section of the Mandelbrot set,
to attach the 3 similar ones to the right trigon;
I'm going to do that, just as soon as
I can find the fractal compasses!... seriously,
there's a common method to generate the M-set,
using (overlapping?) circles to make the complement
of the M-set, which gives a picture that looks,
like the pointilistical one. but,
all of this is somewhat informal, due to the FLOPs specification,
which is IEEE-755, I think,
an article in a magazine, actually, and superseded
by -855, which I have never seen, since
I don't have their online database available.
> now, apply it to the spatial cases.
thus:
which E-hoax -- of, by or for?... I just found a textbook
at the bookstore, which was a zenith
in the Department of Einsteinmania,
the Musical Department, Act One: Obomanauticus,
the Far Side of the Moon ... just kidding;
basically, a sort of Physics Lite by way of Thus Spake Herr Doktor-
proffessor Albert;
large book, but large print & plenty graphics & photo-ops.... or,
you could also say, nadir, or just Bipolar Express;
unscroll me!
yeah, nettttiket;
don't make me phreak on your googolplex,
just to get an inkling of the scan of the UPC on your cybersuite --
I might never get out, again!
> Erratum - The links do not work. These do.
thus:
there are "classical" experiments, if that only means,
it was done in the 19th CCE (PBUThat***** .-)...
um, what ever you guys were referring to,
in your cut&paste VJ mixtape.
anway, Haha, what floor was your office on?... eleven and
above is certainly very safe, if the building doesn't fail
monumentally;
you "mighty swell" be surfing it;
all is well that ends in the well, if
you can swim & it's nondry.
> I do not know of any experiment.
thus:
I had my 4th virtual lesson in surfing in two days,
more or less, this one just watching the lone surferdood;
I didn't wait for him to stand up, since he was clearly
paddling-out in a minimax path to the correct wave.
4 axes would be a form of homogenous coordination,
not entirely amenable to quaternions, AFAICT,
for "the point," which would minimally be a tetrasteron, and
a sphere; how many points is that?... anyone work
on the lunes demonstration of pythag.spatial?
it's very tempting to just bum a board & go, but
I'm retaining my ideal of surfcamp Maui, or
some other island.
or, we'll just make a stop on the Bipolar Xpress --
it's the IPY!
Ian Parker
way reality can be understood. This simple fact seems to be one that
is escaping everyone.
The basic erratum was that the website is case sensitive. All the
internal links work, and the links provided when the filename stats
with a capital letter work too.
- Ian Parker
Daryl McCullough
Your website is extremely confusing. You provide an extremely long
quote from the Einstein Hoax website, and only afterwards do you
explain that you are *not* in agreement with the Einstein Hoax
website. If your point is to criticize rabid anti-relativists,
that should be made clear at the beginning. Otherwise, someone
reading your web page will assume that you agree with the anti-relativists.
--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY
Ian Parker
origen of anti relativity and I feel this should be clearly
aappreciated.
I would appreciate improvements. The website is in fact in a number of
pages. The first page deals with Relativity and all the experimental
and observational test. The second part deals with "The Hoax" and its
motivations. I disagree with you. I think the passage from the "Black
Sun" is extremely interesting and illuminating, as are the anti
Semitic references.
- Ian Parker
I would welcome concrete suggestions for improveement. The EH posters
are difficult to pin down. They say all kinds of different things.
Some are clearly anti Semitic others not.
Daryl McCullough
>...I disagree with you. I think the passage from the "Black
>Sun" is extremely interesting and illuminating, as are the anti
>Semitic references.
It's not a matter of whether they are interesting, it's a matter
of putting them into context *beforehand*. Are you quoting something
that you *agree* with, or something that you find objectionable? If
you don't say at the beginning of the page, then a reader is likely
to get a mistaken impression, and will probably not read the whole
thing.
Ian Parker
I am simply pointing things out.
- Ian Parker
Daryl McCullough
>
>On 1 Aug, 14:09, stevendaryl3...@yahoo.com (Daryl McCullough) wrote:
>> Ian Parker says...
>>
>> >...I disagree with you. I think the passage from the "Black
>> >Sun" is extremely interesting and illuminating, as are the anti
>> >Semitic references.
>>
>> It's not a matter of whether they are interesting, it's a matter
>> of putting them into context *beforehand*. Are you quoting something
>> that you *agree* with, or something that you find objectionable? If
>> you don't say at the beginning of the page, then a reader is likely
>> to get a mistaken impression, and will probably not read the whole
>> thing.
>I am simply pointing things out.
Well, I'm simply pointing out that a good fraction of the
people who read your web page will conclude that *you* are
an anti-semite and and an anti-relativist. Is that the impression
you wanted to make, or not?
Ian Parker
1) Relativity is attacked much more frequently than other theories.
Why?
2) Antigravity research has been going on since WW2. Who is doing it
and where is it leading?
3) What started this off. I feel that the present time we are
suffering from cover up on top of cover up.
4) The "Einstein Hoax" is part of this cover up process. The aim is
NOT to disprove Relativity, the aim rather is to create an atmosphere
of uncertainty where the "secret world" can wield its mystique.
I can't see how I can have given you that impression. The frontpage is
a straightforward review of the scientific evidence. Having read this
you get the feeling there MUST be a conspiracy somewhere.
- Ian Parker
Willie...@gmail.com
superconduction super collider - a collider that power was proposed to
be constructed on the moon back in the 1950s and 60s - as the focus of
a moon base in the 70s - and subject of continuing analysis
http://www.springerlink.com/content/72p1v5677563926x/
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel2/1060/7512/00309021.pdf?arnumber=309021
would make ideal use of the moon - a particle accelerator that
encricled the moon - would achieve these energies.
To what end? The large scale production of anti-matter for one.
Also possible the creation of STABLE negatively charged particles that
are about 2000 x as massive as the proton.
http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v30/i9/p1876_1
These Cahn-Glashow particles would allow the creation of a super-
massive 'inside out' atom - whose center was composed of these
supermassive negatively charged particles - orbited by less massive
protons. These would create molecules that were mediated by nuclear
forces- and the size of the molecules would be the size of present day
nuclei. Inter-atomic forces would be millions of times higher and
densities would be millions of times higher as well.
The materials created in this way would be impervious to all forms of
radiation and particle beams.
With quantities of this supermassive material, one could create very
simple fusion reactors, in a method similar to muonic fusion, but far
simpler since the particles are stable;.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion
Thin films of carbon, tungsten or titanium crystals only a few tens of
molecules thick, would have these supermassive particles form a
'monomolecular' layer on their surfaces - increasing their tensile
strangth millions to trillions of times - while maintaining very light
weigh - forming super strong laminations.
Now shift gears a little bit...
Solar power satellite arrays orbiting a scant milion miles from the
sun, or fusion generator operating anywhere, powering solar or fusion
pumped lasers of immense power - beaming energy to large scale optics
- all using conjugate optics to coordinate their phases - beam energy
10s of light year - to propel laser light sails to 1/3 light speed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_travel#Beamed_propulsion
Arrays of satellites orbiting the sun and eventually distant stars,
establish a transport network between stars that operate at 1/3 light
speed.
One a few dozen star systems are 'settled' in this way, iron 56 is
mined from a dozen of these, and formed into shaped shells - and
propelled at 1/3 light speed to collide and form arrays of miniature
black holes - that have engineered properties. These engineered black
hole dusts are designed to interact with spacetime and each other - to
achieve a variety of ends. This includes; computing, temporal logic,
mass-energy conversion, zero-point energy extraction, black hole
replication
http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn8836-black-holes-the-ultimate-quantum-computers.html
http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/~hpm/project.archive/general.articles/1991/TempComp.html
http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v9/i8/p2203_1
http://www.calphysics.org/zpe.html
A number of engineered black holes, charged black holes - with
stretched event horizons - I call them black hole dusts, are imbedded
crystal fashion in supermassive particle arrays described above -
their charge responding to the charged array of supermassive particles
- forming a sort of supermassive molecule..
Now, due to Hawking Radiation - the black holes have a temperature
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation
That temperature is inversely proportional to the fourth power of its
mass. A spinning, charged black hole with matter falling into it,
produces a jet of relativistic particles that can be double the energy
of the infalling matter - extracting half of the energy from within
the black hole, and half the energy from the infalling matter.
That infalling matter is itself very small black holes formed by
tapping the zero point energy in space - created by the dance of five
black holes in a pentisil arrangement - within the suerpmassive
material described above - layered onto a tungsten or titanium
substrate.
The jet emitted by the black hole is primarily neutrinos.
http://conferences.fnal.gov/aspen05/talks/resconi.pdf
and in response the black hole is accelerated. The black hole is
charged, and interacts with the supermassive material layer encasing
the titanium skin. The five black holes in the pentisil arrangement -
are randomly oriented and thus, under 'normal' conditions, the
pentisil array of black holes - that dance to tap zero point energy
and then eject that energy in the form of jets - a slight change in
the electrric field causes more zpe to end up in the black hole array
- lowering temperature and maximum thrust - or more in the jet -
lowering black hole mass - and increasing maximum thrust - and the
application of an external magnetic field causes the jets to align
with the field, causing the surface to accelerate along with the
charged black holes imbedded in it.
So, a vehicle encased in such a 'propulsive skin' would be capable of
accelerating to very high speeds - with basically one part per 1000 to
one part per 100.000 - of the vehicle mass being taking up by this
propulsive skin - depending on radiation sheildig required.
Automated companion vehicles carrying trillions of times the mass - an
onion like arrangement of shells filliong out a volume of space - each
layer operated in a way that allows the black holes to grow 'fat' - is
one method for 'growing' such a companion vehicle. This pancake
shaped shell - exerts a surface attraction of 1000 gees to 100,000
gees - with very small tidal forces along the axis of rotation for the
disk. Another smaller disk falling toward the massive automated disk
- along this central axis - can be swept along at up to 100,000 gees -
without feeling any exernal force - as long as the propulsive skin on
the supermassive disk was operated in a way to accelerate away as the
piloted disk fell toward it. In this way, two craft can dance around
one another - and provide very high accelerations while the occupants
are in free fall. 1 gee is easily maintained by allowing the
supermassive disk to accelerate at say 100,000 gees - and operate in a
region where the external field accelerates the companion vehicle at
99,999 gees - with 1 gee being provided by the companion vehicles own
propulsive skin.
The universe may be circumnavigated in 3 hours and 40 minutes at
100,000 gee acceleration. Travel to andromeda galaxy occurs in a few
minutes. Travel to the center of the galaxy occurs in a few seconds -
ship time using this technology.
Of course, due to the twin paradox, thousands, millions or billions of
years pass in the external universe.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11539798
One final detail - the center of all galaxies appear to be filled with
supermassive black holes. These black holes have been around for
billions of years. They will continue to survive for trillions of
years into the future. Since they are spinning and very massive,
they are naturally occuring gateways through time - to any point in
time they exist.
With the sort of rocket technology just described, it is possible to
establish both communications satellites as well as transport systems
that allow travel and communication to any point in space and time.
http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr162/lect/active/smblack.html
Of course, heading backward in time to a point before NOW - allows you
to follow the universe forward along a different pathway into a
parallel universe - this is the point of Hugh Everett's MANY WORLDS
INTERPRETATION of quantum mechanics.
That is, not only does the collection of technical skills just
descrbed
1) super particle accelerator
2) supermassive stable negatively charged particles
3) laser light sail spacecraft at 1/3 c
4) engineered black hole dusts (bhd)
5) zero point energy tapping to replicate bhds
6) engineered bhd surfaces
7) zpe powered bhd relativistic propulsive skin
8) supermassive blackhole navigation.
allow us to communicate across all of space and time, but also allow
us to communicate across all parallel spaces and times!
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-manyworlds/
We are within 300 years of achieving this with our technology.
Actually, circumventing the step of inhabiting other star systems to
spread the cost of the program - a crash program could get this
technology into our possession in less than 100 years. - using a dozen
stations built in the Kuiper Belt some 30 billion miles from the Sun,
colliding shaped iron-56 near a station in the asteroid belt -
accelerating the pieces at 100+ gees and then feeding materials into
such arrays - had we agressively moved out into the solar system
following World War 2 - we likely would be well on our way to
achieving this level of technology - by 2030 - 2040 time frame. - well
before singularity is reached.
Benj
> The impression I wanted to give is :-
>
> 1) Relativity is attacked much more frequently than other theories.
> Why?
Simple. Because of the major Hype surrounding Einstein as the
"ultimate" in geniuses. This makes his theories major targets of
everyone who wants to claim the crown of being "smarter than
Einstein".
> 2) Antigravity research has been going on since WW2. Who is doing it
> and where is it leading?
If you poke around you can find some of it. Look at Naval Research or
MIT and the National Magnet lab, etc. But mostly it is highly
classified. The payoff for success simply represents WAY too much
political power to be ignored or simply thrown away by public
disclosure.
> 3) What started this off. I feel that the present time we are
> suffering from cover up on top of cover up.
Please. We don't use the words "cover up". We call it "Protected by
reason of National Security".
> 4) The "Einstein Hoax" is part of this cover up process. The aim is
> NOT to disprove Relativity, the aim rather is to create an atmosphere
> of uncertainty where the "secret world" can wield its mystique.
Once one makes the "official secrets" connection, then all the
disinformation, planted erroneous stories, attacks on the careers of
researchers wandering into forbidden topics, USENET disruptions, and
other chaff in the wind all start to make perfect sense. It is much
easier to steer those trying investigate the truth away from secrets
if you already know what the secrets are!
Fred J. McCall
:On Aug 1, 12:09 pm, Ian Parker <ianpark...@gmail.com> wrote:
:
:> The impression I wanted to give is :-
:>
:> 1) Relativity is attacked much more frequently than other theories.
:> Why?
:
:Simple. Because of the major Hype surrounding Einstein as the
:"ultimate" in geniuses. This makes his theories major targets of
:everyone who wants to claim the crown of being "smarter than
:Einstein".
:
There's also the problem that it's not intuitively sensible to the man
in the streets, like Newtonian mechanics.
We used to joke about how the man in the street was typically at least
two physics systems behind and 'bright laymen' were typically at least
one behind.
Then there are the folks who feel all science since the mid-19th
Century has to go because it keeps them from believing the Earth is
only 8,000 years old or whatever.
<discussion of paranoid delusional views elided>
--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw
Ian Parker
> On Aug 1, 12:09 pm, Ian Parker <ianpark...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The impression I wanted to give is :-
>
> > 1) Relativity is attacked much more frequently than other theories.
> > Why?
>
> Simple. Because of the major Hype surrounding Einstein as the
> "ultimate" in geniuses. This makes his theories major targets of
> everyone who wants to claim the crown of being "smarter than
> Einstein".
I do NOT regard Einstein as the complete genius
"Gott wuerfelt nicts"
Chaos says he does. I accept what stacks. Relativity stacks. His views
opn determinism do not stack and I reject them.
>
> > 2) Antigravity research has been going on since WW2. Who is doing it
> > and where is it leading?
>
> If you poke around you can find some of it. Look at Naval Research or
> MIT and the National Magnet lab, etc. But mostly it is highly
> classified. The payoff for success simply represents WAY too much
> political power to be ignored or simply thrown away by public
> disclosure.
There ain't anything to disclose. I keep telling everyone that.
>
> > 3) What started this off. I feel that the present time we are
> > suffering from cover up on top of cover up.
>
> Please. We don't use the words "cover up". We call it "Protected by
> reason of National Security".
Sorry, of course.
You mean don't you the careers of individual idiots.
>
> > 4) The "Einstein Hoax" is part of this cover up process. The aim is
> > NOT to disprove Relativity, the aim rather is to create an atmosphere
> > of uncertainty where the "secret world" can wield its mystique.
>
> Once one makes the "official secrets" connection, then all the
> disinformation, planted erroneous stories, attacks on the careers of
> researchers wandering into forbidden topics, USENET disruptions, and
> other chaff in the wind all start to make perfect sense. It is much
> easier to steer those trying investigate the truth away from secrets
> if you already know what the secrets are!
The secrets are there is nothing there. Roswell was a hoax from
beginning to end. Someone has said the people of Roswell benetfitted
from all the hype. OK they did, bully for them, I don't blame them for
one moment.
Suggestion - We build an exhibition of modern crime and fraud at
Roswell.
There can't be anthing there. Unclassified Relativity precludes it.
- Ian Parker
BradGuth
Unfortunately, there's not enough human talent, time or resources to
fulfill 1% of what you suggest.
Can you otherwise propose perhaps as little as 0.1% of your manifesto,
that's technically doable without further traumatizing or trashing
what's left of Earth?
* Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
On Aug 1, 9:30 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> A particle accelerator 10x to 100x more powerful than the proposed
> superconduction super collider - a collider that power was proposed to
> be constructed on the moon back in the 1950s and 60s - as the focus of
> a moon base in the 70s - and subject of continuing analysis
>
> http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn8836-black-holes-the-ultimate...
>
> http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/~hpm/project.archive/general.articles/1991/...
hanson
>
On Aug 1, 9:30 am, Willie.Mookie at gmail.com wrote:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.policy/msg/77058f017d6d13f4?hl=en
The universe may be circumnavigated in 3 hours and
40 minutes at 100,000 gee acceleration. Travel to
andromeda galaxy occurs in a few minutes.
Travel to the center of the galaxy occurs in a few seconds -
ship time using this technology.
>
in message
news:6aa05173-62b3-47d9...@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Too bad you're not God, or even the next best thing being ET.
>
... ahahahaha... But he is one of your favorite people,
a Chosen one, and they do have the gift of gab... ahaha...
"Trust me!" -- "Go figure!", Brad... ahahaha... ahahanson
>
"BradGuth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote
Unfortunately, there's not enough human talent, time or
>
Williie, Can you otherwise propose perhaps as little as
Willie...@gmail.com
As per usual, your need to see yourself as better than others has
coloured your analysis.
Here are the facts;
The cost of the moon base with the moon encircling particle
accelerator would have cost less than the Vietnam war. We could
easily afford it.
The cost of a fleet of 1,200 super orion nuclear pulse spacecraft
sufficient to commercially develop and settle the solar system would
have cost less than the cold war. We could easily afford it.
The radioactive materials released in placing this fleet in space
would have been FAR less than the nuclear materials released in
atmospheric testing during the cold war. Doing this would have left
us with a cleaner environment than doing the atmospheric testing.
Expansion of humanity into the solar system would have inspired unity
in human affairs and yeilded dividends far greater than anything
achieved by MAD and the cold war and we would have been far richer as
a result.
The OSS at the end of world war 2 was fashioned into the CIA with the
goal of avoiding a nuclear pearl harbor by using a collection of
activities that are so dishonorable that their very mention must be
kept a deep dark state secret. Consistent application of these
principles have yeilded a world engaged in a secret war with the US
temporarily dominant, but major sections - principally China working
through Muslim terror cells as proxies - using Russian loose nukes -
are effectively organizing the destruction of the USA. Meanwhile the
CIA has used recent attacks by proxies as an excuse to violate a
solemn promise to the American public. This promise, made in secret
is rather easy to violate without immediate political consequence, but
has ended the USA as a viable democracy in the name of national
security. Had the psychological and intelligence techniques honored
the human rights we claim to hold sacred, and sought to unite humanity
in freedom, rather than to dominate humanity through exploitation
drugs and violence, the USA would have built upon its reputation it
gained at the end of world war two - and would today be hailed
universally as the greatest nation on Earth - rather than that being
merely a camaign slogan. The people of Earth as a consequence would
be filled with hope, joy, and an endless sense of possibility - which
informs their dreams, and their activities going forward, shaping the
nature of life on Earth toward more peaceful and productive ends. In
short, a huge liability would have been turned into a huge asset,
further increasing the wealth avaiilable to humanity.
Commercial development of the solar system would have ended our
reliance on terrestrial resources to maintain our growth, and thus
ended pollution and environmental degradation and decoupled our
industrial growth from the environment. Thus, our ability to create
wealth is enhanced while our ability to so independently of our impact
on the environment is created.
Building large scale pressure vessels on orbit permits us to replicate
self sustaining bio-spheres using advanced technology.
The ability to make Cahn Glashow matter and anti-matter with the
particle accelerator mentioned would have exceeded our ability to make
plutonium during the cold war and since very little of either advanced
material goes a long way technically, interplanetary travel, would
have been transformed by the construction of the accelerator. The
fleet of large nuclear powered spacecraft would have been joined by
personally owned private spacecraft in every garage - even 'anti-
gravity' belts and boots - made of advanced propulsive skins and
attached to personal spacesuits - that allow people to fly across the
planet in a matter of minutes and throughout the solar system in
similarly short periods of time - accelerating at high gee - but
feeling only 1 gee throughout.
.
Willie...@gmail.com
Do the math. Take Barnie Oliver's calculations for a relativistic
rocket operating at 100,000 gees - distance is a function of cosh
hyperbolic cosine of ship proper time - plug in the diameter of the
universe - and you get 3 hours and 20 minutes.
so, there's no quarrel you can have there - that's pretty damn solid.
Cahn Glashow matter - that's solid too.
Miniature black holes - that carry small charges - embedded in CG
matter - that's rather straightforward.
Spiinning blackholes that emit jets of material - that's been observed
in space - no reason it cannot be done on a smaller scale
Supermassive black holes that are spinning also have rather large
vonstocum zones - and with the sort of propulsive capacities possible
with CG matter and engineered black hole dust embedded in it -
executing a sort of dance to recharge the loss of mass through zpe
breakdown - resulting in a controlled neutrion jet
all this is non-controversial and rather straightorward and the
development program obvious.
If we knew how to organize our afairs we would be rich enough and
smart enough to achieve that program I described..
Moving from the mundane to the more speculative aspects of modern
life;
If anyone has possession of a suspected propulsive skin - likely torn
apart by the magnetic interaction with a powerful lightning pulse by
accident perhaps - put it in a powerful magnetic field and see what
happens - its propulsive character should become evidend..
Put it also in a powerful anti-proton beam and look at the scattering
caused by it - to get an idea of what its made of.
The ability of such a material to unfold is rather easy to explain.
Trillions upon trillions of propulsive elements are located throughout
the surface. The each have a magnetic field, and respond also to
magnetic fields. There is a magnetic substrate - think recording tape
or disk drive surface - upon which this propulsive skin is layered.
Impressed on the magnetic substrate is the 'pattern' for the enclosing
propulsive skin - any section of skin torn away fromthe whole, tends
to take up the shape it is told to take by this underlying layer..The
skin in its entirety is nearly impervious to anything the universe can
come up with - given its immense surface tension - quite strong in
toto. Torn away from the whole, a piece would be quite easy to
crumple - but would tend through self interaction of the propulsive
elements - tend to spread out and reform. Measure the speed of
recovery and buckling constant of various sized pieces to get how
tensile forces increase with surface area - a knowledgeable analysis
determines the nature of CG matter substrate, bhd density and ultimate
acceleration capability.
Such a skin without care, will be very susceptible to powerful
magnetic fields created by high tension lines running cross country -
which may act like an interstellar spider web that interferes with
unsheilded control mecchanism of such craft. Electronagnetic pulses
properly shaped and of a proper size - likely achieved with a large
van de-graff generator - applied to this speculative sample should
easily tear it into pieces - creating an electromagnetic scissors or
shears should be rather easy..
Even smalll areas of such skin, if cut into finly divided 'dots' -
think of the confetti like remains left by a card punch machine (when
computers used to use 80 column cards). A vehicle capable of 100,000
gees when fully encased,can generate 1 gee with 1/100,000th the
material. So, such a 'sparse array' of subdivided skin - when exposed
to an external field of apprporiate size and strength - can be made
into an 'anti-gravity' lifter - such is not the case obviously - its
a nuetrino rocket tapping zpe present in all of spacetime.
A 10 ton interstellar vehicle would likely possess a skin that massed
10 kg and covered the size of a truck or road vehicle that carried a
similar payload - say 100 sq meters. . Recovery of such a skin and
its subsequent re-engineering into a sparse array would make it
possible to create a fleet of vehicles with a lift capacity of 300,000
tons with a 3.3 gee maximum thrust.
Such re-engineered vehicles would be capable of unlimited range,
Properly shaped charged particle beams exhibiting the right sort of
electromagnetic pulse (read and understand maxwells equations there's
only 4 of them!) should be able to 'knock out' or even 'remotely
control' such a propulsive skin - either repelling such craft - or
drawing them in and disabling them.
.
Willie...@gmail.com
following the assasination of Archduke Ferdinand in the Balkans, and
hence avoided the subsequent great depression, it is very likely that
in the great industrial advance of the 1920s and 30s - we Goddard
would have led humanity to the moon 30 years before NASA did. It is
also likely that nuclear explosives would not be viewed as weapons of
mass destruction, but rather, as a mechanism of mass-energy - similar
to the way people think of dynamite and other useful explosives. Open
research in nuclear sciences would have had nucleonics joining
electronics in the latter part of the 20th century, and humanity would
already have achieved technological singularity by the 1990s - and by
2000 would have personal relativistic starships navigating the
supermassive black holes at the center of every galaxy - and be
capable of visting all points of spacetime - including parallel
universes described by Hugh Everett.
Rising living standards in the 1950s and 60s throughout the world
would have avoided much of the growth in human numbers - and total
number of humans would have stabilized well below 4 billions. This is
due to the well known fact that human reproductive rates fall with
very high living standards. They rise with rising living standards up
to a point, and beyong that point, they fall, and beyond per capita
incomes that are twice their peak, reproductive rates fall below
replacement levels.
With advanced technologies, and capacity to communicae with the future
and the past and the future and past of parellel worlds - the
technological singularity would be complete - and humans would have
access to advanced automation and AI - and have the means to spread
across all of space time.
that is, rapid rises in living standards toward singularity in the
1990s - rather than 2040s which is today's trend line (but could
easily be delayed by misadventure) - would certainly have limited
human numbers - yet, the technology would also have spread those
numbers across all creation. The Earth of today - would have been
merely a convenient reference point of origin for those 3.5 to 4
billions - and the number on Earth would be rather small at any one
time -
In short, had we avoided the first world war - and the resulting
depression caused by that war in the decade following - and had we
honored those things we say we hold sacred - there would be 3.5
billion humans alive today and all of them would be multi-millionaires
- and own personal starships flying across creation in style - having
all sorts of adventures.
BradGuth
> Brad,
>
> As per usual, your need to see yourself as better than others has
> coloured your analysis.
You mean, my analysis of being practical and otherwise affordable on
behalf of accomplishing the greater good for humanity, and otherwise
with a keen focus upon salvaging our frail environment at the same
time. Silly me for being so impractical and for otherwise having that
stitch of remorse which keeps getting in your way of doing things
without regard for the negative consequences.
>
> Here are the facts;
>
> The cost of the moon base with the moon encircling particle
> accelerator would have cost less than the Vietnam war. We could
> easily afford it.
Lots of nifty stuff would cost less than the all-inclusive cost of war
and subsequent inflation, but it seems your kind of preferred brown-
nosing folks as minions to those in charge of our private parts and
most of our hard earned public loot, as such have always had other
ideas as to how to go about starting up and/or extending the next war.
>
> The cost of a fleet of 1,200 super orion nuclear pulse spacecraft
> sufficient to commercially develop and settle the solar system would
> have cost less than the cold war. We could easily afford it.
As long as your budget includes the ongoing worth of the mostly
Republican Mafia and their faith-based New World Order worth of
artificial inflation, such as the 100%/year average of fossil fuel
derived energy (6400% in 64 years), and that of perpetrating the likes
of our mutual cold-war, 911 and now Iraq that has us headed towards
picking yet another Muslim fight with Iran, you could be right.
>
> The radioactive materials released in placing this fleet in space
> would have been FAR less than the nuclear materials released in
> atmospheric testing during the cold war. Doing this would have left
> us with a cleaner environment than doing the atmospheric testing.
>
> Expansion of humanity into the solar system would have inspired unity
> in human affairs and yeilded dividends far greater than anything
> achieved by MAD and the cold war and we would have been far richer as
> a result.
I've always agreed and having argued that a mutual focus upon those
kinds of obtainable goals that'll directly benefit the greater good of
humanity and having protected our frail environment would have been
the thing to do. My LSE-CM/ISS is just one such technology topic, and
the other being intelligent usage of the extremely nearby Venus seems
more than doable as of a decade ago. I'm also in favor of using
thorium, plus having as much in renewable forms of energy as possible
(including Mook energy), in order to establish the 100 TW global worth
of clean and affordable energy for properly sustaining a 1e10
populated future of us humans w/o dependence upon fossil and biofuel
or the subsequent wars over such.
Unfortunately, the reality of life and death as we know it has little
to do with the truth or with the should of been, could have been
alternatives of the past, present or future.
”Whoever controls the past, controls the future” / George Orwell
meaning those in control of whatever gets officially recorded as
history or whatever as having been discovered or created are also
establishing and/or reinforcing their mainstream holy grail as to who
gets future credit and/or blame for whatever, and thus more
importantly of who gets first crack at whatever future credits and
that of receiving our public support, instead of receiving continual
denial, avoidance and systematic banishment. The very root of this
kind of orchestrated naysay imposed action against outsiders is
clearly faith-based and otherwise cloaked as to suggest that no one
public agency, private group or individuals are ever in charge of
anything that gets overlooked or goes terribly wrong.
If the mainstream status quo on behalf of their public image damage-
control didn’t have fingers, they’d have to point with something else.
(perhaps their brown nose would have to due)
BradGuth
our self inflicted demise that's multi-faith-based and thus forever
going to be a tough one for some of us mere village idiot humans with
good intentions to cope with.
If you're actually half as smart as yourself and other ETs claim, then
why don't you folks take charge of this mess, and just make it all
better. I certainly wouldn't stand in your way.
* Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Willie...@gmail.com
future and humans are not?
In addition to your need to see yourself superior to everyone else -
you also have an infantile need for a 'good parent' to take care of
you.
ETIs that exist are not God, and they're not parents. Many likely
don't have parents as humans understand the term. Nearly 100 years
ago Freud pointed out that our God fantasies, like our Santa fantasies
derive from infantile needs derived from poor parenting for a 'good
parent'. Obviously these same needs may be transferred to anyone or
anything seen to be in a superior position to oneself.
In your case Guthball you are hate anyone or anything superior to you
for not doing for you what you should be doing yourself, and you hate
anyone or anything inferior to you for not being as good as you think
you are. Basically you live a largely futile life of projecting guilt
and frustration pain and suffering onto others while vainly trying to
avoid that pain yourself.
In short Bradley, you are pathetic - and its obvious you are pathetic
every time you post bullshit like you've just posted.
The only useful thing anyone could do is be brutally honest with you -
and demand that you GROW UP!
> I'm certain that a smart ET as yourself can appreciate the matter of
> our self inflicted demise that's multi-faith-based and thus forever
> going to be a tough one for some of us mere village idiot humans with
> good intentions to cope with.
The highest best use of your time Brad is to do what you can with what
you have to be truly helpful to those who are in your life right here
right now. I've said this before, but since it doesn't inflate your
ego, and opens the possibility of revealing you as you truly are - you
don't hear it - and don't want to hear it.
> If you're actually half as smart as yourself and other ETs claim, then
> why don't you folks take charge of this mess, and just make it all
> better. I certainly wouldn't stand in your way.
Why don't you make it better? Its your fucking planet! Your
people! Your government!
> * Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
>
I do what I can in my life - and continue to do so. If you think I am
missing something - then you are free to do whatever you think is
right - that you can do that is truly helpful. Go out and do it -
quit railing against others in a vain attempt to deflect attention
away from your total ineffectiveness.
Willie...@gmail.com
> On Aug 2, 12:08 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Brad,
>
> > As per usual, your need to see yourself as better than others has
> > coloured your analysis.
>
> You mean, my analysis of being practical and otherwise affordable on
> behalf of accomplishing the greater good for humanity, and otherwise
> with a keen focus upon salvaging our frail environment at the same
> time. Silly me for being so impractical and for otherwise having that
> stitch of remorse which keeps getting in your way of doing things
> without regard for the negative consequences.
Rot
>
>
> > Here are the facts;
>
> > The cost of the moon base with the moon encircling particle
> > accelerator would have cost less than the Vietnam war. We could
> > easily afford it.
>
> Lots of nifty stuff would cost less than the all-inclusive cost of war
> and subsequent inflation,
Yes, so do those things - rather than war.
> but it seems your kind of preferred brown-
> nosing folks as minions to those in charge
Your need to see yourself superior to others causes you to fail in
seeing that the causes of war are common mode and have nothing
whatever to do with individual failings of this or that person.
> of our private parts and
Blaming others for your behavior is another infantile response to
stress. You are responsible for your life no one else. The moment
you accept this fact and accept responsiblity - you will have taken
one step toward adulthood - and with it, one step toward real
frreedom.
> most of our hard earned public loot,
How much have you paid in taxes over your life time? Not much I
would bet. On balance I bet you are a net drain on society.
> as such have always had other
> ideas as to how to go about starting up and/or extending the next war.
The perceived need for national security and warfare stem from the
fact that humans have not created a safe planet for themselves - and
so, spend inordinate amount of resources - both real and imagined - on
'defense' - this is a common mode failure - not a failure of any one
individual or personality. It stems from a continuing downward trend
in our culture that stems from poor child rearing practices. This was
first outlined by Freud, in his excellent analysis of religion - and
later expanded upon by Miller in her analysis of gifted children.
> > The cost of a fleet of 1,200 super orion nuclear pulse spacecraft
> > sufficient to commercially develop and settle the solar system would
> > have cost less than the cold war. We could easily afford it.
>
> As long as your budget includes the ongoing worth of the mostly
> Republican Mafia
Organized crime cannot exist without the tacit support of the
government at some level. Organized crime is tolerated by government
for a variety of reasons; first, they act as contractors to carry out
activities the government wishes to deny, second, they provide a
'cover' for policies the government wishes to implement and also deny,
third, they provide a means to gather income off-the-books to fund
secret operations and warfare, fourth, they act as a deniable means to
supress low income groups witthin the nation, and, sixth, they act to
destabilize entire regions and nations and peoples outside the
nation...
None of these roles are honrable, none of these roles are in the end
useful, and none of these roles support those things we say is sacred
to us. Yet without organized crime the strong would find it difficult
to efficiently exploit the weak.
But you have it backwards Guthball - you think the mafia controls the
politicians - its just the reverse - the politicians control the mob -
in a different world those agressive and ambitious folks would
actually contribute to society rather than enslave it - that's the
transformation of conciousness that will end organized crime and bring
about the safe world we all deserve.
> and their faith-based New World Order worth of
Every world view is based on faith. This is what Goedel's
incompletness theorem is all about. Merely because something is based
on faith - doesn't make it wrong or inconsistent. That's what
rational thought is for - and logic - and honest truthful
observation. So we can form a rational considered opinion about what
to BELIEVE - this is the basis of democracy - and of a free society in
general.
You seem to claim that the world is organized along irrational lines.
While it is true that those who would enslave us seek first to promote
irrational world views - it is not true they have yet succeeded. You
are a prme example of the failure of rationality and as a consequence,
an example of a life that has failed to be free. We've discussed this
before - you rail against irrationality seeing correctly that rational
thought, appreciation of reality, and freedom go hand in hand. Yet,
despite this you surrender to the most irrational counterfactual
notions and as a result are enslaved in a bizarro dream world.
> artificial inflation, such as the 100%/year average of fossil fuel
> derived energy (6400% in 64 years), and that of perpetrating the likes
> of our mutual cold-war, 911 and now Iraq that has us headed towards
> picking yet another Muslim fight with Iran, you could be right.
When the US was on the gold standard gold was fixed at $35 per ounce.
Today gold traded at $918 on the London exchange. That's a 26.2x
increase in the value of gold. Nixon ended the gold standard on Aug
15, 1971. This is a 9.2% per annum deflation rate in the value of
the currency - in terms of gold.
In that time period oil traded from $2.85 to $3.35 per barrel!! Today
in June 2008 the price of a barrel of crude traded at $126.33. This
is a factor of 44.3x - over the same period. This is a 10.8% per
annum inflation rate - in the value of oil.
The root cause of our economic difficulties lie in the fact that we
maintained a war footing after world war two - relying on our control
of the finance and retailing sectors of the economy to maintain a
disparity of income between ourselves our allies our raw material
producers and our enemies. We used intelligence operations in
resource rich nations to maintain low prices of commodities.
Unfortunately, these policies are doomed to failure for a variety of
sound economic and geopolitical reasons. As a nation we have yet to
address in any meaningful way the common mode failures such policies
create and prefer to focus on short term or chimeric gains.
> > The radioactive materials released in placing this fleet in space
> > would have been FAR less than the nuclear materials released in
> > atmospheric testing during the cold war. Doing this would have left
> > us with a cleaner environment than doing the atmospheric testing.
>
> > Expansion of humanity into the solar system would have inspired unity
> > in human affairs and yeilded dividends far greater than anything
> > achieved by MAD and the cold war and we would have been far richer as
> > a result.
>
> I've always agreed and having argued that a mutual focus upon those
> kinds of obtainable goals that'll directly benefit the greater good of
> humanity and having protected our frail environment would have been
> the thing to do.
Yes, but you have done so in ways that are totally devoid of any
appreciation of reality. Thus the goal is tainted by your madness.
> My LSE-CM/ISS is just one such technology topic,
Precisely - totally devoid of any appreciation of reality.
> and
> the other being intelligent usage of the extremely nearby Venus
Another good example of your madness. Can't you see that by
associating a workable approach to our future as a planetary species
with totally counter-factual and bogus statements and analysis - that
you are undermining the very goal you claim to support? Of course you
do. NO ONE can be as full of bogosity of you and be unaware of the
damage they do.
> seems
> more than doable as of a decade ago. I'm also in favor of using
> thorium,
So?
> plus having as much in renewable forms of energy as possible
Nuclear power is non-renewable- yet another example of a counter-
factual statement.
> (including Mook energy),
haha - don't draw me into you madhouse! lol.
> in order to establish the 100 TW global worth
> of clean and affordable energy
Humanity generates 17 TW presently primarily by burning
28.3 billion barrels of liquid fuels
5.5 billion tons of coal
1.1 billion tons of natural gas
at a cost exceeding $4 trillion per year.
Nuclear, hydro, solar - are down in the noise level.
Generating 3.34 billion tons of hydrogen gas from 30 billion tons of
water using 187.04 billion megawatt-hours of DC electricity each year
generated by 110 million megawatts of solar panels covering 612,000 sq
km of sunny lands - operating at 18% overall efficiency - at a capital
cost of $12 trillion.
Increasing this 11x over the next 36 years would provide everyone in
the world with same per capita energy consumption at the average
AMerican citizen today.
> for properly sustaining a 1e10
> populated future of us humans w/o dependence upon fossil and biofuel
> or the subsequent wars over such.
Fighting over resources is counter-productive and does little to
resolve the need for long term solutions.
Nonsense. The past is over and the future hasn't happened yet. The
only thing we control is the present - and the only answers we have
are those we find within our own minds. Blair argued for a view of
humanity that viewed humans as infinitely plastic in order to tell a
good yarn and tweak the nose of the Soviets.
Such is not the case. We have within each of us an infinity of
knowledge and capabilities and capacities. The moment we turn inward
and trust our own abilities -regardless of our situation - we find
that we have unlimited creative ability to solve our problems and
create the sort of world we desire - rather than be content with the
world we are given. The ever present now is a resource of infinite
potential for these reasons.
> meaning those in control of whatever gets officially recorded as
> history
Has zero bearing on what you are able to do right now. The past is
over and the future hasn't happened yet. Right here right now - you
are god within your own universe - sieze the moment and do what you
think is right to be truly helpful to others so that the world you'd
rather have is the one you have righ tnow.
> or whatever as having been discovered or created are also
> establishing and/or reinforcing their mainstream holy grail as to who
> gets future credit
Reality doesn't need our defense to be true. Reality does not depend
on our belief to be true. Lies therefore cannot threaten reality.
Reality on the other hand, easily and routinely undoes even the most
clever of lies - because things cannot help but be what they are.
> and/or blame for whatever,
Blame? Only those who seek to avoid the work of living their life
the way they'd rather - worry about blame. Only those who seek to
enslave you would try to instell this sort of mindset into you. Sit
still a second and see that this is true - and then carry out your
life without worrying about such things.
> and thus more
> importantly of who gets first crack at whatever future credits
Credit? Only those who are enslaved seek to give credit. Truly free
men and women need not blame nor do they need to give tribute to
anyone.
> and
> that of receiving our public support,
Free men and women make do with what they have.
> instead of receiving continual
> denial, avoidance and systematic banishment.
A free people look at their situation and look within to determine
what they desire and then take all appropriate action to achieve their
desires in that situation.
> The very root of this
> kind of orchestrated naysay i
You have a need to blame others for the frustration you create in your
life. You will never be free until you drop it- just drop it- and
move into a world where you take responsibility for everything that
happens to you - and act on it according to your innermost feeling -
regardless of what others say think or do.
>imposed action against outsiders
Your world view is that of a serf - not a free man - don't blame
others for your abject lack of self understanding.
> is
> clearly faith-based and otherwise cloaked as to suggest that no one
> public agency, private group or individuals are ever in charge of
> anything that gets overlooked or goes terribly wrong.
Have faith in yourself - and your ability to create solutions to you
life's situations. You havne't even admitted what you desire yet -
let alone create a way to achieve it. You're too busy feeling
superior or projecting blame to inflate your diseased ego.
> If the mainstream status quo on behalf of their public image damage-
> control didn’t have fingers, they’d have to point with something else.
> (perhaps their brown nose would have to due)
>
> * Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Utter nonsense.
BradGuth
How is sharing the best available truth so dark and scary to the likes
of yourself?
What and/or how does my sharing this kind of research truth represent
that I'm better than or even equal to others? (especially since it
seems no one on this Earth is half as smart as lord Mook)
Does simply being a messenger mean that you’d have to be extremely
smart? (I don't think so)
Does sharing in whatever discoveries via deductive observationology
make anyone a better than average person? (I don't think so)
Does my deductively interpreting the best available science as based
upon the regular laws of physics, mean that you're not ever going to
be a happy camper?
We seem to agree that war is extremely costly, even though I also
believe war is just plain dead wrong whenever artificially perpetrated
(such as our mutual cold-war, 911 and now Iraq).
You seem to think that 1e10 modern souls of the near future will not
require 100 TW in addition to a very limited and spendy as hell supply
of fossil fuels. Think again.
You seem to think that a substantially improved national energy grid
isn't all that necessary.
You seem to think that wind, tidal and geothermal derived energy isn't
worth the trouble.
You even seem to poo-poo and/or belittle the failsafe use of thorium,
as reactor fuel. (perhaps because it wasn't your idea to start with)
Of lunar derived 3He/fusion is simply of too much pie in the sky, and
of so much so pie that here too we shouldn't bother ourselves.
There's no question that a good amount of solar derived energy via PVs
and of the direct thermal energy conversion can eventually solve a
large portion of our global energy demands.
Of mirrors and lens applications are relatively cheap. However, of
reliable and affordable methods of short term storing of a given days
worth of solar energy isn't quite there, especially complicated if the
Zionist/Nazi proven method of making h2o2, aluminum, aluminum hydrides
plus the makings of other synfuels are excluded from ever utilizing
any of that clean energy for the productions of such.
BTW, I didn't bother to read through your entire rant because it's the
same as the ones of last year, of the year before that, and so forth.
* Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
> ...
>
> read more »
BradGuth
ETIs? (what the hell are you talking about?)
If I were merely half as smart as William Mook, I'd have fixed this
planet as of decades ago. Besides your being intellectually bipolar
and packing that mainstream brown nose, what's your excuse?
”Whoever controls the past, controls the future” / George Orwell
meaning those in control of whatever gets officially recorded as
history or whatever as having been discovered or created are also
establishing and/or reinforcing their mainstream holy grail as to who
gets future credit and/or blame for whatever, and thus more
importantly of who gets first crack at whatever future credits and
that of receiving our public support, instead of receiving continual
denial, avoidance and systematic banishment. The very root of this
kind of orchestrated naysay imposed action against outsiders is
clearly faith-based and otherwise cloaked as to suggest that no one
public agency, private group or individuals are ever in charge of
anything that gets overlooked or goes terribly wrong.
If the mainstream status quo on behalf of their public image damage-
control didn’t have fingers, they’d have to point with something else.
(perhaps their brown nose would have to due)
* Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Pat Flannery
Ian Parker wrote:
>
> I am simply pointing things out.
>
You will find a Google search for the postings of Ron Arndt - who does
the Black Sun/Grey Wolf website - to be fascinating.
One thing that's very surprising is that a world-class raving loon like
that could somehow competently put together a website that's technically
that well done.
The content is complete BS, but the site itself is world-class.
It would be like seeing Brad Guth whip up something like "Encyclopedia
Astronautica" one weekend.
I suspect that there's more to that website than meets the eye, and the
whole thing is some sort of chimera whose real purpose remains hidden.
Pat
Willie...@gmail.com
What you were talking about you lame brain.
> If I were merely half as smart as William Mook, I'd have fixed this
> planet as of decades ago.
There you go projecting responsibility again. If you actually did
anything in this life you'd understand - but since you are a do
nothing know-it-all you don't.
> Besides your being intellectually bipolar
Wait a minute.. haha.. who talked about ET and then asked what the
hell I was talking about when I responded to your comment about ET?
haha - you're doing that projecting thing again son. Where you accuse
people of the very thing you are doing.
> and packing that mainstream brown nose, what's your excuse?
You need to see yourself as superior to others causes you endless
confusion. You really need to see a therapist about that.
> ”Whoever controls the past, controls the future” / George Orwell
The past is over and the future hasn't happened yet. In this moment
you rule your universe. What are you going to do with that power?
Give it away? Why?
> meaning those in control of whatever gets officially recorded as
> history
Reality doesn't need our defense or our belief to be what it is.
Reality therefore is not vulnerable to lies. Rather, lies are
vulnerable to reality - every time.
> or whatever as having been discovered or created are also
> establishing and/or reinforcing their mainstream holy grail
Why do you promote views that give away your power to others and then
complain that those others are controlling you? You have the power
right here right now to take back your power and live in the real
world.
> as to who
> gets future credit and/or blame
A free people decide on a thing and then go out do it. They don't
worry about who gets the credit. They don't try to assign blame.
They see a situation as it truly is, and address it usefully to
achieve their goals.
Any time you hear someone blaming someone else - you can be assured
that they have some sort of infantile dysfunction which is the result
of poor parenting. Any time you hear someone worrying about who gets
the credit - you can be assured that they have another type of
dysfunction where they are very needy of attention lacking all self-
confidence.
that's you Brad. You are enslaved and powerless. But that's due to
your own mental processes - having nothing to do with external
reality. The moment you realize this is the moment you will be free.
And in that moment you might actually do something useful fo rsomeone.
.
> for whatever, and thus more
> importantly of who gets first crack at whatever future credits and
Utter bullshit.
> that of receiving our public support,
A free people are self reliant.
> instead of receiving continual
> denial, avoidance and systematic banishment.
People are drawn to those who are truly helpful and truly loving -
ever notice that? If you are reviled and banished and so forth -
please consider that it is not the fault of some distant conspriacy -
but rather something within you that keeps you from being helpful and
loving to those around you. Whatever you lack in life is what you
have failed to bring to it. If you desire a thing - be that thing -
and youwill have it.
> The very root of this
> kind of orchestrated naysay
Reality needs no defense to be what it is. Only lies are vulnerable
and will pass away. Reality will be what it is always.
> imposed action against outsiders is
> clearly faith-based
The only faith a free person needs is faith in themselves and their
own abilities to know what they want and goes about getting it.
> and otherwise cloaked as to suggest that no one
> public agency, private group or individuals are ever in charge of
> anything that gets overlooked or goes terribly wrong.
You are free Brad, despite the errors made by those use lies to
attempt to help the USA avoid al surprise nuclear attack.
> If the mainstream status quo on behalf of their public image damage-
> control didn’t have fingers, they’d have to point with something else.
> (perhaps their brown nose would have to due)
Politicians who live in the sort of hellish world you describe are the
opposite of powerful are the opposite of free. Free people have very
little to worry about from the likes of those you describe - if any
should exist.
Willie...@gmail.com
> How is sharing the best available truth so dark and scary to the likes
> of yourself?
>
> What and/or how does my sharing this kind of research truth
Brad, you lack the requisite skills to do any sort of research, and
you tell nothing but lies. Of course it inflates your ego to imply
you have done real research and know the truth! lol. But they're
lies and easily revealed as such, because you cannot help but be the
loser you are.
> represent
> that I'm better than or even equal to others?
Stating a truth doesn't necessarily inflate one's ego. Saying
everyone else are brown nosed minions - does! haha.. You won't even
allow yourself to see this difference - that's how weak and pathetic
you are.
>(especially since it
> seems no one
Yeah, that's the problem - you proceed from what things seem like -
based on how describing those things makes you feel. You LOVE
telling others they're brown nosed minions - BECAUSE it makes you feel
SUPERIOR to them - the reality is, you don't know what the fuck you're
talking about.
> on this Earth is half as smart as lord Mook)
Nonsense.
> Does simply being a messenger mean that you’d have to be extremely
> smart? (I don't think so)
See? You cannot listen to someone without making personality
judgments. This proves that you are not the disinterested observer
you pretend to be. You are truly pathetic - your whole life being
nothing but one big lie. Sheez. I feel sorry for you. I really do.
btw. VonNeuman showed that if a machine can add two numbers and get
the correct answer - it can do ANY computation of ANY complexity -
they're all the same thing. So, the idea that one is smarter than
another is a rather useless concept. Smart is only important when
you worry about speed - given time and space - anyone can come to the
same correct logical conclusion - those who seek to make distinctions
therefore are merely seeking to enslave folks.
> Does sharing in whatever discoveries via deductive observationology
> make anyone a better than average person? (I don't think so)
You have totally missed the point to protect your ego - which is out
of control.
> Does my deductively interpreting the best available science as based
> upon the regular laws of physics, mean that you're not ever going to
> be a happy camper?
You are the soul of bogosity - and wish desperately to be taken
seriously so that you can feel better about yourself. Fact is if you
faced the truth, you'd break through to a better life - but you don't
trust that or believe that.
> We seem to agree that war is extremely costly,
Except when its not.
> even though I also
> believe war is just plain dead wrong whenever artificially perpetrated
What about your artificial perpetrations? See? Fix yourself first
son, and if you ever get done with that job, worry about others if
they ask for your help.
> (such as our mutual cold-war, 911 and now Iraq).
The difference between you and me Brad is that you think all the
secret ops have been successful - whereas I fear that through common
mode failure - they have cost the USA the greatness that could have
been ours.
> You seem to think that 1e10 modern souls of the near future will not
> require 100 TW
I said quite the opposite. Of course, you would never tell the truth
when a lie could be fabricated would you? lol.
>in addition to a very limited and spendy as hell supply
> of fossil fuels. Think again.
99 TW of peak solar panels operating on 212,000 sq miles of sunny
lands provide sufficient hydrogen to displace all fossil fuels used
today. In less than 45 years at normal growth rates, with adequate
supplies, this will grow to be 11x this figure.
Two mining concerns controlling over 250,000 sq miles of sunny lands
have already agreed to reclaim their surface mines by giving them to
me to use as solar collector sites. Once these lands are filled with
solar collectors, I will then erect solar pumped lasers on orbit to
beam bandgap matched laser energy to these collectors to increase
their total energy 16x.
Before hydrogen displaces fossilfuels, I will hydrogenate coal
directly, without emissions, to produce gasoline diesel fuel and jet
fuel and sell those. Eventually converting the world's 5.5 billion
tons of coal per year into 38.5 billion barrels of liquid fuels. This
program requires only 15,000 sq miles of sunny lands converted to
solar panels. I will do this.over 15 years and dominate the energy
market. After that time I will increase the amount of hydrogen
produced from my lands, and the amount of fossil fuels will gradually
decline. Beyond that, laser energy beamed directly from space will
displace hydrogen in most applications - as the cost of energy
continues its steady decline, and its use continues to rise.
I will also adapt my ability to fabricate large areas of PET film to
make greenhouses, barns and homes, at extraordinarily low cost. That
combined with improved solar powered desalination and low cost
fertilizer made from air and hydrogen - will dramatically increase the
food supplies of Earth.
Meanwhile, the space launch capacity to orbit low mass inflatable
concentrators that power solar pumped lasers, will also be used to
orbit a communications satellite array to probide wireless broadband
worldwide. This will be used to provide a stable electronic currency
and fair and honest banking and financial services uniformly across
the globe. This will also be used to provide tele-robotic capacity
to allow anyone anywhere to work anywhere else. This combined with
increased food supplies, water, energy and low cost housing - will end
many of the shortfalls we currently face.
I will continue to expand space launch beyond that needed to support
powersats - and launch an expedition to the asteroid belt - with the
idea of surveying all the small bodies in the solar system - and
picking the richest of those to return to Earth orbit.
Sometime in this time frame the detonation of a loose nuke somewhere
in the world will cause everyone to re-address the issue of nuclear
proliferation. At that time I will propose, and fund, an enhanced non-
proliferation treaty - whereby all nuclear materials are processed
into non-threatening impulse units - to be used on a small exploratory
fleet - that carries out a manned grand tour of the solar system. No
single activity will so unite humanity. A dozen interplanetary
cruisers powered by nuclear pulse units, each carrying a crew of 5,000
- drawn from every nation on Earth - will carry out an 7 year
expedition to all the planets and moons fo the solar system. In their
wake they will leave a city on the moon, a city on Mars, and manne
outposts throughout the solar system. The fleet returns to a nuclear
repository and research center on the moon. there they will maintain
interplanetary contact to the manned outposts - and a chemical RLV
will maintain contact with the moon.
We will have achieved the starting point for true civilization - SAFE
WORLD.
I will use nuclear pulse units to capture and return to Earth orbit
the richest asteroids in the solar system- and then orbit remotely
operated solar powered factories to process those asteroids into
products for distribution on Earth - and across the solar system.
Large pressure vessels will be built from this material, and seeded
with crops and animals and trees - farms, then forests will bloom on
orbit. Food and fiber in great abundance will rain down on the people
of Earth, and across the solar system to wherever people are found.
This will be the second stage in the continuing advance of humanity -
PERFECT WORLD
Laser powered propulsive skins will be developed and used to create
very safe reliable and capable aircraft and spacecraft. These will
allow people to travel throughout the world in minutes - and to attain
orbit cheaply.
Pressure vessels developed for factories, farms, and forests, will
continue to advance to produce space homes owned by individuals.
combined with low cost space access - this will be the first diaspora
- D1 - movement from Earth to orbit.
Developing safe reliable and extraordinarily powerful propulsive
capacities to attach to orbiting space homes - allows people to travel
freely and safely thoruhgout the solar system - this is the second
diaspora - D2 - movement from Earth orbit into interplaneteary space.
Developing improved propulsive capacities to take space homes at 1/3
light speed across interstellar distances - allows people freedom
beyond the solar system - D3.
Relativisitc rockets, combined with navigation around supermassive
black holes - opens the entire universe - including all parallel
universes - to human travel - this is DF - thefinal diaspora.
At this point - the nature of what we find in the universe will
determine what happens next. do we have SAFE UNIVERSE? PERFECT
UNIVERSE?
What would those look like?
Well, on the other side of the looking glass - that is, the other side
of the technologicla singularity - you would have implanted sensors of
very powerful intelligence - that would be owned by every individual -
the AI loves you - and cares for you - you wear the device the way one
might own and wear a watch today - that would basically read your mind
- and then organize the universe in response to your thoughts.
Nano-tech equipped with miniature engineered black hole dusts capable
of tapping zpe - to make bhds, supermassive atoms, conventional atoms
and molecules and energy on demand - would allow the universe to
respond to you desires. Information available in an instantaneous
universal web - spread across all dimensions - would provide
information directly in your mind - and within seconds you could be
transported to anywhere anywhen anyinstantion (noting parallelity of
experience)
Of course nanotech circulating through your body maintains it in
perfect working order - surrounding it with a worldlet of your
imagining.. creating any sort of environment. peopling it even with
friends, lovers, family and enemies even - as you imagine what you
need.
,
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
BradGuth
behalf of the dark side.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
> perfect working order - surrounding it with a worldlet of your ...
>
> read more »
Read more, my ass. How about, go screw yourself, and then some.
Willie...@gmail.com
Willie...@gmail.com
What is it about a positive vision of the future that disturbs you?
> How about, go screw yourself,
Nope, I'm going to throw some filets on the grill and have a BBQ - a
few friends are coming over and we're going to talk about investing an
importing some scooters for a retailer friend of mine. High gas
prices,mean those scooters are flying off the shelves - and well, the
recent banking crisis has meant that scooter shops can't get the
credit they need - so, there's a business opportunity my man! Also
gonna talk about helping out some builders with their construction
loans - get some $1 mililion + houses for the *balance* of the loans -
sweet.
That's what I'm doing - later - who knows? If I feel like it Barb
and I might take my convertible down to the lake house and fire up the
boat - its such alovely day.
> and then some.
<shrug> You think I kiss and tell? Not by a long shot.
BradGuth
Since the truth about history isn't allowed, and there's still all
sorts of ongoing evidence exclusion/banishment, need-to-know and
otherwise taboo/nondisclosure that's keeping us mainstream snookered
and dumbfounded, whereas the only thing left to do is to survive
WWIII, WWIV and if there's anything left for surviving WWV.
Too bad your version of the future is still under the Zionist/Nazi
control, whereas the rich and powerful get richer and more powerful,
and they obviously get to live large at the ongoing demise and expense
of others.
Any time the all-inclusive government exceeds 10% of the adult
population, we've got trouble in River City, so to speak.
BradGuth
>
> What is it about a positive vision of the future that disturbs you?
>
> > How about, go screw yourself,
>
> Nope, I'm going to throw some filets on the grill and have a BBQ - a
> few friends are coming over and we're going to talk about investing an
> importing some scooters for a retailer friend of mine. High gas
> prices,mean those scooters are flying off the shelves - and well, the
> recent banking crisis has meant that scooter shops can't get the
> credit they need - so, there's a business opportunity my man! Also
> gonna talk about helping out some builders with their construction
> loans - get some $1 mililion + houses for the *balance* of the loans -
> sweet.
>
> That's what I'm doing - later - who knows? If I feel like it Barb
> and I might take my convertible down to the lake house and fire up the
> boat - its such alovely day.
>
> > and then some.
>
> <shrug> You think I kiss and tell? Not by a long shot.
Why do honest folks among friends need commercial credit?
With you and your Zionist/Nazi friends in charge, we'll have nothing
to worry about. At least that's what most good Jews were being told
by their own kind, and just look at what happened. Later on, 100,000
dark skinned Jews were told their 36,000 fold gamma and X-ray
treatment for their supposed ringworm infestation was a perfectly good
thing. Then there was the LIBERTY fiasco and countless other
unmentionable acts of faith-basted collateral damage and carnage of
the mostly innocent, proving that nothing all that much has changed.
Provoke and/or allow most anything to happen as unpoliced, and you get
war.
Willie...@gmail.com
> I do not presently have time to read
> from your learned response.
haha - but I had time to read yours and write a response - lol. If
you take one thing away from what I've said its this - really learn
about a subject before posting on it - it will make your life easier.
> I had realized that
> I am probably doing a dysservice to the Solopsists
Not at all - you are merely wrong about MWI = Solipsism. You are
doing yourself a dis-service, no one else.
> -- I'm sure it's not a totally pointless philiosphy --
Its an important philosophy. I didn't speak to solipsisms importance
or lack of importance I merely pointed out that solipsism says the
universe doesn't exist, and that quantum theory is a theory ABOUT the
universe, and MWI is an interpretation of that theory.
> but
> i'm just referring to the gist of their argument,
> "Universe is all in my head -- tee-hee!"
Obviously you are wrong when you say a philosophy that demands the
universe not exist is the same as a theory that explains the existence
of the universe. You being wrong on this critical issue plainly is
not a discussion about the importance of anything - merely the
correctness of your thought processes.
> thus:
> good observational, it applies to the perimeters
> of the figures on the sides of the trigons etc.
this is word hash again - words that seem to be assembled into a
sentence but make no sense whatever. Tell me son, do you use mind
altering substances on a regular basis?
> the main thing is that it applies to any similar figures,
> whatsoever; your special case was built on a 45-degree right trigon
> (equiangular & equilateral).
yep, no sense whatever.
> the *really* main thing is that
> you have to construct the circles, in any case,
> to actuallly "construct" the proof with compasses,
> so that Hipparchus' proof is the minimal effort. essentially,
> "Einstein's proof," which is actually in Eculid, but
> not labelled per the pythag. theorem, and which would
> have been seen by him in the gymnasium, is the same
> as Hipparchus, only it is merely diagrammatical,
> without bothering with the constructive part of it.
wow - no sense at all.
> now, apply it to the spatial cases.
If you would go cold turkey on every drug you now take, join a gym and
begin a regular pattern of exercise and running - watch your diet -
and see a therapist - you might be worth talking to in a few years.
Good luck with all that Sponge Bob
BradGuth
What are you and those you continually brown-nose so afraid of?
Obviously you haven't accomplished squat because of the screwed up
system that you can't find any fault with.
If given the opportunity and the means, would you help another
individual exceed?
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Androcles
<Stev...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a5870905-1de5-4e46...@w1g2000prk.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 20, 11:20 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> moon that's physically as dark as coal.
What?! Most of the surface is very reflective. How dark is our sun?
==================================================
The Moon is not "very reflective", you can hardly see it in daylight unless
the highly reflective air of Earth is clear. The Sun is never dark.
kT
> On Jul 5, 11:10 am, Borked Pseudo Mailed <nob...@pseudo.borked.net>
> wrote:
>> Brad Guth is a secret double agent of DARPA.
>> He would like to portray himself as against
>> the conspiracy, but he uses double think.
>> He is really an agent provocateur trying
>> to divert us all from the real truth.
>> Guth what did you do with the stars on
>> the original Apollo 11 film? You were
>> the secret agent that first analyzed
>> the film and modified it. You were the
>> one that added the fake cities to the
>> lunar pictures. Tell the truth
>> or we will tell if for you.
>>
>> -The Space Vigilantes
>
> I don't give him that much credit. Brad makes neither a good
> representative or propagandist for either side. He's confused that's
> why you are confused.
But being a secret agent, he WANTS you to propagate that myth.
Secret agents do that. Inspector Clouseau was a genius at it.
You are all mere pawns of forces of nature you cannot imagine.
kT
> On Aug 14, 5:08 pm, kT <cos...@lifeform.org> wrote:
>>> I don't give him that much credit. Brad makes neither a good
>>> representative or propagandist for either side. He's confused that's
>>> why you are confused.
>> But being a secret agent, he WANTS you to propagate that myth.
>
Because he's a secret agent, I just said that.
Presumably because his cover has been blown.
> I don't waste too much time with Brad.
Just enough time to be another pawn in his myth propagation routine.
>> Secret agents do that. Inspector Clouseau was a genius at it.
>
> I don't know. I don't waste time with fiction/tv.
Do you google or wiki?
>> You are all mere pawns of forces of nature you cannot imagine.
> You're not?
Did I say that?
Androcles
<Stev...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:df31380b-97da-4c14...@v39g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 14, 4:25 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:
>> <Stevep...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:a5870905-1de5-4e46...@w1g2000prk.googlegroups.com...
>> On Jul 20, 11:20 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > moon that's physically as dark as coal.
>>
>> What?! Most of the surface is very reflective. How dark is our sun?
>> ==================================================
>>
>> The Moon is not "very reflective",
>
> haven't you noticed?
No, I haven't. It appears quite brown to most people, perhaps you are colour
blind.
> White is the most reflective color. Are you
> saying it's not?
No, I'm saying the Moon is not fucking white.
> A full moon can even cast shadows. Isn't Selene the
> most reflective planet/moon?
No, it is not. Several moons and planets have a higher albedo than Luna.
> Could look it up.
Then do it. Produce a photograph of the Earth and Moon, like this:
http://tinyurl.com/66thn5
>
>> you can hardly see it in daylight
>
> Duh! The sun is extremely bright. What do you expect?
I expect the Moon not to be white or very reflective as you claim, duh.
Nor is it as dark as coal as Guth claims, duh.
So duh, whatever that childish expression means, fuckhead.
Androcles
<Stev...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e420f690-c435-49eb...@b2g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 14, 6:13 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:
>> >> The Moon is not "very reflective",
>>
>> > Yeah compared to chrome. Most of the moon's surface is quite white,
>> > haven't you noticed?
>>
>> No, I haven't. It appears quite brown to most people, perhaps you are >
>> colour blind.
>
Are you?
>
>> > White is the most reflective color. Are you
>> > saying it's not?
>>
>> No, I'm saying the Moon is not fucking white.
>
> Wrong, Keith is caucasian.
Are you?
>
>> > A full moon can even cast shadows. Isn't Selene the
>> > most reflective planet/moon?
>>
>> No, it is not. Several moons and planets have a higher albedo than Luna.
>
> Keith Luna?
>
>> Then do it. Produce a photograph of the Earth and Moon, like this:
>> http://tinyurl.com/66thn5
>
> Can we see your brown moon first?
>
>> > Duh! The sun is extremely bright. What do you expect?
>>
>> I expect the Moon not to be white or very reflective as you claim, duh.
>
> Selene is. Keith too. Maybe it just your cigarette stained eyes. Do
> you see everything brown?
>
>> Nor is it as dark as coal as Guth claims, duh.
>
> You're one step on the sane side of Guth, it's a start.
>
>> So duh, whatever that childish expression means, fuckhead.
>
> Speaking of childish expression, it's hard to top your childish
> expression of the moon being brown.
There is the photograph, child.
http://tinyurl.com/66thn5
Now fuck off, your bore me.
*plonk*
BradGuth
> On Jul 5, 11:10 am, Borked Pseudo Mailed <nob...@pseudo.borked.net>
> wrote:
>
> > He would like to portray himself as against
> > the conspiracy, but he uses double think.
> > He is really an agent provocateur trying
> > to divert us all from the real truth.
> > the original Apollo 11 film? You were
> > the secret agent that first analyzed
> > the film and modified it. You were the
> > one that added the fake cities to the
> > lunar pictures. Tell the truth
> > or we will tell if for you.
>
> > -The Space Vigilantes
>
> representative or propagandist for either side. He's confused that's
> why you are confused.
I'm the guy asking questions, and otherwise I'm simply a messenger. I
have at least a hundred questions for everything I believe to be
matter of fact. What's so confusing about any of that?
Is my deductive thinking too confusing for those of you that can't be
allowed to independently think inside the box, much less outside?
Is my suggesting as to how the unknown works, too much to ask?
Is asking of others to give us their best SWAG, too much to ask?
Are you confused because some of my ideas would actually work?
Are you confused because I'm not afraid of the planet Venus, or that
of utilizing Venus L2, or that of our Selene/moon L1?
Are you confused about our having to eventually relocate our Selene/
moon out to orbiting interactively at Earth L1?
If you'd like, I could go on like this for more than a hundred topics
and subtopics.
BradGuth
> > On Jul 5, 11:10 am, Borked Pseudo Mailed <nob...@pseudo.borked.net>
> > wrote:
> >> He would like to portray himself as against
> >> the conspiracy, but he uses double think.
> >> He is really an agent provocateur trying
> >> to divert us all from the real truth.
> >> the original Apollo 11 film? You were
> >> the secret agent that first analyzed
> >> the film and modified it. You were the
> >> one that added the fake cities to the
> >> lunar pictures. Tell the truth
> >> or we will tell if for you.
>
> >> -The Space Vigilantes
>
> > representative or propagandist for either side. He's confused that's
> > why you are confused.
>
> But being a secret agent, he WANTS you to propagate that myth.
>
> Secret agents do that. Inspector Clouseau was a genius at it.
>
> You are all mere pawns of forces of nature you cannot imagine.
That's the problem in a proverbial nut shell, whereas they "cannot
imagine" squat unless it's officially scripted within their Zionist/
Nazi Qur'an (aka DARPA) or Old Testament.
At least Clouseau made things happen, though not always for the
better. Clouseau also made his superiors think of what could and
usually did go wrong. It seems what we need are a few lose cannons
like Clouseau, thinking and acting outside the box as part of a team
effort.
If the unexpected was never unexpected, why bother?
BradGuth
> BTW I didn't change the topic. Agents of Darpa must have. SigHailBrad!
DARPA couldn't be any better cloaked on behalf of our Zionist/Nazi
wizards if we'd tried. It's also providing a perfect cover for their
own special and black ops.
Without the physics and science expertise of those willing to do
anything in order to further their research, warlords like Hitler
would have been hard pressed to pull of 10% of their collateral damage
and carnage of the mostly innocent.
Public loot and the authority to utilize such for traumatizing and/or
causing the demise of others is entirely faith-based orchestrated and/
or being puppet master controlled from within the Old Testament cloak
of religion that would like nothing short of global domination.
Without church backing, political actions would soon become screwed,
because, if the church says there's nothing wrong with the political
and civil service actions taking place, then most folks don't mind
going along for the ride, and if need be paying the ultimate price.