Page 3 of 5

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 3:16 pm
by Mikado14
grassahhoppah wrote: mikado-

Along with the revisiting, it simultaneously revisited a different approach to the core root of matter.
I am not following, what is "it"?
grassahhoppah wrote:Which is very different than what is taught in the mainstream. A general summation of what I have been digging up, matter..... really isn't matter as most are taught. A particle really isn't a particle as my recent schooling endeavors teach.
Two things here: First, I asked you to define "particulate" and you are talking "particles" of matter. As you say, in the mainstream, there is a difference in the use of those words. Second, if I may be so bold, what was your recent schooling?

grassahhoppah wrote:The "rabbit hole" (as you all say) I am finding myself going deeper and deeper into, is a fitting analogy. What I have learned as the reality,.... turns out to only be the reality of the illusion. Or the reality of the path to the dead end.

It seems from the very most finite, to the most complex..... it's all in the vibes. So a direct answer to your request for me to define particulate, at this time I surmise that it is a node from standing EM waves.
You need to define what you mean by a standing EM wave.
grassahhoppah wrote:Paul S-

I have heard thought of such a reactor, but personally haven't found anything further on any being a reality at this time. Not to say that something like that, or a variation, wouldn't be possible. I've just never heard any hint of how one might pull it off. Yes of course, there are lots of technologies I know aren't disclosed. And the electrogravitic effect is a good example by how long it took before it leaked.
My young grassahhoppah, have you read any of the posts or what else Paul has written?

Mikado

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 3:37 pm
by Mikado14
kevin.b wrote:Mikado 14,
For the benifit of grassahhoppah, who may not know you as much as others here do, and who appreciate and welcome your most valued contribution.
May I just say that your approach is sometimes like a knight of shining armour, eager to defend to the end your grasp of science.
I really do appreciate it, but just want to reassure others that you are as a knight, completly honourable, but sometimes a little scary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jN5aWyiCyk
Kevin
kevin,

That is the second time in a day that someone has called me scary! <g>

Let me clarify something, what I am "defending", as you say, is not the absolute concrete of science as we know it. I am saying that what we have is what we have. It works from day to day and is what we use. These rules apply to the plane that we exist upon and we are still finding out new ones.

Why does Newtonian apply to lower speeds but Einstienian apply to relativistic and that Lorentz equations are necessary to bridge the gap? In my "perfect" world <g>, one equation would apply therefore, empirically speaking, we don't know it all and I am open to something new. However, wild claims and theoretical postulations do not make science. New discoveries start out as a dream, an idea, even wild ones but at some point experimentation must commence and an understanding of the results so that in the end, others can understand and the result can be engineered.

Do not make an assumption that I am stoic to new passions of others ideas.

I did like the youtube of the knight!

Mikado

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 3:56 pm
by kevin.b
Mikado14,
I don't find you scary at all, but I can see how you may appear as such to others, especially anyone new around this block.

I consider Newton and Einstein etc as the ultimate of refinement of our five sense dominated reality, but , I consider there is ever so much more.

You are not going to crack open this wabbit hole by utilising just what the best minds on the planet have already fully scoured.
So if myself or others fly by the seat of our pants, not really knowing how to fly , don't be too alarmed, if you can see we are about to crash, by all means haul us in.
If I get really fired up, I can go like a hare never mind a wabbit, I have no fear, so am not bothered if I hit a brick wall, I will just jump over it and keep going.
Fear is what holds people back, stuff it.
By the way, keep the number NINE at the CENTRE of your thoughts, don't try to find zero point, its NINE point, nine is alpha and omega, a fibonacci spiral.
zero doesn't exist, just one to nine, all done with straight lines , and then a fair curve taken along them.
kevin

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 5:57 pm
by Hector
I think that what Mikado14 is trying to point out is that ignoring thousands of years of accumulated human knowledge is not as wise as building upon it.

In other words standing on the shoulders of giants you might see further.

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 6:58 pm
by kevin.b
Hector,
Hello,
It's difficult for a little hobbit to get up on giants shoulders.
Better to ferret about , unseen , down where they have dropped crumbs.

Clues are lying about, if you use the senses available to all, not many do.
Many are masters , nae giants of a certain group of our senses, whilst totally blind /ed to other senses, maybe its the higher altitude their heads are in?
Kevin

658

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:03 pm
by Elizabeth Helen Drake
Our meeting spot in the aether kevin Elizabeth

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:31 pm
by kevin.b
We must be both thinking of this HULL bloke, or woman?
Ed can be edwina
Off scuttles the hobbit.
kevin

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:55 pm
by kevin.b
Elizabeth Helen Drake,
I wonder?
, if this Richard Hull is a relative?
He sure knows what he is on about,
http://www.pupman.com/listarchives/1996 ... reads.html
His e-mail is here , go to the end of these lists, perhaps a request from you may shed some light?
Kevin

little crumbs

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 8:37 pm
by Elizabeth Helen Drake
Perhaps kevin, this other Hull is just thinking of us.

Paul knows a man by the name of Richard Hull. Perhaps that person is just thinking of us.

Yes, it does seem that he knows his stuff but may not be interested in a Hobbits thoughts?

Thankyou anyway. Elizabeth

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 8:44 pm
by kevin.b
Elizabeth helen Drake,
Lets hope his thoughts wander this way, he would be most welcome.
I will THINK of him, tenacious little terriers are hobbits.
Kevin

Warning

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:02 pm
by Hector
Ok, if you guys think that Mikado14 is scary than you better stay away from Richard, he will eat you guys alive. Don’t take my word for it, check out his posts at the Fusor.net website.

Warning: Fusor.net is a high-end amateur science and engineering website; bring your A-game. These guys can be nice, but they can also be ((((Brutal)))) in there criticism.

brutal? maybe afraid

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:27 pm
by Elizabeth Helen Drake
Ah Hector.

I would expect such from him. But it might be time for some sort of interaction here. We will see what happens. Hobbits are fearless little creatures, even the females.

Usually when someone is abrasive ..... they are .... afraid

Elizabeth

Re: just another observation

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:27 pm
by Mikado14
James Barrett wrote:I
found here http://users.erols.com/iri/TTBROWN2.htm
Any relation the Barrett mentioned in the above link?

Mikado

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:30 pm
by flowperson
Back in the day, Bobby Hull and Dennis Hull used to play some great hockey for the Chicago Blackhawks. Trickfox...remember them guys ?
Back in the days of the Richards, Maurice and "?" for the Maple Leafs up there in Canada, eh ? May be wrong on some of the details buddy.

Hector...Mikado's a pussycat. Just Fedex him some lasagna with a little cinnamon mixed into the ricotta filling. He'll start purring right away

flow.... :wink:

lost me a bit

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:40 pm
by Elizabeth Helen Drake
Give me a little more ground to stand on here Mikado, ya lost me?
with this post?

James Barrett wrote:
I
found here http://users.erols.com/iri/TTBROWN2.htm
Any relation the Barrett mentioned in the above link?

Elizabeth