ydoaPs Posted September 10, 2005 Posted September 10, 2005 Conceptual Relativity (CR) is another term for Pulsoid Theory (PT). Conceptual Relativity connotes a difference from that relativity as proposed by SR and GR. The concept of relativity is one of the most important concepts that has ever been proposed such that the mind can perceive the counter-intuitive enigmas required to rationalize Reality. However' date=' there are serious flaws in both SR and GR; CR connotes the concepts of Relativity without said flaws. A few of the major flaws are: that the speed of light is constant. This is ludicrous on its face.[/quote']any reason to think this? Only the poorly understood concept of time has the constancy of a metronome.*cough*time dilation*cough* The variation in light's speed is too subtle for anthropic detection. You might say that the structure of light, to an anthropoid, is that of a hyper-elongated ellipsoid that cyclically gives the illusion of existing and not existing as its complex oscillations approach the hyper-relativistic speeds of the duality of Infinity.eh? Thus, another flaw is noted: that the limit of speed is that of light. Also, ludicrous, as aptly demonstrated by EPR and observed non-local phenomena. Why should anything be limited to contrived speeds that are other than the duality of Infinity: motionlessness (the infinitesimal) . . . and infinite speed (that of gravity and the most fundamental pulses of Nature).speed of gravity is c, buddy. Another serious flaw: GR has no structural force that is exactly counter to gravity.why does it need one? EM, Strong, and Weak forces are much greater than gravity. Today's many Cosmic enigmas and anomalies demonstrate, observationally, how inadequate GR actually is.examples?Consequently, because of major flaws of reasoning SR and GR are rife with many other flaws that are inconsistent with Nature.examples? Conceptual Relativity (CR) connotes relativity without the flaws of SR and GR, which flaws no one understood better than . . . Einstein. Why else did he spend the major part of his adult life trying to reconcile SR and GR with one another and Reality . . . unsuccessfully? Who first proposed the EPR gedunken? how are SR and GR incompatable? iirc, SR is a special case of GR(hence "special" relativity). what is a gedunken? Time, the most fundamental of the descriptive dimensions is also, at its root, the most enigmatic.nicely vague There are two forms of time which are usually commingled when trying to understand the concept. There is cyclic time and linear time; all other forms of time are derivations of these two. what is cyclic time?The metronome of time derives from the oscillations: vibration, slide, and swing, of Triquametric, seminal motion . . . the Unified Concept.eh? There is a Proof of One (PoO), which is a simple, universal constant that applies to all systems, including light; and, that is system dependent. The Natural PoO is, ultimately, dependent upom the Elliptical Constant. However, I enjoy the elegance of a simple geometric constrution that requires only Geometry 101. This constant is derived from any two Natural integer values of any system, and simple geometry. The Proof of One should complete Kurt Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem. how so? what exactly have you proved? There is no antimatter because seminal motion does not generate any negative intrgers. Nature only "knows" Natural Integers. The antimatter that has been detected by cyclotrons is the result of data misinterpretation. that is baseless rubbishSeminal motion, as the resultant of the Unified Concept, is the first essence of Reality.what is this supposed to mean? Legend for an Ultron Ellipse Line AD = radius = r Line BA = hypotenuse = h Line BC = soliton = s Line BD = wave = w Line BF = vector = v Line CA = diagonal radial = d Line CF = amplitude = a Line EB = perigee = p Line EC = major radial = m Line ED = apogee = o Line EF = diameter chord = C = Natural integer Line EG = major diameter = M Line FH = minor diameter = L Line JA = diagonal = D Line oP = Pythagorean radius = Pr = Natural integer Line oT = Taisoid radius = Tr = Natural integer Line oV = Vector radius = Vr = Natural integer Triangle ABD = Pythagorean triangle Inscribed circle ABD = Pythagorean circle Inscribed circle CDH = Vector circle Inscribed circle CEH = Taisoid circle p, s, v, o = 1st terms of a Brunardot Series The Ultron Ellipse is a Pulsoidal Ellipse that has a Natural integer value for the diameter chord, "C" (Line EF). The Ultron Ellipse, actually, resembles the below image more than the one above. The Ultron Ellipse is, heuristically, associated with the Congeneric Realm of Propagation near the Congeneric Realm of Compression . . . where Light morphs (resonates) to mass. See: The Mystique of the Ultron Ellipse. i've never heard of most of these buzzwords.The following observations and predictions of Pulsoid Theory are in no particular order; nor are they exhaustive. Generally speaking, all that the senses perceive are observations as predicted by Pulsoid Theory. More specifically . . . 01. Non-local "photon" effect of light waves. 02. An accelerating force that "pushes" galaxies apart. 03. The Pioneer anomaly. 04. Red-shift of light waves with time. 05. A "force" that compresses galaxies. 06. Twelve subatomic manifestations that have a unit "charge." 07. The most powerful "binding" forces are found at the most 0....fundamentallevels of phenomena. 08. That all mass must eventually dissipate. 09. Polarization of light waves. 10. EPR hyper-relativistic behavior. just like creationists trying to make observations fit the bible.11. Speed of gravity at near the infinite.wrong 12. Universal entanglement. 13. Quaquaversal behavior of light. what? 14. The high energy of quasars and gamma-ray bursts. 15. The ultra-high energy, background radiation. 16. Universal effects of "dark" energy. 17. Water, Viruses, and life arrived on Earth from the Cosmos. none of which are predictions. more trying to make observations fit your vague rubbish 18. Intergalactic viruses are the direct cause of much ......species ceation; rather than, Darwinian evolution. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!! 19. The non-existence of antimatter.wrong againThe Transcendental Mystique of the Number . . . 5. The number five, "5," is not only quite distinct from the other numbers; five, "5," also, has transcendental qualities much like the integer pair of Zero, "0," and Plus One, "+1." Five is found, fundamentally, everywhere there is Natural phenomena. If it could be said that one number could be more important than another, that most salient number might be five, "5." Five, "5," is generated by the Brunardot Ellipse, which, heuristically, represents the Ephemeloid, which is the first manifestation of Triquametric motion.more meaningless buzzwordsFive, "5, is at the heart of the Golden Ratio, Phi, "Φ," which is ubiquitous throughout Nature.it is? If the Natural function (the soliton, "s,") of a Brunardot Ellipse is One, "1,"; then the perigee, "p, equals the Golden Ratio, Phi, “Φ,” which is [math]\frac{\sqrt{5}+1}{2}[/math] Five is the only odd number that when multiplied by other odd numbers always results with the same number as its last digit . . . the last digit is always five, "5."a product of using base ten The set of non-prime numbers that have five, "5," as a factor (S5) is one of the sets of numbers that comprise the amalgam of sets that comprise conventional prime numbers. That is: S5 is one of the sets that must be subtracted from the set of Natural prime numbers so as to obtain conventional prime numbers. Five, "5," is part of a select group of revised Fibonacci sequence (rFS) numbers. It is the fifth rFS integer, which is the seventh term (1, 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5...). more meaningless rambling on the number five Most saliently, five, "5, is the most important factor for both the Iime and Pulse cycle that produces the perigee, "p," integer value that generates an Ultron Ellipse. See: The Ultron Resonance Sequence. Ultron Ellipses, generated by Pulse-Times of multiples of five, "5," are the precursor of Taisoids; and, heuristically, account for the resonance that culminates in Critical Coalescence . . . the "morphing of Light to mass." eh? Critical Coalescence refers to the moment when Ephemeloids become Oscilloids. Critical Coalescence, heuristically, occurs when Brunardot Ellipses evolve to Pulsoidal Ellipses. Critical Compression is the boundary between the Congeneric Realm of Coalescence and the Congeneric Realm of Propagation. eh?Critical Compression refers to the moment when Ultrons become atoms. Critical Compression manifests as Quasars and Gamma-ray bursts depending upom the amount of torqued mass involved. Critical Compression is the boundary between the Congeneric Realm of Propagation and the Congeneric Realm of Dissipation. eh? wtf?The Ultron Ellipse is symmetry and beauty at its maturest. The Ultron Ellipse answers the question, "Why twelve quarks?" Remember, these, heuristic, circles are rhythmically, relativistically, and dynamically oscillating, such that: no two are identical in spin, pulse, or mass at any one moment; as, each quadrant is a mirror image of its neighbor and reciprocal. There are twelve circles represented in the above image of an Ultron Ellipse (A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L). Eight circles are in the center of the above Ultron Ellipse. In each quadrant two are merging together (A-C, D-F, G-I, and J-L). At One end are Circles B and K; at the other end are circles E and H) Circles A, D, G, and J represent four Pulsoidal circles (One in each quadrant); Circles C, F, I, and L represent four Taisoidal circles; and, Circles B, E, H, and K represent four Pythagorean circles. See: Ultron Ellipse Legend; and, See: Pulsoidal Ellipse Legend for Circle definitions.) The twelve circles, heuristically, represent Soloids (analogous to quarks). The eight central circles, heuristically, represent the "gluon" fields of quantum chromodynamics (QCD). As the eight circles (Soloids) merge into four (one in each quadrant) and evolve closer to the center, their "bonds" become stronger (strong force). Of course the opposite is true for the peripheral Soloids. The central eight circles that become four are, in Nature, actually, four pulsing spheroids (Soloids) that are aligned in the form of a regular tetrahedron. As are also, on a higher level, the four rhythmically pulsing Phorbs (two of which comprise a Hylotron). Said rhythmically pulsing Soloids ("gluons") arranged as a regular tetrahedron are the strongest bonded structure in Nature. A Phorb is a "matched" set of three Soloids. Such is the nature of the Ultron (exotic "dark" matter), before Critical Compression, when all light is internally reflected back into the Ultron substructure. It is the Phorb that is ejected at Critical Compression, with two Soloids dissipating as Dissipents (the state of Light within the Congeneric Realm of Dissipation); the other remains as an electron. The three Phorbs that are not ejected at Critical Compression are referred to as the Neutron and the Proton. One of the four outer Soloids will become an electron at Critical Compression, which occurs within a quasar or gamma-ray burst. As the Ultron continues to expand, with decreased circularity, and its pulses approach the speed of Infinity, the Ultron becomes circular in the counter-intuitive manner of a Pulsoid. An Ultron Ellipse is a Pulsoidal Ellipse if the diameter chord, "C," (A line from the end of either diameter to either end of the other diameter.) is an integer. Of all the Conceptual Ellipses the Ultron Ellipse has the most unusual, counter-intuitive . . . amazing . . . behavior as the pulse times and cycle count increase. An Ultron Ellipse can be generated by any Natural integer value for the Cycle count with any integer value of 225, or larger, for the Time value. The smallest Ultron Ellipse has: ...........a minor diameter, L =........90,519,298; and, ...........a major diameter, M = 20,321,683,202; which is a ratio of exactly 1:225, when a very slight adjustment is made to the minor diameter, which adjustment is a simple function of the Taisoidal radius. This Pulsoidal Ellipse ratio of the major and minor diameters (with said very small adjustment) is exactly the Time value times the Cycle number. (Of course, all are Natural integers.) CT = M/(L+very small Taisoidal radius increment) Seek Simplicity !!! Thus all Ultron Ellipses are quite elongated; much like a light wave, which they, heuristically, represent. (The above diagram is drawn to an exaggerated scale for clarity.) See the Ultron Cycle-Time Arrays by "Clicking" this line. The Natural integer 225 is also, interestingly, the units of time required for the first cycle of a Brunardot Ellipse to become an Ultron Ellipse. After 225 units of time, all subsequent integer units of time result in Ultron Ellipses. Fourteen other cycles, as shown below have lower thresholds of time than 225 units. 225 is two times 5^3, which indicates the uniqueness of 5. See the Ultron Cycle-Time Arrays by "Clicking" this line. The Cycle-Time units, in each column, are minimum threshold time units that create the same resonating Ultron Ellipses. They are as follows: ..........Cycle....Time......Cycle....Time.......Cycle.....Time ..............1.......225............4.........57.............7..........33 ..............3.........75............6.........38...........11..........21 ..............5.........45..........12.........19 ..............9.........25 ............15.........15 The, below listed, Cycle-Time units are minimum threshold time units that each create unique Ultron Ellipses. They are as follows: ..........Cycle....Time ..............2........113 ..............8..........29 .............10.........23 .............13.........18 .............14.........17 All times given for each cycle are threshold times; all larger integer values of time, for each cycle listed, and for all cycles above fifteen, create a Brunardot Ellipse with an integer amplitude and an integer diameter chord; thus, an Ultron Ellipse. The Ultron Resonance Sequence eschews mathematical logic. This behavior is, heuristically, directly related to Hylotron formation, which relates to the morphing of Light to mass. so much crap, so little desire to typeThe Ultron Resonance sequence is fifteen integers that are most salient for Ultron formation; they are: 225, 113, 75, 57, 45, 38, 33, 29, 25, 23, 21, 19, 16, 17, 15. These numbers establish the minimum threshold Time units, in order of cycle, wherein a Pulsoidal Ellipse becomes an Ultron Ellipse. These fifteen numbers end with fifteen, "15,"; and they begin with 225, which is fifteen, "15," squared. Fifteen, "15," is the product of the first three odd Natural integers, which represent the first three cycle peaks of seminal motion's pulse. is this supposed to mean anything?The significance of Natural integers is that they, heuristically, represent solitons and the units of Time (cyclic phases) on Nature's metronome.i'm getting the feeling most of your buzzwords are circular in definition. Pulsoid Theory: a Summary Forget the ellipses. Forget the Proof of One. Forget the Elliptical Constant. Forget the esoteric arguments concerning Infinity; the Unified Concept; and, Triquametric, seminal motion. You don't need to understand gasoline/air ratios or "spark" advancement to drive a car. Remember that, the enviroment, including Consciousness, can be easily rationalized with a little intuitive reflection upon what had seemed enigmatic. vague, meaningless crapWe are a part of this environment; in fact we are the highest form of known evolution; wtf? and, as such, we are moving in the slowest "lane" of motion. We are the furthest away from the locus of the duality of Infinity as is possible. Yet, with all that has occurred between the ends of curent evolution, we are the only manifestations that may, eventually, know of our origins. The Congeneric Realms of Reality should join the 3-Rs in grade school. Coalescence, Propagation, Compression, and Dissipation, as the core of the Equilibrium Theory of Reality, must replace the Big Bang theory. If there were a beginning it would be the quiet calm of coalescence; ludicrous bang of compression . . . Never! The strength of Pulsoid Theory is the beauty, inevitableness, and logical completeness of its underlying Natural mathematics. more meaningless crap. nice summary, i could have told you that in the faster than light thread. Infinity is the source of all energy; which by definition must be conserved; therefore, said energy oscillates . . . never parting from its source. Being able to fully perceive "nothing"/"nil," which is the attribute of a singularity from within Reality, is very difficult; as, there are no comparable percepts. Such is a singularity . . . quintessential simplicity; yet, such is the source of all the variety of the total environment in which we exist. It is this singularity that is referred to as Infinity. By definition: there can be only one singularity. And, thus Infinity is the only absolute; as well as, the only provable, because Infinity can not be disproved. Infinity is the locus of a limit that can be approached, but not reached from Reality. Infinity is a manifestation of speed; not distance, or size. The infinite and the infinitesimal, which are infinite speed and motionlessness, are not found within Reality; thus, being beyond Reality, they are Infinity. Thus, as a singularity: the locus of the infinite and infinitesimal are congruent; and, are often referred to as the Duality of Infinity. Infinity, within Conceptualism is referred to with many words that have slightly different connotations; however, all have the identical meaning. The words are such as: ONEness, motionlessness, maximal speed, singularity, absolute, UnReality . . . even god; and so on. Infinity is indefinable; however, most subtly, the effects of Infinity are discernable by a careful examination of the most fundamental manifestations of all that which exists. Perhaps, what is most counter-intuitive about Infinity; and, at the same time, of the utmost importance, for an understanding of the structure and Triquametric motion of seminal phenomena, known popularly as "dark" energy, is that: Infinity, from within Reality, is approachable at three, heuristic, points; or more saliently: /me can't believe he wasted his time actually reading this rubbish.The photon effect is a manifestation of the geometry and Triquametric motion of the structure of a light wave. Said structure is described; by an ellipsoid that is, heuristically, defined, two-dimensionally; by the ellipses that are generated by the Elliptical Constant. All light waves collapse sinusoidally as they pulse hyper-relativisticly, between the dualities of Infinity. With each pulse (cycle), the time increases one integer unit, which tends to elongate the light wave structure as it evolves through the Congeneric Realms of Coalescence; and, to a lesser extent, as it evolves through the Congeneric Realm of Propagation. wtf? The Natural function, Psi, Ψ, (x^2 – x), is found everywhere in Nature and demonstrates the equivalence of Brunardot pairs such as: 0 & 1, -1 & 2, -2 & 3, -3 & 4, et cetera, ad infinitum. Each integer of a Brunardot pair returns the same Natural function value; and, is equidistant from Zero and plus One, respectively, on an integer scale, as above. The Natural function, Psi, Ψ, (x^2 – x), demonstrates the Natural absence of negative numbers; and, thus explains why there is no antimatter within Reality. Zero and plus One, which are Naturally equivalent, represent the congruity of the infinite and infinitesimal at Infinity. The soliton, "s," of Brunardot Ellipses', heuristically, represents the Natural function. what was the point?Simple algebraic formulas evolve to all the complexity of Reality. Very simple algebraic formulae generate, from any Natural integer, all of the integers of the following series, sequences, and arrays, except for the Ultron Ellipse arrays, which have a minimum threshold, as described, of 225. Ultron Cycle-Time Arrays; Tini Circle Groups It might be noted that ellipses (and circles, a special ellipse) and right triangles are not known for simple integer values. Such is the power of the Elliptical Constant and the Brunardot Series wtf?The Seminal bond, being closest of all bonds to the seminal source of all energy, is the strongest bond, of subsequent, similar bonds, that evolve exponentially, throughout the process of evolution . . . until the Congeneric Realm of Dissipation when such, subsequent, bonds begin to dissipate. The formation of these bonds is mathematically demonstrated with what must be considered a most remarkable mathematical construction. Possibly, the most amazing geometric demonstration with Natural integers that can be imagined. The mathematical construction begins with that structural part of an ellipse that is most salient with regard to structural “packing.” huh? well, that was "Pulsoid Theory" and my thoughts as i read each thread....in conclusion, it is vague, basesless, meaningless, crap.
CPL.Luke Posted September 10, 2005 Posted September 10, 2005 nice! as a note to proof of one, you mentioned that you had more scientific research than is found at your website. If there is substance to it will you care to show it?
Proof of One Posted September 10, 2005 Posted September 10, 2005 nice! as a note to proof of one' date=' you mentioned that you had more scientific research than is found at your website. If there is substance to it will you care to show it?[/quote']Just found this Thread; thanks to you. I did not want to be the one that created it; as, I have been previously accused in this forum of "grandstanding." You are, probably, quite correct, depending on which website you are referring to, I have over 70 domain names that are all active. I have published almost nothing of substance on the internet unless asked specific questions. Much is just provocative statements mixed with some error to judge who is paying attention. The sites bring many acquaintances from around the world. I never divulge private correspondence. On all sites there are back channel ways to reach me. To the point: my work always has substance. It would be near impossible to place all of it here; probably over 100Gbs. I will answer as many questions as time allows, to the best of my ability; or clearly state why not; this site is not my life. It does appear that this Thread will be better than the morass I was dragged into elsewhere. When directly questioned, every attempt is made to be forthright and transparent. I know that I will be informed if otherwise. Please try to keep the drivel and bickering to a minimum if you want my full attention to substance.
Proof of One Posted September 10, 2005 Posted September 10, 2005 any reason to think this? *cough*time dilation*cough* eh? speed of gravity is c' date=' buddy. why does it need one? EM, Strong, and Weak forces are much greater than gravity. examples? examples? how are SR and GR incompatable? iirc, SR is a special case of GR(hence "special" relativity). what is a gedunken? nicely vague what is cyclic time? eh? how so? what exactly have you proved? that is baseless rubbish what is this supposed to mean? i've never heard of most of these buzzwords. just like creationists trying to make observations fit the bible. wrong what? none of which are predictions. more trying to make observations fit your vague rubbish HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!! wrong again more meaningless buzzwords it is? If the Natural function (the soliton, "s,") of a Brunardot Ellipse is One, "1,"; then the perigee, "p, equals the Golden Ratio, Phi, “Φ,” which is [math]\frac{\sqrt{5}+1}{2}[/math] a product of using base ten more meaningless rambling on the number five eh? eh? eh? wtf? so much crap, so little desire to type is this supposed to mean anything? i'm getting the feeling most of your buzzwords are circular in definition. vague, meaningless crap wtf? more meaningless crap. nice summary, i could have told you that in the faster than light thread. /me can't believe he wasted his time actually reading this rubbish. wtf? what was the point? wtf? huh? well, that was "Pulsoid Theory" and my thoughts as i read each thread....in conclusion, it is vague, basesless, meaningless, crap. Wow. What an impressive response. The manner of the displayed intellect is truly amazing. As a reminder, I am printing the prior post, from which the embedded quotes herein were derived, from a high resolution Epson photo printer, on high quality paper, framing it under glass, and hanging it above my computer. First thing tomorrow, I will Google to see its ranking to determine if the world is as impressed as I.
ydoaPs Posted September 10, 2005 Author Posted September 10, 2005 any reason to think this? *cough*time dilation*cough* eh? speed of gravity is c' date=' buddy. why does it need one? EM, Strong, and Weak forces are much greater than gravity. examples? examples? how are SR and GR incompatable? iirc, SR is a special case of GR(hence "special" relativity). what is a gedunken? nicely vague what is cyclic time? eh? how so? what exactly have you proved? that is baseless rubbish what is this supposed to mean? i've never heard of most of these buzzwords. just like creationists trying to make observations fit the bible. wrong what? none of which are predictions. more trying to make observations fit your vague rubbish HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!! wrong again more meaningless buzzwords it is? Wow. What an impressive response. The manner of the displayed intellect is truly amazing. As a reminder, I am printing the prior post, from which the embedded quotes herein were derived, from a high resolution Epson photo printer, on high quality paper, framing it under glass, and hanging it above my computer. First thing tomorrow, I will Google to see its ranking to determine if the world is as impressed as I.[/quote'] that was just about how impressed i was with your crap. for the 10 trillionth time, THAT ISN'T HOW GOOGLE WORKS!!!!!!!!
CPL.Luke Posted September 10, 2005 Posted September 10, 2005 proof of one, you didn't comment on any of his points refuting your theory...
ydoaPs Posted September 10, 2005 Author Posted September 10, 2005 lets see: 1)not a scrap of evidence 2)vague beyond meaning 3)all terms have circular definitions 4)not way to test it 5)what little base it has been experimentally proven to be false
Proof of One Posted September 10, 2005 Posted September 10, 2005 that was just about how impressed i was with your crap. for the 10 trillionth time' date=' [u']THAT ISN'T HOW GOOGLE WORKS!!!!!!!![/u] I guess with my 70 plus, often high ranking domains (Google frequently changes the algorithm); I have learned nothing since before Google. In that case, your advice is duly noted. And, yes, often my postings at night, on this forum, are found at Google the next morning, Google watches me so closely that at PhysicsForums, from which I am totally banned, they use my original thoughts to promote the PhysicsForum website. I find it quite ironic that the traffic that is so directed there (And as is also directed to this site) discovers that my posting name on every post has a thick black line drawn through it. My viewers generally break all the forum records wherever I go. Probably thanks to Google and Yahoo. For some unknown reason Google follows me. I note that some listings of foreign forums drop me from the top spots, occasionally; only to put me back on top in several days. Try Googling Elliptical Constant, etc.
ydoaPs Posted September 10, 2005 Author Posted September 10, 2005 I guess with my 70 plus' date=' often high ranking domains (Google frequently changes the algorithm); I have learned nothing since before Google. In that case, your advice is duly noted. And, yes, often my postings at night, on this forum, are found at Google the next morning, Google watches me so closely that at PhysicsForums, from which I am totally banned, they use my original thoughts to promote the PhysicsForum website. I find it quite ironic that the traffic that is so directed there (And as is also directed to this site) discovers that my posting name on every post has a thick black line drawn through it. My viewers generally break all the forum records wherever I go. Probably thanks to Google and Yahoo. For some unknown reason Google follows me. I note that some listings of foreign forums drop me from the top spots, occasionally; only to put me back on top in several days. Try Googling Elliptical Constant, etc.[/quote'] either you are joking or a complete idiot......it's probably both
CPL.Luke Posted September 10, 2005 Posted September 10, 2005 that does not support your case, that proves your the only person on the internet who makes mention of the "eliptical constant" furthermore with this in mind you may want to consider the fact that very few people will google for eliptical constant. and finnaly you should consider that I can get google to look at one of my posts as well just quote a significant portion of text from one of my posts and you'll find that google will bring up a post of mine. this proves nothing. finally respond to the criticism that was given to you
Proof of One Posted September 16, 2005 Posted September 16, 2005 that does not support your case, that proves your the only person on the internet who makes mention of the "eliptical constant"You are quite correct. No one else in the world understands the Elliptical Constant, which is the Rosetta Stone of all wisdom, except for myself. My point is that: anyone who seeks wisdom should understand the Elliptical Constant. It is the Elliptical Constant that is at the crux of all physical manifestations; and, it offers a rationalization for the ellimation of all the metaphysics that is promulgated by Pomo elite theoretical physicists. If you do not understand the value of pure mathematics, which is an essential part of understanding the fundamental concepts of physics, I suggest that you educate yourself. furthermore with this in mind you may want to consider the fact that very few people will google for eliptical constant. and finnaly you should consider that I can get google to look at one of my posts as wellThat the world has difficulty undersatand something so simple as the Elliptical Constant and its significance to all knowledge is not my problem. just quote a significant portion of text from one of my posts and you'll find that google will bring up a post of mine.I would think that this proves how unconcerned Google is with truth and fundamental wisdom. Google has provided the playing field; the performers must provide the content . . . wise, or otherwise. this proves nothing.Probably not. But, your reply proves much. finally respond to the criticism that was given to youI am overwhelmed from many forums, and over 70 Domain Names, if I am lax in some particular area of response, Please elaborate. Much is so ludicrous on its surface that no response should be necessary. Comments often stand by themselves as their own best rebuttals. I would recommend that if you wish to be credible that you carefully study Pulsoid Theory; then pick one logical statement or mathematical expression and criticize it specifically . . . if you can. I am always looking for thoughtful input concerning "tweaking" the theory so that others can more easily understand it. Your input could be invaluable.
Proof of One Posted September 16, 2005 Posted September 16, 2005 either you are joking or a complete idiot......it's probably bothAd hominem argument is a sure sign of a weak argument. Pick a logical agument or mathematical statement to discuss.
Proof of One Posted September 16, 2005 Posted September 16, 2005 lets see:1)not a scrap of evidence See: Observational evidence. 2)vague beyond meaningVague is subjective and not specific. Please give an example so that it can be clarified. 3)all terms have circular definitionsI know of no terms so defined in Pulsoid Theory. Please specify one; and' date=' I will immediately clarify it in a non[b']-[/b]circular manner. I might mention that all dimensions in conventional physics are circularly defined . . . an impossibly lax situation. 4)not way to test itThe photon effect is a great test for Pulsoid Theory. Also, the Pioneer anomaly is another excellent test. And, of course, the Natural integers are one of the best tests; iff such were not so, all integers must be considered as contrived . . . a sad situation. 5)what little base it has been experimentally proven to be falseI know of no such instance. Can you cite some case in point?
Proof of One Posted September 16, 2005 Posted September 16, 2005 that was just about how impressed i was with your crap. for the 10 trillionth time' date=' [u']THAT ISN'T HOW GOOGLE WORKS!!!!!!!![/u] Check with both a real world-class theoretical physicist and a world-class internet Guru. I believe you'll be surprised and impressed with what i actually do understand.
Proof of One Posted September 16, 2005 Posted September 16, 2005 what is a gedunken?I will let most of your comments stand. They are their best rebuttel. However, no one who understands a wit about theoretical physics could possible ask for the definition of a “gedunken.” Certainly, not without first Googling. a product of using base tenYou responded to my below quote, as above. Five is the only odd number that when multiplied by other odd numbers always results with the same number as its last digit . . . the last digit is always five, "5."Had you carefully study Pulsoid Theory, you would have noted that one of its revolutionary Pure Mathematics' concepts is that it uses no “base” or scale; such is the significance of the universal Proof of One and the Elliptical Constant. Your continuing ad hominem and pejorative comments only weaken your arguments. You would be more effective in presenting your case if you would eliminate the emotion and stick to logic.
insane_alien Posted September 16, 2005 Posted September 16, 2005 You are quite correct. No one else in the world understands the Elliptical Constant, which is the Rosetta Stone of all wisdom, except for myself. My point is that: anyone who seeks wisdom should understand the Elliptical Constant. That is because you have not provided any mathemetics on the page you linked to. you didn't even say what the eliptical constant is.
Proof of One Posted September 16, 2005 Posted September 16, 2005 That is because you have not provided any mathemetics on the page you linked to. you didn't even say what the eliptical constant is.I am not certain which linked page you are referring to. Please advise and I will clarify. Pulsoid Theory is replete with mathematics and its logic. The Elliptical Constant is a simple algebraic/geometrical concept that is the scheduled topic of a seminar to be held shortly. You will be advised. You can be asured that it is the Rosetta Stone of all Knowledge and Wisdom.
ydoaPs Posted September 16, 2005 Author Posted September 16, 2005 See: Observational evidence[/url']. yea, nice evidence. just about how much i thought you had.Vague is subjective and not specific. Please give an example so that it can be clarified.ok, it has no point. that better?I know of no terms so defined in Pulsoid Theory. Please specify one; and, I will immediately clarify it in a non-circular manner. then you have no idea what a circular definition is. every single one of your made up terms has a circular definition The photon effect is a great test for Pulsoid Theory. Also, the Pioneer anomaly is another excellent test. neither of those are tests And, of course, the Natural integers are one of the best tests; iff such were not so, all integers must be considered as contrived . . . a sad situation. that's not a test either.....amazingI know of no such instance. Can you cite some case in point? lets see, both light and gravity have been experimentally tested to travel at c, not infinity.
ydoaPs Posted September 16, 2005 Author Posted September 16, 2005 I am not certain which linked page you are referring to. Please advise and I will clarify. Pulsoid Theory is replete with mathematics and its logic. The Elliptical Constant is a simple algebraic/geometrical concept that is the scheduled topic of a seminar to be held shortly. You will be advised. You can be asured that it is the Rosetta Stone of all Knowledge and Wisdom. neither of those have ANY math in them.....who would have guessed.
Proof of One Posted September 16, 2005 Posted September 16, 2005 neither of those have ANY math in them.....who would have guessed. math n : a science (or group of related sciences) dealing with the logic of quantity and shape and arrangement [syn: mathematics, maths]
ydoaPs Posted September 16, 2005 Author Posted September 16, 2005 Jesus H Christ! "i'm gonna ignore every point and argue semantics!" btw, the dictionary is not a technical resource.
Proof of One Posted September 16, 2005 Posted September 16, 2005 yea, nice evidence. just about how much i thought you had.Thank you. I thought such was among the most powerful evidence that I could present. You might “Click” and read carefully this time. Of course, you really should be questioning Lawrence M. Krauss and his many supporters. ok, it has no point. that better?No. You have given an opinion. You have not given an example of my logic, with which you dispute. Maybe, you don’t question my math and logic; just the presenter? then you have no idea what a circular definition is. Circular Definition: .........A circular definition is a description of the meaning of a lexeme that is constructed using one or more synonymous lexemes that are all defined in terms of each other. An excellent example of circular definitions are the four basic dimensions that are so misunderstood by most all physicists. every single one of your made up terms has a circular definitionPlease give me just ONE example; and, I will correct it. neither of those are testsYour saying so, especially considering your learned background, does not make it so. I do not understand why it would not be possible to test for the phuton effect; and the Europeans are mounting millions of dollars to test for the Pioneer Anomaly. What part of test do you misunderstand? that's not a test either.....amazing Please consult any Pure Mathrmatician concerning the contrivances of numbers . . . upon which the fundamental concepts of physics ultimately rests. lets see, both light and gravity have been experimentally tested to travel at c, not infinity.Not so. Or at least the issue is far from settled. There is definitely much in question regarding the speed of gravity; and many are beginning to question the concept of light and its speed; particulary as to its internal structure and its various states . . . there are four.
Proof of One Posted September 16, 2005 Posted September 16, 2005 Jesus H Christ! "i'm gonna ignore every point and argue semantics!" btw, the dictionary is not a technical resource.If you are serious about arguing semantics, might I recommend a book that I've had on my shelf for 50 years and often enjoy perusing: Science and Sanity, An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics, Third Edition, a revision by Alfred Korzybski, 1933, 1948 The International Non-Aristotelian Library Publishing Company. There are many persons that find the Dictionary quite helpful in defining every day terms such as "Circular Definition" and "Math."
Recommended Posts