The power to explain sorta stands on it's own I think, how else do
paradigms make leaps/bounds? I was just hoping for a tidbit really, as
he mentioned a number of dimensions (32?) I wanted a sneak peek. Due to
special memory constraints I cannot keep up with the math as arbitrary
terms and rote destroy my system building/synthesis process, but I look
forward to something innovative, especially if it affords the cross
boundary work needed for a good TOE.
The power of mental revolution is symbolic manifest in language and if
his work is as r-/evolutionary as I hope he will have the most support
outside the academic community. I think everyone is hoping for a
breakthrough, perhaps not perfect but something promising even if it is
in the form of a 'what if'.
Gah, thanks for ignoring the bad edit in my post a part slipped down
below my view.
On 8/25/2010 10:41 PM, Slip Disc wrote:
Ash, Pat's insight cannot be found online as it is innovative as far
as finding voids and filling in gaps which essentially is the same
thing that others in th past have done. However, I'm sure as soon as
the ink hits the papyrus brilliant minds will hack at it as they did
with Hawking's revelations to which he rebounded with correction fluid
to make it right. Be prepared Harrington! The problem is that it all
will remain essentially hypothetical without evidential substance.
On Aug 25, 9:23 pm, Ash<[email protected]> wrote:
On 8/25/2010 4:19 PM, gruff wrote:> "... On Aug 25, 4:57 am,
Pat<[email protected]>
wrote: ..."
Notice how the world is, rather quickly, readying itself for my book.
It's nice to see it won't come as such a blow to some, who will have
been waiting for a logical breakthrough in this area.
I'm sorry Pat but that sounds a bit grandiose. But tell me more.
I second the request, please go over the dimensional aspect some more, I
couldn't find references online.
are playing out a part of my dreams
