Tolerance: Can there be too much?

[Willie Lumplump]

The objection that "if paranormal phenomena are so common why are there not clear convincing cases of it" appears a strong one until one realizes that many things we now take for granted and know how to shape and intensify were unknown or not understood for thousands of years. I am thinking of for instance magnetism and electricity.

But, lest we confuse ourselves here, the fact that there are still many things unknown to science does not constitute evidence for the existence of paranormal phenomena.

[Willie Lumplump]

Fear not! You are unlikely to have one. :wink:

-Jeff

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! Now THAT tickled my funnybone!

[Willie Lumplump]

Zeno, do we know how the brain guesses?

This is an area of intensive research. In fact, I think that a couple of economists just won the Nobel Prize for shedding light on this question.


where does it get its information from?

By and large, this is known in great detail. Open any physiology book.


oh and does it work on its own or is somebody in charge?

It works on its own, or at least it's supposed to. In your case I'm not always so sure.

[Willie Lumplump]

Zeno, we still don't know how magnetism and electricity work!!!!!!!
we know how to use and reproduce them, but we don't know how they work.

Ever hear of James Clerk Maxwell? Nobody since his time has ever wondered how electricity and magnetism work.

[Willie Lumplump]

In the earliest part of the 20^th century it was thought to be imposable to drive a car past thirty miles per hour, the clear assumption was that you would not be able to breath if you traveled past that speed! Their was scientific proof top back this up!

You're not catching on to this. The speed of light is not a technological problem. It is a universal constant. There is a big difference. Technological problems are amenable to solution. There is no way to "solve" a universal constant.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
quote=Willie Lumplump;41122]It's not like there are different rates of travel in the universe and the fastest we've discovered so far is light. That's not the situation at all. Nothing can travel faster than light for a number of reasons, one of which is that such travel would violate laws of causality. Also, as any particle with a non-zero rest mass approaches the speed of light, it becomes more massive. At the speed of light, any such particle would have infinite mass, which is an impossibility. Also, at light speed the particle would be two-dimensional, that is, its length in the direction of travel would be infinitely small, another impossibility.[/quote][/quote]

[ThePhiant]

closed minds have always been a problem.
but people in denial of reality are worse.
Wilie, WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS STUFF REALLY WORKS!!!!!!
just like you with your scientific mind can't figure out what the life force is, where it is, where it comes from or how it works
in our myopic way we are ablr to observe and draw some conclusions that suit us but WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS STUFF REALLY WORKS
and that is the reality of life



Ever hear of James Clerk Maxwell? Nobody since his time has ever wondered how electricity and magnetism work.

[Willie Lumplump]

closed minds have always been a problem.
but people in denial of reality are worse.
Wilie, WE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS STUFF REALLY WORKS!!!!!!
just like you with your scientific mind can't figure out what the life force is, where it is, where it comes from or how it works

The last responsible person to believe in "the life force" was Irwin Schroedinger (of quantum mechanics fame) who published his book, "What is Life" around 1930, if my memory serves me. Since then, no responsible scientist has believed in vitalism, i.e., the notion that life is animated by some special force that sets it apart from inanimate matter. Scientists now agree that life is an emergent phenomenon of chemistry and is a purely mechanistic process subject to investigation by the standard methods of science.

Phiant, I have no idea if you're just making this stuff up or if you're getting it from somewhere else, but your opinions on this and related scientific matters are just off the wall. I don't know if you're reading too many religious tracts or too many issues of "The American Journal of Pseudoscience and Occult Phenomena." Whatever the case, I'd say that you need to get yourself a decent education.

[ThePhiant]

Well, well Willie finally we agree
you need to educate yourself!!!!


Scientists now agree that life is an emergent phenomenon of chemistry and is a purely mechanistic process subject to investigation by the standard methods of science.HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA
I CAN BARELY STOP LAUGHING
you sound so innocent LOL
you mean to tell me that we can just throw a bunch of chemicals at dead people and then they will miraculously come back to life ???????
Have you been smoking that stuff from Mykil?????

are you aware that scientist have weighted a body at the moment of death and right after that? and were able to notice a decrease in actual weight???
are they just full of air too?????????????


an emergent phenomenon of chemistryan emergent phenomenon of what?????????
where did it emerge from???

your slogans are great,
but can we have some scientific prove that these theories are actually realities???

[Willie Lumplump]

you mean to tell me that we can just throw a bunch of chemicals at dead people and then they will miraculously come back to life ???????

Or is it possible that if you throw the chemicals at a dead person everything might come back to life but his brain? But please don't take anything I say personally.

[ThePhiant]

But please don't take anything I say personally.
I can't take it personally.
your mumbo-jumbo is such thick gumbo, it won't done no good!

[Zeno Swijtink]

This querelle between the lump (the philosopher) and the deviant (the poet) is getting repetitious.

The two characters seem to merge: the deviant has a lump on her lul/u, and/or the lump is growing a deviant willie.

Tolerance: Can there be too much?

It's hard to see from here.

[mykil]

Well hell Zeno ole man, this seems to be post # 112, I would say there is tolerance among us! Willie asked the question, and I think that the posts speak for themselves. Although there seems to be no headway, a few butting heads, but for the most part everyone seems happy to participate and allow each other certain tolerances. So all the venting aside, I assume we all like each other, get along and are allowing the tolerance levels to rise. Instead of getting really mad, trying to throw a chair threw the window for something LULU or Willie said, we seem to brush it off and indulge in the scenario. For this particular instance I think the tolerances level is just fine. Now if you could all just see things my way everyone would be hunky dory to the friggin max!!!!<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>



This querelle between the lump (the philosopher) and the deviant (the poet) is getting repetitious.

The two characters seem to merge: the deviant has a lump on her lul/u, and/or the lump is growing a deviant willie.

Tolerance: Can there be too much?

It's hard to see from here.

[Sara S]

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."


I've never said that we should live by logic alone, but tarot, astrology, and many other wacky notions make sweeping claims that are testable. To believe such claims without evidence is irrational, and irrationality undermines rationality. We can't afford to have our irrationality undermined.

[Willie Lumplump]

and/or the lump is growing a deviant willie.



I have no idea what this means, but it's still one of the funniest things I've ever read.

I see the interactions between ThePhiant and me as a kind of dance, and I'm beginning to catch on to the steps. Most of it isn't real, but it has the satisfactions of complexity. ThePhiant continually throws out hooks trying to engage anyone available. If a respondent shows indignation or hurt, ThePhiant has hooked him into an exchange in which he, The Phiant, reaps the reward of attention. (I should note here that I believe ThePhiant to be a man rather than a woman, as advertised.) The counterstep (or counterstrategy, if you will) is either not to play at all (a good choice), or to alternate back-and-forth between appearing to take the hook and then unexpectedly switching to a kind of bemused disdain. If you're a third party who's not paying close attention, I can imagine that this game might get rather tedious. If there's any serious objection from wacco members, I wouldn't mind giving it up, but for now I find it to be quite entertaining.

[Willie Lumplump]

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

With all due respect to you and William Shakespeare, the fact that there are more things in heaven and earth than I (or we) dream about does not constitute evidence for the validity of tarot, astrology, or any other occult practice. If you wish to believe in things without sufficient evidence, of course it's a free country. But I see myself as a seeker after the truth, and to seek the truth one must base one's beliefs on evidence. As I see it, this is basically a contest between two sets of values, one based on truth and the other based on comfort. The truth is often not comforting, and what's comforting is often not true. But there are great compensations for living in the real world rather than in one's own mind.

[Clancy]

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

This is very likely true, since we don't even know what the vast majority of the universe is made of, but that in no way lends any credibility to tarot, astrology, tea leaf or live animal entrail reading.

[ThePhiant]

well, well,
so finally the real Willie popped out
here I thought that i was going to be able to elicit some REAL and rational answers to the most interesting questions that mankind has pondered ever since it was able to ponder.
I DO have an insatiable curiosity combined with an equal amount of skepticism
after all I DO like to hear a scientific explanation of how it all came about in this world.
but turns out there are no real answers, just a willie-nillie nobody who only can offer up some outdated slogans, with a superior disdain for us mere mortals

But I must say,I feel a lot safer knowing that you see me as a man rather than as a woman,





I see the interactions between ThePhiant and me as a kind of dance, and I'm beginning to catch on to the steps. Most of it isn't real, but it has the satisfactions of complexity. ThePhiant continually throws out hooks trying to engage anyone available. If a respondent shows indignation or hurt, ThePhiant has hooked him into an exchange in which he, The Phiant, reaps the reward of attention. (I should note here that I believe ThePhiant to be a man rather than a woman, as advertised.) The counterstep (or counterstrategy, if you will) is either not to play at all (a good choice), or to alternate back-and-forth between appearing to take the hook and then unexpectedly switching to a kind of bemused disdain. If you're a third party who's not paying close attention, I can imagine that this game might get rather tedious. If there's any serious objection from wacco members, I wouldn't mind giving it up, but for now I find it to be quite entertaining.

[Tinque]

:heart:
well, well,
so finally the real Willie popped out
here I thought that i was going to be able to elicit some REAL and rational answers to the most interesting questions that mankind has pondered ever since it was able to ponder.
I DO have an insatiable curiosity combined with an equal amount of skepticism
after all I DO like to hear a scientific explanation of how it all came about in this world.
but turns out there are no real answers, just a willie-nillie nobody who only can offer up some outdated slogans, with a superior disdain for us mere mortals

But I must say,I feel a lot safer knowing that you see me as a man rather than as a woman,

I can only say it brought a smile :heart: to my lips seeing "The Phiant" back on board. I was at one time intrigued and curious about "The Phiants" gender, but for some reason, it really doesn't matter a bit ! :Yinyangv:

[Lorrie]

Okay, Okay! I pipe in! heh heh, Well the question is Tolerance: Can there be too much? Well, after reading and where this thread has gone .... giggle... I will give MY answer.

Obviously there can never be too much tolerance! Each one of you have tolerated the questions and answers of each of you.

AND I TOLERATED ALL OF IT!!!

LMFAO!!!
You people are great comedians!!!:thumbsup:
~Lorrie


I can't take it personally.
your mumbo-jumbo is such thick gumbo, it won't done no good!

[Lorrie]

Hey Willie!
:troll::argument::feedtroll::mime:


:veryfunny:
~Lorrie


I have no idea what this means, but it's still one of the funniest things I've ever read.

I see the interactions between ThePhiant and me as a kind of dance, and I'm beginning to catch on to the steps. Most of it isn't real, but it has the satisfactions of complexity. ThePhiant continually throws out hooks trying to engage anyone available. If a respondent shows indignation or hurt, ThePhiant has hooked him into an exchange in which he, The Phiant, reaps the reward of attention. (I should note here that I believe ThePhiant to be a man rather than a woman, as advertised.) The counterstep (or counterstrategy, if you will) is either not to play at all (a good choice), or to alternate back-and-forth between appearing to take the hook and then unexpectedly switching to a kind of bemused disdain. If you're a third party who's not paying close attention, I can imagine that this game might get rather tedious. If there's any serious objection from wacco members, I wouldn't mind giving it up, but for now I find it to be quite entertaining.

[Willie Lumplump]

Hey Willie!
:troll::argument::feedtroll::mime:


:veryfunny:
~Lorrie

Actually, there's more to this than just entertainment, but I should probably explain privately.

[ThePhiant]

Actually, there's more to this than just entertainment, but I should probably explain privately.
you should!!!!
how long are you going to make me wait this time????

[Tinque]

you should!!!!
how long are you going to make me wait this time????
Can we all have some communication that could be relevent or meaningful or even entertaining . , so that several or all or some can understand ! :heart:

[ChristineL]

Willie Lumplump stated:
"So you know things that you have no way of knowing, but you're not a psychic. In that case, how are you different from a psychic?"

Yes I am...

Willie Lumplump stated:
"As I always say, I like to have an open mind, but not so open that my brains fall out."

Your brain is absolutely in no danger from your mind being too open.


Willie Lumplump stated:
"I see you and people who make similar claims as yours as a part of the general "assault on reason" (Al Gore's term). A hundred years ago the light of reason that was our founding fathers' bequest to us burned bright in this country. The values of the Enlightenment prevailed. Now we have retreated far back into the dark ages from which we had begun to emerge in the 15th century. Ghosts, demons, occult powers, and so-called "paranormal phenomena" are perceived everywhere. Ronnie Reagan consulted his astrologer before making important decisions. This man, who had his finger on the button that could destroy the world, was consulting with a refugee from the dark ages. And now we have a president who consults with politicians disguised as evangelical Christians preaching a gospel of hate and destruction. And . . . what do you know? . . . I feel angry about all that."


I think what's left of the Native American tribes might not feel that the "light of reason" was our founding fathers' bequest. If founding a country on the near genocide of an entire people and the forced relocation of the survivors onto the least desirable land (land not coveted by the "reasonable") and initially starting a viable economy on slave labor is the beginning of "englightment" and a bequest of a "light of a reason", we did it. A hundred years ago when the "light of reason" burned so bright, Native American children were still being taken away from their parents at an early age and placed in boarding schools where their hair was forcibly cut and they were not allowed to speak to each other in their native languages. Less than a hundred years ago, the Olympic gold medal champion, Jesse Owens, still had to ride in the back of the bus in the South and use public bathrooms and drinking fountains designated for "Coloured Folks". The black man who discovered the RH factor enabling us to safely carry out blood transfusions bled to death in a hospital because it was a hospital for "whites only". Just a few examples...

As far as Ronald Reagan consulting an Astrologer before making major decisions, isn't that anecdotal? Astrology by far predates the Dark Ages and Astrologers were part of the getting burned at the stake group.

It's not the Astrologers, Wiccans, Spiritualists, Kabalists, etc. that are preaching a gospel of hate and destruction. We are also not the ones trying to set us back into the 19th century through the promotion of Constitutional changes and elimination of legal protections. It is the Fundamentalists and extremists of many organized religions that have to be right and feel a need to control the "morality" of everyone on the planet.

In response to my statement that I had nothing vested in converting him to my way of believing and thinking, Willie Lumplump asked:
"Maybe I forgot to ask. Do you accept money for what you do?"

Yes Willie, I do. In spite of that, I will not push anyone to get a reading as their getting something out of it is important to me. Again, I have little vested in converting anyone to my belief system or way of thinking.

Once again, let's agree to disagree.

Christine

[ThePhiant]

Supernova.
I asked Willie some direct questions, but all I get back is slogans and artificial hype. So I guess I will see eternity turn into infinity, before that Willie rises to the occasion...............


Can we all have some communication that could be relevent or meaningful or even entertaining . , so that several or all or some can understand ! :heart:

[Willie Lumplump]

Astrology by far predates the Dark Ages and Astrologers were part of the getting burned at the stake group.

Astrologers were burned at the stake? By whom? And when?

I'm not trying to renounce history here. The science of astronomy developed from the superstition of astrology, and in any case early astrologers carefully plotted the motions of the planets and provided a ground on which Bahe and Kepler could found the science of astronomy.

You make much of your Native American connection. What was the place of tarot in the story of your people?

I'm not sure what point you hoped to make in reciting the ghastly, butal history of the United States (a brutality that continues to the present day). Do you feel that the constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the other writings of the founding fathers are meaningless because of what your people suffered? By the way, I wouldn't blame you if you answered "yes" to this. The Federal government continues to this day to steal from Native Americans. The amount of the theft is so vast that nobody even knows how to calculate it. The so-called "Bureau of Indian Affairs" (actually the Bureau of Indian Oppression) stole billions. The latest rough estimate that I heard was $15 billion (but nobody is sure). And the American people, or rather non-Native Americans, tolerate this. We should construct a special prison in Guantanamo for the criminals who perpetrated this injustice on Native Americans.

By the way, I was married to a black woman and have an adopted black daughter, so, like you, I'm sensitive to issues of race.

[ChristineL]

Astrologers were burned at the stake? By whom? And when?...


All methods of divination, from Tarot to Astrology, were condemned during the Dark Ages and the Inquisition. Anything less than full adherence to the dicates of the Church got you burned at the stake. The Cathars in Southern France who were followers of Mary Magdeleine and practiced a more spiritual and liberal form of Christianity were almost completely wiped out in the Middle Ages. Culture, art and science thrived in their communities and women were considered the equals of men. Jews, Africans and people of all cultures and belief systems resided and did business in their cities. When their last stronghold fell, most walked into the fire rather then repent their ways and give allegiance to the Church. Astrology is just one form of divination and just one aspect of many belief systems...The symbolism in the Tarot deck I use is derived from the Kabalah (ancient Judaism). So, yes, they were persecuted too. Early Astronomers were not looked upon fondly either.

Tarot itself has little to do with Native Americans, it is just an aspect of a spiritual belief system. Native American tribes had Shamans, Medicine Men and their own belief systems...which in the eyes of many early settlers made them "heathens" and less than human as they did not believe in the settlers' "God". The Quakers were an exception. It's not just Tarot, Astrology, etc., they all relate to a way of believing. I know you believe it's all superstitions, but those who taught me Tarot, Numerology, Palmistry, Healing, and the Kabalah believed that whether called Christ, Buddha, Mohamed, The Great Spirit or Godess, it all has the same foundation and the basic tenets are the same. The Cathars were equally tolerant.

Do remember that the Constitution and other writings were only for the benefit of white men originally and did not include Blacks and Native Americans as "men", nor were women of all races included. Just making the point that their heritage of "light of reason" and "enlightment" are not all it's cracked up to be. I just get tired of hearing that other cultures hate us because we stand for freedom and democracy and that the spread of democracy is a justification for war. I get tired of hearing this country was founded on "Freedom" when it was actually founded on genocide and slavery. We can be a great country, but a little more self examination and less self glorification might go a long way towards fixing all that is wrong. Yes, the basic ideas in the Founding Fathers' writings are a solid foundation for a great country, but they've really never been fully applied.

Whatever gives you the idea I'm Native American? I'm just a critical thinker who looks behind what is written and tries to find writings from different perspectives before deciding what the truth actually may be.

Maybe....I even could be a man...and/or Black, Jewish...etc. It's irrelevent.

[ThePhiant]

christine I don't understand why you are waisting your time on some one who obviously is judging something that he has no first hand knowledge of.
it would be akin to see him trying to teach you French,
he'll probable try to convince you that au revoir and adieu mean the same thing. maybe even a bientot


All methods of divination, from Tarot to Astrology, were condemned during the Dark Ages and the Inquisition....

[ChristineL]

christine I don't understand why you are waisting your time on some one who obviously is judging something that he has no first hand knowledge of.
it would be akin to see him trying to teach you French,
he'll probable try to convince you that au revoir and adieu mean the same thing. maybe even a bientot

Willie has been trying to teach me proper written English...I have wondered if he can write any second language as well as I can this one...

Wasting my time...on Willie, highly likely. Many other people are reading this thread and if someone else's mind is opened a little or they're inspired to do some research, or just enjoy reading the posts, it's not a waste of time.

Not many people in the US would know that au revoir and adieu actually have different meanings...

Christine

[Willie Lumplump]

Willie has been trying to teach me proper written English...I have wondered if he can write any second language as well as I can this one...

Mai oui! J'ecris tres bien en francais. Apres tout, j'ai passe huit ans dans un pays francophone, le Congo (denierement, le Zaire). Avez-vous d'autres questions, Madame Christine?


Wasting my time...on Willie, highly likely.

J'attends toujours l'evidence. Vous pouvez parler jusque votre visage devient bleu, mais sans evidence ca n'a pas d'importance.

"Adieu" est ce que je dis au Phiant quand je pense qu'il est parti de bon. "Au revoir" est ce que je lui dis quand il continue a revenir comme un cas de "halitosis."

[Willie Lumplump]

All methods of divination, from Tarot to Astrology, were condemned during the Dark Ages and the Inquisition. Anything less than full adherence to the dicates of the Church got you burned at the stake. The Cathars in Southern France who were followers of Mary Magdeleine and practiced a more spiritual and liberal form of Christianity were almost completely wiped out in the Middle Ages. Culture, art and science thrived in their communities and women were considered the equals of men. Jews, Africans and people of all cultures and belief systems resided and did business in their cities. When their last stronghold fell, most walked into the fire rather then repent their ways and give allegiance to the Church. Astrology is just one form of divination and just one aspect of many belief systems...The symbolism in the Tarot deck I use is derived from the Kabalah (ancient Judaism). So, yes, they were persecuted too. Early Astronomers were not looked upon fondly either.

Very interesting history. Thanks. I wasn't aware of all that, although I would question certain parts of your account. Western Science, in the sense that we understand it today, didn't start until much later, in the early 16th century.


I know you believe it's all superstitions, but those who taught me Tarot, Numerology, Palmistry, Healing, and the Kabalah believed that whether called Christ, Buddha, Mohamed, The Great Spirit or Godess, it all has the same foundation and the basic tenets are the same. The Cathars were equally tolerant.

Very hard for me to understand that point of view. Judaism and Islam have much in common. Christianity has relatively little in common with either, and Buddhism is way off by itself in that it is spiritual path based on an exploration of consciousness and therefore, in an important sense, not even a religion.


I get tired of hearing this country was founded on "Freedom" when it was actually founded on genocide and slavery..

I see your point, but we have to believe in something to have reason to go on living, and I believe in the words of the founding fathers. "The duty of the patriot is to protect the people against the government." Thomas Paine said that. It probably isn't too relevant to this discussion, it just makes me feel good to repeat it.


Whatever gives you the idea I'm Native American?

Well, I'll be darned.


I even could be a man.

Well, in that case it's time for both of you to come out of the closet.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Mai oui! J'ecris tres bien en francais. Apres tout, j'ai passe huit ans dans un pays francophone, le Congo (denierement, le Zaire). Avez-vous d'autres questions, Madame Christine?



J'attends toujours l'evidence. Vous pouvez parler jusque votre visage devient bleu, mais sans evidence ca n'a pas d'importance.

"Adieu" est ce que je dis au Phiant quand je pense qu'il est parti de bon. "Au revoir" est ce que je lui dis quand il continue a revenir comme un cas de "halitosis."

Spreek je ook Vlaams? Zo ja, dan kunnen Phiant en jij misschien het in het Nederlands eens worden.

[Willie Lumplump]

Spreek je ook Vlaams? Zo ja, dan kunnen Phiant en jij misschien het in het Nederlands eens worden.

Oh, dear! I'm afraid that I don't speak any Dutch, although about now I'd sure like to. Say, here's an idea: Let's throw a translation party and invite you-know-who. I'll bring the balloons, the chips & avocado dip, and the tar and feathers. You bring some soft drinks, some pretzels, and a rail. We'll have ourselves a real blow-out jamboree! Yessiree!

[ThePhiant]

Afrikaans is waarschijnlijk meer op zijn plaats voor iemand die zo graag apart staat en superieur is!

Spreek je ook Vlaams? Zo ja, dan kunnen Phiant en jij misschien het in het Nederlands eens worden.

[Willie Lumplump]

Afrikaans is waarschijnlijk meer op zijn plaats voor iemand die zo graag apart staat en superieurr is!

Hey, great! You speak Afrikaans! Now if you can only learn to speak English . . .

[ThePhiant]

Willie has been trying to teach me proper written English...I have wondered if he can write any second language as well as I can this one...


Christine
like I said, Willie Hautain, likes to correct your French too!
and he is now going to teach me English as well,
no wonder they kicked the bug man out of Africa

[ChristineL]

...
Well, in that case it's time for both of you to come out of the closet.

I could be transexual and already way out of the closet...

[ThePhiant]

oh, mr critical thinking scientist
when did I say I was able to speak Afrikaans???????????????????


Hey, great! You speak Afrikaans! Now if you can only learn to speak English . . .

[Willie Lumplump]

I could be transexual and already way out of the closet...

More's the better! I've considered coming out as supra-sexual or transcendentally sexual, but I'm not sure if the world is ready for that.

[Willie Lumplump]

oh, mr critical thinking scientist
when did I say I was able to speak Afrikaans???????????????????

My mistake! (again). I guess we can go back to my original proposition that you are entirely nonverbal.

[ThePhiant]

as a self proclaimed critical thinker and scientist you are certainly consistently inconsistent.
your statement "my original proposition that you are entirely nonverbal" leads me to believe that you contracted a severe case of malaria during your bug exploitation days.


My mistake! (again). I guess we can go back to my original proposition that you are entirely nonverbal.

[Willie Lumplump]

as a self proclaimed critical thinker and scientist you are certainly consistently inconsistent.

Well, you know what Ralph Waldo Emerson said: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."

[Willie Lumplump]

your statement "my original proposition that you are entirely nonverbal" leads me to believe that you contracted a severe case of malaria during your bug exploitation days.

Now that you mention it, I did contract malaria several times, and once it was quite brutal. But, Igor, I'm almost normal now . . . almost normal now.

[Sara S]

For you sceptics I recommend "Opening the Dragon Gate"-the making of a modern Taoist wizard, by Chen Kaiguo and Zheng Shunchao, translated by Thomas Cleary.


Willie; I think it all boils down to the fact that there are other people on this planet and we share it! ...

[Willie Lumplump]

For you sceptics I recommend "Opening the Dragon Gate"-the making of a modern Taoist wizard, by Chen Kaiguo and Zheng Shunchao, translated by Thomas Cleary.

Skepticism is a trait that we should encourage in ourselves and in our children. A skeptic is someone who bases his beliefs on evidence and is not willing to believe until he sees the evidence.

[Sara S]

I don't demand to see the evidence when the source is one of the few people I know who are superior in intelligence and veracity. Thomas Cleary is one.


Skepticism is a trait that we should encourage in ourselves and in our children. A skeptic is someone who bases his beliefs on evidence and is not willing to believe until he sees the evidence.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Skepticism is a trait that we should encourage in ourselves and in our children. A skeptic is someone who bases his beliefs on evidence and is not willing to believe until he sees the evidence.

This cannot be a good definition of a skeptic. Such a person would have very few beliefs, not enough to function in a complex society.

Most of our beliefs are based on testimony from other people we trust to have reliable beliefs. If you read a scientific paper based on direct observation and experiment you trust the authors to report and interpret correctly, have used reliable methods of error correction and data reduction, etc.

The difference between a skeptic and the rest of us cannot be based on this criterion, "having seen the evidence." It's a naive definition, not grounded in the practice of science.

[Willie Lumplump]

I don't demand to see the evidence when the source is one of the few people I know who are superior in intelligence and veracity. Thomas Cleary is one.

A lot of people who are superior in intelligence are also untrustworthy, but the word of a person whom you've learned to trust can be a valid kind of evidence, depending on the standards you've applied while learning to trust. I've learned to trust Noam Chomsky, so when he says something, I tend to believe it.

[Willie Lumplump]

This cannot be a good definition of a skeptic. Such a person would have very few beliefs, not enough to function in a complex society.

Most of our beliefs are based on testimony from other people we trust to have reliable beliefs. If you read a scientific paper based on direct observation and experiment you trust the authors to report and interpret correctly, have used reliable methods of error correction and data reduction, etc.

The difference between a skeptic and the rest of us cannot be based on this criterion, "having seen the evidence." It's a naive definition, not grounded in the practice of science.

"Evidence" is a kind of trick word. See my comments to Sara.

[mykil]

Just out of mild curiosity what would you conceder a one-dimensional object? And don't say mykil!

[Willie Lumplump]

Just out of mild curiosity what would you conceder a one-dimensional object? And don't say mykil!
A one-dimensional object is, by definition, a straight line.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Just out of mild curiosity what would you conceder a one-dimensional object? And don't say mykil!

According to Herbert Marcuse our society (in the late 50s??) was/is a one-dimensional object where the skill for critical thinking and creating alternatives had/has disappeared. Having "mild curiosity" may be a first step towards a second dimension.

[mykil]

AS described by some, this might be acceptable to me! 'mathematically absolute' 1 D, is infinite...<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
There can be no one dementional object as far as I can decsribe, but there can be everything in between on the way to find it! How can anyone even assume that there might be a one demetional obeject? It cannot exist? A frog hair can not even assume to be thin enough? On the way to a 2 D can only be entertainment!

[Zeno Swijtink]

AS described by some, this might be acceptable to me! 'mathematically absolute' 1 D, is infinite...<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
There can be no one dementional object as far as I can decsribe, but there can be everything in between on the way to find it! How can anyone even assume that there might be a one demetional obeject? It cannot exist? A frog hair can not even assume to be thin enough? On the way to a 2 D can only be entertainment!

Mykil, Did you just spend your last dollar?? :lol2:

[Willie Lumplump]

How can anyone even assume that there might be a one demetional obeject?
I think that the confusion is in our use of words. When mathematicians, including geometrists, refer to certain mathematical constructs as "objects," they're not implying that the constructs are real in the sense of something you might find growing out of the ground or sitting on a shelf in a hardware store. To mathematicians, abstractions such as two-dimensional lines are "objects."

[mykil]

Just a little warrant on my own mind and conversation method on time travel at beyond the speed of light in less than three-dimensional travel. Theories on 2 D travel are not possible unless you have 1 D which would be easier that the 2. which would make things way in more perspective as far as regeneration. I have alwayz believed that the key was to make things smaller and not bigger, it kind of makes sense to me now that we need to work out our own DNA patterns and be able to regenerate them, sending the patterns and totally igniting them at a far out destination, and reverse the process while still having no lose of the experience in the process? Anything is possible when going in the right direction, which includes speeds way beyond our comprehension with a 1 D application accelerator. Just warming up!

[mykil]

tell me, would you conceder light as one dimensional?

[Willie Lumplump]

Just a little warrant on my own mind and conversation method on time travel at beyond the speed of light in less than three-dimensional travel. Theories on 2 D travel are not possible unless you have 1 D which would be easier that the 2. which would make things way in more perspective as far as regeneration. I have alwayz believed that the key was to make things smaller and not bigger, it kind of makes sense to me now that we need to work out our own DNA patterns and be able to regenerate them, sending the patterns and totally igniting them at a far out destination, and reverse the process while still having no lose of the experience in the process? Anything is possible when going in the right direction, which includes speeds way beyond our comprehension with a 1 D application accelerator. Just warming up!
Do you happen to know anything about happy, slurping spiders that say "Yahoo"?

[Willie Lumplump]

tell me, would you conceder light as one dimensional?
Light is three-dimensional because it has length, width, and depth. A light wave is composed of an electrical field that vibrates in one plane and a magnetic field that vibrates 90 degrees out of phase in a perpendicular plane. Voila! Three dimensions.

[Braggi]

Just out of mild curiosity what would you conceder a one-dimensional object? And don't say mykil!


In geometry, a point.

-Jeff

[Willie Lumplump]

In geometry, a point.-Jeff
Point, 0-dimensional
Line, 1-dimensional
Plane, 2-dimensional
Solid, 3-dimensional
Einsteinian space-time, 4-dimensional
String theory space-time, 11-dimensional.

[Braggi]

Sheesh! You got me there Willie.

I'm too tired to try thinking right now.

BTW, that string theory is ... well, for people with too much time on their hands and no (other) life.

-Jeff

PS. Three dimensions and time. That's where we live. Everything else is ... something else.


Point, 0-dimensional
Line, 1-dimensional
Plane, 2-dimensional
Solid, 3-dimensional
Einsteinian space-time, 4-dimensional
String theory space-time, 11-dimensional.

[Willie Lumplump]

Three dimensions and time. That's where we live.
In an Einsteinian universe, time is a fourth dimension and space and time are interrelated in a single space-time continuum. But a four-dimensional universe seems to offer no way to unify gravity with the other fundamental forces of nature. The only unification that's been found so far is string theory, and that requires 11 dimensions, seven of which are presumed to be rolled up so tightly that we can't see them.

[Sara S]

For those who, like myself, mostly don't know what you're talking about here, I highly recommend a book:
Space-Time and Beyond, by Bob Toben and Fred Alan Wolf in conversation with theoretical physicists, A Dutton Paperback. ISBN: 0-525-47710-1

It's in cartoon form, and is (relatively) easy to understand.

[mykil]

Well hell will; when you mentioned you could only travel at the speed of light in two-dimensional travel it really was a simple task to put two and two together and come up with a solution to justify even writing about. Simple minds even like mine can easily understand how if you put something on a disk and send it through email it gets to the other side really fast. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
As we are just discovering how on this earth to map out our DNA, we are discovering how to write it down and use really old DNA to even bring Dinosaurs back to life. An easy task it will be in a few more years to come. An easier task will be to make humans of the DNA we already have, if they aren’t doing that already. Once they get the structure down pat, eventually they will be able to write it down and send it through a computer and regenerate it from the other side. This will probably be in this lifetime. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
What is to come? Who on this earth even can tell? Where will we be in 100 years from now? How far will we go with the DNA strands and how particular will we get? Even a fifth grader can understand what I have just written yes? <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
So what’s to say in only a hundred years that we cannot transport something that is written in 2 D and regenerate it from afar? Is there a law that sayz we can’t? We know we can almost achieve this at this point in our time. Do you think for one minute it hasn’t been done in other solar systems, other galaxies? Do you think that somewhere were they might have a five billion year head start that they can pretty much do and go wherever they might want to be?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Even if it takes a couple of hundred years, I am betting they have the time to kill, since it this lifetime we live in people might even be hitting a thousand soon! In Japan they have about Thirty Thousand citizens that are over one hundred!<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
I am betting they have come up with a way better scenario than the one I have just described, probably about a thousand times the speed of light and able to transport in way more than the average three dimensions. But all in all I really believe! <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

[Willie Lumplump]

So what’s to say in only a hundred years that we cannot transport something that is written in 2 D and regenerate it from afar? Is there a law that sayz we can’t?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
A two-dimensional universe is strictly imaginary, so I'm not sure what we're talking about here. Anyway, Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity sets a limit (the speed of light) on the maximum speed of transmission of any sort of information. This is not a technological problem. In fact, it's not a problem at all, it's just a statement of fundamental physical laws. Maybe the laws are different in different universes, but in ours, this is the way it is.

[silverhaze]

superstitious nonsense is a false belief if it is not backed by scientific evidence or held dear as spiritual faith by some recognized and socially accepted disorganization.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">superstitious nonsense </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->
please define

<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --><!-- using waccobburl -->
Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">dangerous foolishness. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->
please define

<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --><!-- using waccobburl -->
Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Who will stand up for reason and denounce superstition </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->?
please define reason[/quote]

[Willie Lumplump]

superstitious nonsense is a false belief if it is not backed by scientific evidence or held dear as spiritual faith by some recognized and socially accepted disorganization.
Yes, I see your point.
As for the rest, we've already pretty well hashed this out some time ago. Previously when I was asked to define my terms, I replied that the terms are defined adequately in any dictionary, and all you have to do is look them up. I said this to emphasize that the argument, as I conceive it, is not about semantics but substantive issues.

[Alex]

In an Einsteinian universe, time is a fourth dimension and space and time are interrelated in a single space-time continuum. But a four-dimensional universe seems to offer no way to unify gravity with the other fundamental forces of nature. The only unification that's been found so far is string theory, and that requires 11 dimensions, seven of which are presumed to be rolled up so tightly that we can't see them.

Nassim Haramein claims to have found the unified field theory. I went to a 6 hour lecture of his last May at Noetic and he's pretty confident about have the proof. The link is
www.theresonanceproject.org

I'm slowly trying to grasp it all through his DVD series but here's some points from my notes that may make hint at the answer to the gravity issue to you:

-One centimeter cube of vacuum exceeds the total mass of the observable universe.
-There are infinite division of any particle according to a geometric pattern.
-The compressive side of the universe needs to be understood to undertand the expansive.
-You are biologically in the exact center of the infinitely large and infinitely small and your cells oscillating rate is the exact same as a black hole.
-The outside of a cell is vibrating at 10" hertz creating lots of energy.
-You are pulsing in and out of the vacuum.
-The radiative + contractive = dynamics = the fundamental structure of the vacuum.
-Cells, hurricanes, galaxies all work the same.
-What is the CAUSE of spin is the big question no one has asked - the answer is a (double) torus. An atom is a torus with a 64-cube tetrahedron at the core (I think called a tetragrammatron - found in Mayan, Aztec and many other ancient culture art).
-Our DNA has the same spin and 64-cube tetrahedron construct.
-Gravity is a double torus that has a nucleus blackhole that can produce infinite amount of density.

There's tons more that spins my head but I find fascinating.
Trying!
Alex

[Willie Lumplump]

Nassim Haramein claims to have found the unified field theory. I went to a 6 hour lecture of his last May at Noetic and he's pretty confident about have the proof.
Every day of the week somebody claims to have developed a unified field theory, and they are all confident.

One centimeter cube of vacuum exceeds the total mass of the observable universe.This is equivalent to saying that the part is greater than the whole. Without knowing a bit of physics you can figure out that this has to be false.

There are infinite division of any particle according to a geometric pattern.The "geometric pattern" part sounds like an echo of Johann Kepler's regular geometric solids as an explanation for the distances of the planets from the sun, an explanation that turned out not to be true, of course. The "infinite division" part would run afoul of Olber's Paradox. Olber's Paradox concerned stars, not particles, and modern astronomy has found a resolution, but the resolution wouldn't apply to particles. If you have an infinite division of particles, you have an infinite number of particles, and an infinite number of particles would create an infinitely large gravitational force that would immediately collapse the entire universe in on itself to form a singularity. Since we don't live on or in a singularity, particles cannot be infinitely divided.

The compressive side of the universe needs to be understood to undertand the expansive.
This is beginning to sound like Depok Chopra (or is it Kapok Chopra?). First of all, it's not at all clear that the universe even has sides, and if it does there are no observations indicating that one side is more compressed than the other. In fact, a host of observations and big bang theory itself, which I can't go into here, restricts the number, sizes, and placements of possible compressions.

You are biologically in the exact center of the infinitely large and infinitely small and your cells oscillating rate is the exact same as a black hole.I don't know what you mean by cells "oscillating," but if they do, it's certain that they aren't all oscillating at the same rate because the physical characteristics of cells wouldn't allow that. As for black holes, they don't oscillate at all. A black hole has only three characteristics--size, rotation, and electrical charge (size and gravity are correlated).

The outside of a cell is vibrating at 10" hertz creating lots of energy.And where is all this energy supposed to come from? There is something called the Law of Conservation of Mass and Energy. You can't keep generating energy forever without replacing it.

You are pulsing in and out of the vacuum.
After having read thus far, my head is starting to feel like it's pulsing in and our of a vacuum.

The radiative + contractive = dynamics = the fundamental structure of the vacuum.
Sorry, but this has become so nonsensical that it's pointless to continue.

If you have an interest in cosmology, may I suggest that you read some books by legitimate authors and consign Hassim le Noix to the garbage can? Steven Weinberg is a nobel-winning physicist who has a marvelous writing style. I especially enjoyed his book "Looking Up."

[Alex]

Willie,
It was obviously wrong for me to assume that a few drops of info without the rest of the sea needed to really define them would be understood. I know its a field where exact words matter, I wasn't supercareful and some of your responses made erroneous assumptions about what they meant. For example, you dwelled on my stating 'sides' of the universe like I was implying borders, I meant aspects of it's nature.

You admonished me to "read some books by legitimate authors and consign Hassim le Noix to the garbage can".

I also failed to mention that Nassim Haramein's paper was co-authored by E.A. Rauscher, and he continues to develop this theory with her. Here's her bio, I guess this is low on your legitimacy list.

-E. A. Rauscher, Ph.D. (Nuclear Physics and Engineering, University of California at Berkeley). Dr. Rauscher was a nuclear scientist and researcher at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and at Stanford Research Institute, Professor of Physics at John F. Kennedy University of California, research consultant to NASA (space shuttle program) and the U.S. Navy. Dr. Rauscher served on the Congressional OTA Advisory Committee, and has been Delegate and advisor to the United Nations. Recognized for major contributions in Marquis Who's Who of Men and Women in Science, Who's Who in California and in Technology Today, Leading Consultants in Technology, DOE top ten man and women in USA science award, USPA Leaders of America Life Time Membership Award. Dr Rauscher also received the award for Outstanding Contribution to Astronomy and Astrophysics, American Astronomical Society Meeting, Lawrence Hall of Science, and the CSPS Hall of Fame Award by the California Society for Physical Studies for Outstanding Research in Bioelectromagnetism, the Foundations of Quantum Theory, and Contributions to Humanity. Also recipient of a Medal of Honor for contributions to Unity of the Sciences, Seoul Korea, and many other awards. Dr. Rauscher is author of over 250 scientific papers, 4 books, 3 US patents and held 1 European patent.

You also admonished various statements that you did not recognize as fact like cell and black hole vibration, central to their theory. I can't prove it either, but after sitting with Nassim for 6 hours and seeing his commitment to integrity of fact, I have no doubt that if he says it's a fact part of his theory, it's a fact.

With great enthusiasm and humor he went to great lengths to describe the state of other unification theorys and many empty assumptions, and the differences he was stating and exactly why. He was so joyful at having built his theory by having gone no step further until the step it was built on was EXACT. No... "let's call it dark matter and go on...."....for ex. like the others.

I could go on and on. I think he's worth paying attention to and was excited to share. It was wrong to try to explain why with a few scattered sentences. Here's his own words, maybe this explains the basis better:

"We have developed an extended form of Einstein’s field equations in which we include torque and Coriolis forces, and hence torsion effects. New solutions are found to the extended field equations, which generates a modification of the Kerr-Newman solution we term the Haramein-Rauscher solution. We establish a reference frame in the description of the rotating metric that accommodates the complexities of gyroscopic dynamics – torque and Coriolis forces. This approach may allow us to define the origin of spin in terms of the new torque term in the field equations and better describe the formation and structure of galaxies, supernovas, and other astrophysical systems, their plasma dynamics and electromagnetic field. We formulate a relationship between gravitational forces with torsional effects and the Grand Unification Theory (GUT). This unification is formulated in terms of the metric of the new form of Einstein’s field equations which is a U4 space and the group theoretical basis of the GUT picture. Hence, gravitational forces with spin-like terms may be related to the strong and electroweak forces, comprising a new unification of the four forces."
Nassim Haramein, E.A. Rauscher 2005


Alex





--- "Willie Lumplump @ WaccoBB" <[email protected]> wrote:


---------------------------------
From: Willie Lumplump Supporting Member
Category: WaccoTalk
Thread: Tolerance: Can there be too much?

Quote:
tarexi wrote:
Nassim Haramein claims to have found the unified field theory. I went to a 6 hour lecture of his last May at Noetic and he's pretty confident about have the proof.

Every day of the week somebody claims to have developed a unified field theory, and they are all confident.
Quote:
One centimeter cube of vacuum exceeds the total mass of the observable universe.
This is equivalent to saying that the part is greater than the whole. Without knowing a bit of physics you can figure out that this has to be false.
Quote:
There are infinite division of any particle according to a geometric pattern.
The "geometric pattern" part sounds like an echo of Johann Kepler's regular geometric solids as an explanation for the distances of the planets from the sun, an explanation that turned out not to be true, of course. The "infinite division" part would run afoul of Olber's Paradox. Olber's Paradox concerned stars, not particles, and modern astronomy has found a resolution, but the resolution wouldn't apply to particles. If you have an infinite division of particles, you have an infinite number of particles, and an infinite number of particles would create an infinitely large gravitational force that would immediately collapse the entire universe in on itself to form a singularity. Since we don't live on or in a singularity, particles cannot be infinitely divided.
Quote:
The compressive side of the universe needs to be understood to undertand the expansive.
This is beginning to sound like Depok Chopra (or is it Kapok Chopra?). First of all, it's not at all clear that the universe even has sides, and if it does there are no observations indicating that one side is more compressed than the other. In fact, a host of observations and big bang theory itself, which I can't go into here, restricts the number, sizes, and placements of possible compressions.
Quote:
You are biologically in the exact center of the infinitely large and infinitely small and your cells oscillating rate is the exact same as a black hole.
I don't know what you mean by cells "oscillating," but if they do, it's certain that they aren't all oscillating at the same rate because the physical characteristics of cells wouldn't allow that. As for black holes, they don't oscillate at all. A black hole has only three characteristics--size, rotation, and electrical charge (size and gravity are correlated).
Quote:
The outside of a cell is vibrating at 10" hertz creating lots of energy.
And where is all this energy supposed to come from? There is something called the Law of Conservation of Mass and Energy. You can't keep generating energy forever without replacing it.
Quote:
You are pulsing in and out of the vacuum.
After having read thus far, my head is starting to feel like it's pulsing in and our of a vacuum.
Quote:
The radiative + contractive = dynamics = the fundamental structure of the vacuum.
Sorry, but this has become so nonsensical that it's pointless to continue.

If you have an interest in cosmology, may I suggest that you read some books by legitimate authors and consign Hassim le Noix to the garbage can? Steven Weinberg is a nobel-winning physicist who has a marvelous writing style. I especially enjoyed his book "Looking Up."

---------------------------------

If you have an interest in cosmology, may I suggest that you read some books by legitimate authors and consign Hassim le Noix to the garbage can? Steven Weinberg is a nobel-winning physicist who has a marvelous writing style. I especially enjoyed his book "Looking Up."

[mykil]

The thought pastern I was talking about came from within. It was not to prove to everyone how bright I am, for this is not even an issue worth evaluating it’s relevant. It was more on the lines of wondering how you can achieve you spirituality without even trying to focus on the issue. In the future I think you will discover that spiritually and science go hand in hand, if you do not look for this you are going to miss something and it will be your loss. Tolerance is far greater to achieve in this space and time than ever before, without it we are all lost! I tolerate way more than my share just waking every morning without coffee brought to me in bed. I am working on a solution for this problem as we speak.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

<o:p></o:p>

The one example that I have written is really going to be the foundation of all. We are sending information at the speed of light everyday, our whole Internet is based on this at this moment in time, in two dimensions. Everything that’s coming your way via the Internet has traveled at the speed of light. Back in the early nineties the Internet companies bought up the railroad tracks and started laying down fiber optics, thus the Internet was really born. First DSL, then Cable, then who the hell knows what is coming next? <o:p></o:p>

<o:p></o:p>

The thing that I am trying to get across is you aren’t looking to the future, you aren’t even looking to the past, you are stuck in the presence and this is as far as you are willing to look.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p></o:p>

I asked a question a few weeks ago and the response was pretty week. “What do you see in the future”? As far as I see everything we are doing today relates to the future. The most important is the work in my mind is with our own DNA. If you look a little closer at this you might see our future a bit more clearly. WE can put some Blood In a little container and transport in across the globe and make an exact duplicate being. We can do this right now! Well not me of course! In a few years we will be able to just transport our DNA in code to another part of the world and reconstruct a human being! Doesn’t that blow you away? <o:p></o:p>

<o:p></o:p>

The questions still are what do you see in the future? Can you read my mind yet? Do you have any inclination where on this earth I might be going with this? What will we be capable of doing in another century? In a few more millenniums? Has anyone else done this before on other parts of our galaxy? Why with what we know at this early part of our civilization would you even conceder being so arrogant in presuming we have not been visited by other beings? What makes you so dam smart?<o:p></o:p>

<o:p></o:p>

<o:p></o:p>

[Zeno Swijtink]

Willie,

also failed to mention that Nassim Haramein's paper was co-authored by E.A. Rauscher, and he continues to develop this theory with her. Here's her bio, I guess this is low on your legitimacy list.

-E. A. Rauscher, Ph.D. (Nuclear Physics and Engineering, University of California at Berkeley). Dr. Rauscher was a nuclear scientist and researcher at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and at Stanford Research Institute, Professor of Physics at John F. Kennedy University of California, research consultant to NASA (space shuttle program) and the U.S. Navy. Dr. Rauscher served on the Congressional OTA Advisory Committee, and has been Delegate and advisor to the United Nations. Recognized for major contributions in Marquis Who's Who of Men and Women in Science, Who's Who in California and in Technology Today, Leading Consultants in Technology, DOE top ten man and women in USA science award, USPA Leaders of America Life Time Membership Award. Dr Rauscher also received the award for Outstanding Contribution to Astronomy and Astrophysics, American Astronomical Society Meeting, Lawrence Hall of Science, and the CSPS Hall of Fame Award by the California Society for Physical Studies for Outstanding Research in Bioelectromagnetism, the Foundations of Quantum Theory, and Contributions to Humanity. Also recipient of a Medal of Honor for contributions to Unity of the Sciences, Seoul Korea, and many other awards. Dr. Rauscher is author of over 250 scientific papers, 4 books, 3 US patents and held 1 European patent.

Dr Rauscher seems to have had an impressive career in physics, but there is also another part of her career, as indicated by her connections with the California Society for Psychical Studies, misspelled in your quote as "California Society for Physical Studies" (if there ever was a more Freudian slip!).

Here is some clue to that part: "Laying on of Hands. Healing The Interconnection of Life Systems" ( https://www.ca-sps.org/Elizabeth-A-Rauscher_Laying_on_of_Hands_Healing_The_Interconnection_of_Life_Systems_6-17-2003.html )

There may be something to her work with Haramein, but this work on a Unified Theory has not been commented on in peer reviewed journals, and to read that it has "resulted from studies of ancient codes left in monuments and documents around the world" (https://www.shiftinaction.com/discover/luminaries/nassim_haramein) does not look promising.

[Willie Lumplump]

You also admonished various statements that you did not recognize as fact like cell and black hole vibration, central to their theory. I can't prove it either, but after sitting with Nassim for 6 hours and seeing his commitment to integrity of fact, I have no doubt that if he says it's a fact part of his theory, it's a fact.
Stay with me for a moment. There is nothing in a black hole to vibrate. I mean, there is nothing in a black hole. A black hole consists of a gravitational field, and that's it. What would it mean to say that a gravitational field "vibrates"? It's like saying that electricity vibrates, or that magnetism vibrates.
"We have developed an extended form of Einstein’s field equations in which we include torque and Coriolis forces Coriolis force? The so-called "Coriolis force" isn't even a force, it's just a convenient, short-hand way of referring to the behavior of objects traveling parallel to an axis of rotation. The notion that a non-existent Coriolis force is somehow involved in unification of the fundamental forces of nature is preposterous.
We establish a reference frame in the description of the rotating metric that accommodates the complexities of gyroscopic dynamics – torque and Coriolis forces. This approach may allow us to define the origin of spin in terms of the new torque term in the field equations and better describe the formation and structure of galaxies, supernovas, and other astrophysical systems, their plasma dynamics and electromagnetic field.What could all this possibly have to do with a unified field theory? The formation and structure of galaxies, etc. is totally irrelevant. If you're to talk about a unified field theory, you have to talk about what's being unified--the strong force, the weak force, electromagnetism, gravity, and the cosmological repulsive force. These are the five fundamental forces of nature. Unifying them has absolutely nothing to do with "Coriolis force," plasma dynamics, astrophysical systems, torque, and all the rest of it.
Hence, gravitational forces with spin-like terms may be related to the strong and electroweak forces, comprising a new unification of the four forces." May be related? MAY be related? They had BETTER be related, because if they're not, there is no unification. And gravitational forces with "spin-like terms"? On theoretical grounds the graviton is believed to have a spin of 2. It's not believed to have a "spin-like term" of 2. It's believed to have a SPIN of 2. What does the term "spin-like" even mean. Does it spin or not?

Look, I'm not a physicist; I'm a mere entomologist. So most what goes on in physics is way above my head. But if somebody is talking nonsense about subjects like relativity, cosmology, and unification, it doesn't take me long to catch on. And these people you quote are talking nonsense.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Coriolis force? The so-called "Coriolis force" isn't even a force, it's just a convenient, short-hand way of referring to the behavior of objects traveling parallel to an axis of rotation. The notion that a non-existent Coriolis force is somehow involved in unification of the fundamental forces of nature is preposterous.What could all this possibly have to do with a unified field theory?
Look, I'm not a physicist; I'm a mere entomologist. So most what goes on in physics is way above my head. But if somebody is talking nonsense about subjects like relativity, cosmology, and unification, it doesn't take me long to catch on. And these people you quote are talking nonsense.

You are overreaching yourself here, Willie. This study was an abstract at the American Physical Society. It may not lead anywhere in the end but a bug person cannot in good sense dismiss it like that.

https://flux.aps.org/meetings/YR03/4CF03/baps/abs/G150016.html

[Willie Lumplump]

You are overreaching yourself here, Willie. This study was an abstract at the American Physical Society. It may not lead anywhere in the end but a bug person cannot in good sense dismiss it like that.
Hey, I can publish just about any abstract I want. I probably could join the American Physical Society, and if I did I'd be entitled to deliver a paper and publish and abstract on Unified Field Theory in the proceedings. If it didn't make sense, nobody would say anything beforehand, although there might be a few comments afterward. Science is pretty democratic; everybody gets a chance to be heard.

[Willie Lumplump]

This approach may allow us to define the origin of spin in terms of the new torque term in the field equationsSince the subject is unification, one can only assume that the spin referred to here is the spin of subatomic particles. (I say this because particles exhibit the characteristics that physicists are trying to unify. Galaxies and other astronomical bodies are not usually said to spin, they are said to "rotate.") Identifying the origin of spin would be the greatest discovery in a hundred years because it would mean that a hidden variable had been discovered, and if there is a hidden variable for spin, there must be hidden variables for the other quantum properties. That would return us to the classical, deterministic universe of Isaac Newton. The world would immediately beat a path to the author of this great discovery. There would be ticker tape parades in his honor. He would be showered with awards and honorary degrees. A nobel prize would be a foregone conclusion. The entire world of physics would be turned upside down. The front pages of newspapers would be covered with the story. Textbooks would immediately be rewritten. Depok Chopra would go out of business. Calvinism would be instantly revived. The world would never be the same.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Hey, I can publish just about any abstract I want. I probably could join the American Physical Society, and if I did I'd be entitled to deliver a paper and publish and abstract on Unified Field Theory in the proceedings. If it didn't make sense, nobody would say anything beforehand, although there might be a few comments afterward. Science is pretty democratic; everybody gets a chance to be heard.

I dare you! You talk like a bug drunk on the nectar of a Pitcher plant.

[Zeno Swijtink]

Calvinism would be instantly revived.

Oh, if it only could be. The religion of my childhood. The smell of the Bibles and the feel of the hard church benches. The girls' white socks on pretty legs. And pepermunt!

[Willie Lumplump]

Doesn’t that blow you away?It does, indeed.

Why with what we know at this early part of our civilization would you even conceder being so arrogant in presuming we have not been visited by other beings?The answer to this question is partly tied up in the scale of the universe. The nearest star is 24 trillion miles away. The other side of our galaxy is 400 quadrillion miles away. That makes it difficult to go knocking on your neighbor's door.
What makes you so dam smart?I dunno. What do you think?

[Willie Lumplump]

Oh, if it only could be. The religion of my childhood. The smell of the Bibles and the feel of the hard church benches. The girls' white socks on pretty legs. And pepermunt!I had a deprived childhood. The girls in my church didn't have either white socks or pretty legs.

[handy]

For an interesting overview and elucidation of working definitions of terms like Universe, point, finite, definite, infinite, dimension, etc, may I highly recommend reading "Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking", by R. Buckminster Fuller.

To get back to the topic of the thread, I don't recall who said it, but I always liked the quote"

"Democracy deserves what it tolerates."