RE: Robert Carroll
Hi Keith, His name is Keith Trenton. Believe me, no moss would dare grow anywhere near him. At some point in the future he may find his way back into the Carroll work with its many implications, but it would require a pretty hefty budget. We tried to find government funding to explore some of the possibilities some years back, but as with LENR, there was nobody brave enough to sign off on a project so far from mainstream physics. Trenton suggested a few practical implications in fields such as medicine - a pion knife would be far better than a gamma knife for certain brain operations, as one example. Carroll's idea for a pion drive, he believes, if translated into hardware, might eventually make interstellar space craft practical. Mark From: Keith Nagel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Robert Carroll Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 23:44:44 -0400 Hey Mark, you write: At least one young scientist believes he was more correct than most will allow. You ought to let the poor boy out of the basement for some air, he must have moss growing between his toes at this point. It would probably help you more than hurt. Just a thought *smile* K.
RE: Robert Carroll
I have started reading Carroll's stuff. He is certainly a man after my own heart if the following gem is anything to go by. -- If the reader detects a note of sarcasm in the above statement, it is only because it was meant to be so. Our present level of scientific knowledge is about that of the kindergarten dropout. Consider the fact that the aberration of light from celestial objects is well known. There is no corresponding evidence that such an aberration exists in the law of central forces by which a satellite system such as the sun and its planets is established. -- And a bit lower down the opening page, this - The oddest of all the oddities concerning the human animal is his apparent lack of predisposition toward the truth. The statement: in any argument, the loudest voice prevails, has nothing to indicate that truth is involved. It is useless to speculate what might have been. Leibniz was a rival of Newton, both in mathematics and in physics. He ridiculed Newton's concept of space with the statement: There is no space where there is no matter. Amen to that, I say - but then seeing as I realise that matter is held together from without and not from within, I would say that wouldn't I. grin If nothing else, it looks as though Carroll's stuff will be a wonderful source of quotations. Cheers Frank Grimer
Re: Robert Carroll
From reading Carroll it is apparent he had a humor to temper his intellect. As time goes by I am coming to realize that CF will emerge just as I am considering the major movement will occur as the result of new mathematics rather than physics alone. Carroll relied upon his math wisdom and skills to lead him in much of his work. Way back in the 1950's I enjoyed a fellowship with some remarkable minds.. alas there are all since passed. Carroll reminde me of some of them Since that time the closest I have come to such an association has been VortexL.. Clapping hands.!!! I suggest that Carroll recognized the complexity of the math required to crack the code of CF. Again, we discussed this way back in the 1950's and concluded a machine would be needed to handle the complexity. Now I realize the machine would be a computer. The existing software is insufficent to deal with the task which is why I suggested a form of quadratic computing. I have read about the arguments for quantum computing and the ridicule surounding it. Should the word quadratic be used in lieu of quantum we may have already be in motion toward the software. Looking at kid's computer games like game boy etc I notice the software people have already worked across some of the major steps toward quadratics. I envisioned the software in four sections. The first is the base with two varaible and a differential bias to load weight of balance between the two variables. NOW!! hold onto your hat because this gets near the edge.. the two variables are 3D which means their analog values must be converted to digital on the fly which is how game boy performs. The idea of using 3 D collectors similar to a parabolic mirror as each of the two variables provide the infinite measure which in turn can be calibtrated ( biased) like a proportional and reset controller. The complexity comes from how to differentiate. My experience with derivative features in a controller lead me to consider the problem has again, already been solved by industry evidenced by the numerous industrial controllers with programmable features. Carroll is one of those people you would like to have spent relaxed time with. Richard - Original Message - From: Grimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 2:30 PM Subject: RE: Robert Carroll I have started reading Carroll's stuff. He is certainly a man after my own heart if the following gem is anything to go by. -- If the reader detects a note of sarcasm in the above statement, it is only because it was meant to be so. Our present level of scientific knowledge is about that of the kindergarten dropout. Consider the fact that the aberration of light from celestial objects is well known. There is no corresponding evidence that such an aberration exists in the law of central forces by which a satellite system such as the sun and its planets is established. -- And a bit lower down the opening page, this - The oddest of all the oddities concerning the human animal is his apparent lack of predisposition toward the truth. The statement: in any argument, the loudest voice prevails, has nothing to indicate that truth is involved. It is useless to speculate what might have been. Leibniz was a rival of Newton, both in mathematics and in physics. He ridiculed Newton's concept of space with the statement: There is no space where there is no matter. Amen to that, I say - but then seeing as I realise that matter is held together from without and not from within, I would say that wouldn't I. grin If nothing else, it looks as though Carroll's stuff will be a wonderful source of quotations. Cheers Frank Grimer
RE: Robert Carroll
Hey Mark, you write: At least one young scientist believes he was more correct than most will allow. You ought to let the poor boy out of the basement for some air, he must have moss growing between his toes at this point. It would probably help you more than hurt. Just a thought *smile* K.
RE: Robert Carroll
Hi Keith, That's him alright. I believe we have a copy of his original patent application for fusion close to absolute zero. He delivered his last paper in San Francisco at a AAAS meeting, which for the first, and only, time had a Section devoted to non-relativistic physics. At the end he delightedly wrote on the blackboard what he had calculated was the maximum speed a spacecraft could attain -- 20,000,000C. The short book on the site, Arcturus by Dawn, reflects a quick synopsis of his physics. His views can change the impact of a walk under a night sky filled with stars. At least one young scientist believes he was more correct than most will allow. Mark From: Keith Nagel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Arie DeGeus Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 21:26:43 -0400 Hey Mark, you write: I am not qualified to evaluate the fractional hydrogen experiments, but he seemed to have carried those forward some distance toward practical hardware. The patent picture remains cloudy. It looks from the INPADOC legal data like he's been fighting it out with the examiners since 2002. This stuff is cited, US6024935, EP0395066, EP0461690 ( Boeing??? How 'bout that. ) BTW, WO0208787A3 sort of has heartburn written all over it. Every claim... Incidently, the late Dr. Robert Carroll, who was a consultant to our firm the last dozen years of his life, predicted the importance of fractional quantum states many years prior to Mills or DeGeus. Huh. I'll have to check him out, this is the site then? http://www.pride-net.com/physics/ K.
