I do agree with you to some extent. Although my experienceis that as soon as the negative part has made its job you need to shift to the positive counterpart. I am not detail oriented per se, although I need to give you some opinion about rule 15. In addition my English migh catch up with me. I need to fully understand limitation. I think you mean limitation as in elimination and then I am just OK. I have no problem with the detail but it is important for my reasoning (and defense of SOD). I do believe one need to find the weaknesses before there is a solution. I alsoo think one need to not ask for them as that makes people defensive and then it is hard to bring them up again. I concentrate on less agonistic stuff and wait to hear the negative as time goes. it never fails to reveal itself and then I can deal with the (agreed) more important issues. I have read your negative statement but I think I found it too hard to write about, maybe I am the lazy one. My initials spells lat and that is the Swedish word for lazy:). The reason I think it is hard to respond to the negative phrases is that it requires pedantry and that is not my fortei. I seldom disagree with your thesis, I just think they have a positive angle either from the very outset or afater an initial negative aproach a positive will (have to) take over. I realize this not Vortex material. However, if we cannot involve other disciplines LENR cannot be solved. Business reasons and leadership issues are among things that is part of the solution. I do recognize that quantum mechanics might have a more direct part in the solution. It is like the Otto motor is more direct to a solution of the popularity of the automobile than issues like saftey, environmental issues as well as other economical factors in general. Well one without the other . . . .
On Aug 6, 2014 12:20 PM, "Peter Gluck" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Lennart, > > Thanks. Please read the VUCA paper, it is actually a leadership acronym. > I have noticed SOD, really not bad- however see my problrm solving Rule: > > 15. NOT the enhancement of human strengths but the limitation of human weaknesses is more useful for efficient problem solving. > > > Negative is more important than positive, snd more urgent, see my FQXI essay > > > Peter > > > > On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 10:08 PM, Lennart Thornros <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Peter, >> I am new to science and LENR but Ii am certainly familiar with SWOT. I did read your blog and considered a comment but thought that perhaps it is hard for people to spee the impact of other , not science fact, so I decided it was not worth it. Seems I was right. I think one need to start with SOD to get things to grow. Strengths, Opportunities and Dangers.. The simple reason I rather use SOD is that nobody will admit to their Ws anyhow. :) >> >> On Aug 6, 2014 11:43 AM, "Peter Gluck" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> 2 years >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 9:41 PM, Peter Gluck <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Kevin, >>>> >>>> well know who Daniken is 9Tow years older than me and still alive) >>>> The guy from the video Billy Black says similar things but well. >>>> You have to listen a few minutes tp it, if you will get an opinion. >>>> >>>> Peter >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> started by Erich von Daniken. >>>>> ***You mean this same Erich von Daniken who finished his work first as a hotel manager and then in PRISON??? What are you pushing here on Vortex? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> from wikipedia: >>>>> >>>>> The ideas put forth in his books are largely rejected by scientists and academics, who categorize his work as pseudohistory and pseudoarchaeology.[1][2][3] >>>>> >>>>> Däniken wrote his first book while working as manager of the Hotel Rosenhügel in Davos, Switzerland. He was convicted of several financial crimes, including fraud, shortly after its publication.[4] The revenue from the sales of his book allowed him to repay his debts and leave the hotel business. Däniken wrote his second book, Gods from Outer Space, while in prison. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Peter Gluck <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I understand you will not read my Blog. Sorry for it but it happens. >>>>>> The greatest part of Humanity does not read it and the consequences >>>>>> are visible. >>>>>> >>>>>> However because I see you are an electrical engineer (as my very best US friend Mike Carrell), I want to ask you a favor. A young reader friend has asked my opinion about this: >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nwN0Oj6k0g >>>>>> magnetic vortexes in stone >>>>>> >>>>>> I am a chemical engineer and re electricity magnetism I have always consulted my colleagues. The video is over my head, i am not very fond of such things - started by Erich von Daniken. If you like them, please tell what you think.... >>>>>> Thank you in advance, >>>>>> peter >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 10:42 PM, Peter Gluck <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sorry, it seems my blog has lost a reader. >>>>>>>> Wish you all we >>>>>>>> Peterll >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ***What? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Dr. Peter Gluck >>>>>> Cluj, Romania >>>>>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Dr. Peter Gluck >>>> Cluj, Romania >>>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Dr. Peter Gluck >>> Cluj, Romania >>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com > > > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com Iss t
