Dear Vortex People,
I admit I am not the best speller. I admit I get somewhat
excited and or exercised when I type fast. I do not generally use of
have a "spell check" program.
I thank Kyle and I thank those of you who are ''lurking'' and may
or may not agree.
My main reason for posting is to ask questions.
Would someone, maybe a lurker... or not... help me to help the
whole of vortex to learn the basics of the differences between:
(A) Theory
(B) Experimental support.... or not support .. of one or more theories.
(C) Mathmatical ideas, armchair expositions, and the history
of the basis of or for some given post or posts.
(D) Personal comment:
I happen to LIKE real world, nuts and bolts, belt and
suspenders engineering. This helps me to not only understand physics
and the observations of the behavior of ? the universe? ?? our place
in space?? and the grand love of discovery.
Theory is GRAND.... but the real fun and excitement ....for
myself .... arrives when I can not only understand the idea and
theory... but when I can demonstrate the idea to others.
Over the last 10 to 20 years I have found if one is able to
bring the idea to the "see here it is and here is how it works and
here is what we MIGHT do with it.... then in a few cases people
learn, people make money, people can teach the general idea to
others... AND THEN comes the fun part....
Other persons who I may never have known or met... and may
never know or meet ... will be albe to make some good use of the ideas
I have been lucky enough to be exposed to ..... and the world
becomes... for me anyway ... a more beautiful, richer and interesting
place to ... not Live In.... but... far more importantly... to be a
part of.
SO: Simple questions... cannot we have either simple answers
....or responses along the lines of...:
i] "I understand or think I understand this part.... but I am not
sure of this other part"
OR
ii] "I am not sure but I read a really useful text that may help
us to understand"
OR
iii] "This is really interesting and I will do the best I can to
attempt to TRY to reproduce the work.... and if or when I am
successful, I will hope to be able to put the matter into such words
as I can so that you also will be able to understand"
NB The last form several years ago as a poster reported his
long and useful effort to substantiate
the "black Light Power" ..... I am ashamed to to admit I do not
remeber his name at this time.
------------------
Will any vortex "VOs" please help me to say this a little
better so that Vortex can become closer to the hopeful love that I
look toward that can help us all bridge the gap.... and this is a very
important gap... Grand Ideas ... and the use of these ideas to help
all of humankind.
I happen to be in love, at present, with the History and
Ethics of Sciences and Technology ...
Will any of the Vos help me to learn more of the sciences we
see posted?
Thanks for the time to read this.
I do not think knowing will hurt. I do think words with
not common meaning do not well communicate ......
Is that ANY part of the above which in hard to understand?
Will any Vos help to re-write and-or re-phase this so that the
idea may obtain?
I am most grateful if any vo can even entertain the idea of
trying to put this hope into cleaner works.
NB: Some time ago a Vo offered the idea of BBGB ....
BBGB meant "Blow By Grinding Blow" as a desription of.... I
guess... a fight or battle....
But for a time the term BBGB was meant to lead some poster to
explain EXACTLY what the idea, technology, experiment or other was
about.
BBGB is kind of hard, as I am in principle a peace loving person....
Maybe we can adopt another acronym
to help us move forward ...through the place
between "ideas-words" toward ..."OH! ... Now I can understand this!!"
And even better........."AH...Now I can make one or at least can
demonstrate or observe the '''effect''' or science...."
And FAR more important One may then be able to inflict the
operational demonstration of the idea or
some actual Working Gizmo to one or more than one person of any age,
nationality or gender in order to promote knowledge and the fruit of
these understanding ...... far and wide....
As I understand matters, this is what communication is all
about. The exchange of words, pictures and other is a part of the
Human condition.
For myself the great fun come in the discovery... but the BIG
fun comes from being able to share the "ooohhh really coool" secret
with other persons.
But, Hey, I am just a General joe who would rather be a
private 3rd class bean.... and drink the coffee from those beans.
____________
___________________
__________________________
____________________________________
---------> ENDIT-40 -------------->
WOOLEY BOOLEY
---------
On 6/19/06, Kyle R. Mcallister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Probably most of them I would imagine since in the course
> of one short e-mail you managed to misspell Vortex TWICE!
>
> "lay population of Votex"
> "I hope others in and of votrtex"
I think it is perhaps better to misspell than to populate Vortex-L with any
number of oddball theories and/or speculated subatomic particles of which
there is not the least bit of experimental evidence for their existence.
> There is really no excuse for this type of sloppiness in a
> scientific discussion. It is insulting to other members.
Really now, there is a lot that goes on here which is insulting to other
list members, and you ALL know that. Be it politics, religion, completely
ignoring reasonable posts by list members, and most annoying of all to me at
least, propagation of conjecture for which there is either no evidence at
all, or of which no tests are even SUGGESTED to test for said evidence.
Now, to ask a few questions of my own and rephrase a few of John's so that
(perhaps) someone will answer them:
1. I know what "ZPE" is supposed to be. Besides the Casimir effect and some
theoretical predictions, is there and HARD evidence that such actually
exists in any way shape or form that is similar to what is being bandied
about here?
2. "Beta atmosphere"....? What is this supposed to be, really? What is
"Alpha" and or (insert other Greek letters) in this context? What
experimental proof is there that this exists? How can we measure it, test
for it, test its properties, and use it to our advantage?
3. "Electronium"...I understand that positronium is supposed to be a bound
state of a positron and an electron which is very unstable. What then is
electronium? Two electrons and a positron, yielding a "thing" with mass of
3e(or p) and a net charge of -1? Evidence for this thing please? I seem to
recall an experiment involving playing with the vertical drive coils of a
small TV, and looking for a less deflected lineon the phosphor screen which
would correspond to something with an electron's charge but higher mass. I
recall also that nothing was found. If positrons are in it, the only thing I
can think of is maybe doping the cathode with something that emits positrons
is relatively high quantities. But who knows.
4. What John has been asking, I believe is basically this. Has anyone doing
these cold fusion/electrolysis experiments been taking into account evolved
H and O (either in atomic or molecular form) and figuring it into net energy
output either by
1. Volume of gas evolved
2. Total mass of gas evolved
3. Heat produced by burning this nicely volatile mixture
John, anything else to add here please?
I will say this in closing, John is a very smart guy and he knows his
stuff...anyone who has actually spoken with him for any length of time will
appreciate this. Don't dismiss him so readily, he has important things to
say. Granted, maybe his method of posting is a little at right angles to the
way we normally post, but as Maxwell might well remind us, sometimes right
angles are pretty damned important.
Regards,
--Kyle
