voodoochile Posted September 12, 2008 Author Posted September 12, 2008 There were a lot of people involved. It was a group effort by me, a japanese cryptographer and some physicists. If you want to see what I'm talking about do this boycott. If you can think of another way to make this public now, please do. How do I make public finding the points of inertia? Isnt that a noble prize?
insane_alien Posted September 12, 2008 Posted September 12, 2008 i doubt you will get a noble prize. calculating inertia is a trivial process that most highschool physics students could do.
voodoochile Posted September 12, 2008 Author Posted September 12, 2008 not undisputedly finding all 12 points within the car for a fact. I could do the same again in 5 minutes.
insane_alien Posted September 12, 2008 Posted September 12, 2008 you're delusional. anyway, everything here is done on a computer model that does not relate to reality AT ALL. why should we give you a nobel for that? you haven't even presented anything more than an anecdote. no evidence whatsoever.
voodoochile Posted September 12, 2008 Author Posted September 12, 2008 I know which is why I also suggested a means for it to be made public so it will considered serious and not anecdotal.
iNow Posted September 12, 2008 Posted September 12, 2008 It's no wonder this was closed the last time it was brought up.
voodoochile Posted September 12, 2008 Author Posted September 12, 2008 Which part are you having trouble believing? It was one decision that made all of this possible.
insane_alien Posted September 12, 2008 Posted September 12, 2008 well, the whole thing,. the fact you think you deserve a nobel for calculating inertia doesn't lend credibility either.
voodoochile Posted September 12, 2008 Author Posted September 12, 2008 finding the points of inertia in a car is worth a noble prize. not including everything else I did.
insane_alien Posted September 12, 2008 Posted September 12, 2008 finding the points of inertia in a car is worth a noble prize a HIGHSCHOOL student knows the necessary mathematics. the mathematics has existed for hundreds of years. calculating them is neither origional nor complicated. not including everything else I did we have no evidence that you have done anything at all.
big314mp Posted September 12, 2008 Posted September 12, 2008 Finding proof of god is worth a Nobel prize. Somehow, running a video game "at the speed of light" and then "poking holes in the fabric of spacetime" seems more like tripping out. Nobel prize for Hofmann!
voodoochile Posted September 13, 2008 Author Posted September 13, 2008 (edited) hello big. I know how it sounds but forget the video game part. Think about the development of physics and binary code during this process to completely predict the movment of a car running on binary code and the laws of physics. I'm very strong and very fast and there were a few scientists involved who were very good. I'm repeating myself. prove me wrong Edited September 13, 2008 by voodoochile multiple post merged
insane_alien Posted September 13, 2008 Posted September 13, 2008 the onus is on you to prove yourself right. thats how science works.
voodoochile Posted September 13, 2008 Author Posted September 13, 2008 I dont think I can explain myself any further. I think that one decision is just too hard to believe. If you want the to see the proof of that decision and of everything else I'm saying, do the boycott or at least think of another way to make them show it. I just contacted the noble foundation. Maybe they might have the means to make that happen.
iNow Posted September 13, 2008 Posted September 13, 2008 I feel sorry for those poor folks who have to deal with your kind. Wait a minute, we're dealing with you, too!
Kyrisch Posted September 13, 2008 Posted September 13, 2008 You want a direct question? How does binary code travel faster than the speed of light? WTF does that even mean? And also it is so obvious that you don't know the slightest thing about physics because you keep referring to a moment of inertia as if it were an actual instant in time >.<
big314mp Posted September 13, 2008 Posted September 13, 2008 Voodoo, the issue with your "science" is that it is entirely subjective. Explain to us how someone could peer review your "findings" or somehow verify your work. You think you saw something, and you can't even accurately describe it to us. Of course we are going to be skeptical of something like that. It's what we do. It's what science does.
ChemSiddiqui Posted September 13, 2008 Posted September 13, 2008 I didn;t have time to read the OP's post but from the replies from other members of the forum, I take it that the OP is trying to say that either him or someone he knows has seen 'God'. God really exists but saying that you saw him and wagering to it won't change anyone mind....in fact no one can see God except only the Prophets and angels.!
Glider Posted September 13, 2008 Posted September 13, 2008 I should have said, no drug or mental health related comments please.So, ignore the most obvious explanation and look for something more obscure. Why?
voodoochile Posted September 13, 2008 Author Posted September 13, 2008 (edited) Voodoo, the issue with your "science" is that it is entirely subjective. Explain to us how someone could peer review your "findings" or somehow verify your work. Thats exactly why I'm asking for a boycott. Its the only way I can think of for everybody to verify my work. You think you saw something, and you can't even accurately describe it to us. Of course we are going to be skeptical of something like that. It's what we do. It's what science does. I know. I see the part where everybody gets lost is when I mention breaking through the fabric of space-time. So I will try to explain how this happened in more detail. As I mentioned this new code looked like 2 dimensional squares. The testing I did perfectly filled these squares with information. So now these squares were solid with inertia information. Inertia is a very special force. When a car is drifting, the slightest touch will make the car skim along the track in a different direction. These squares behaved the same way. Each one was a perfect copy of the last so they had an unlimited supply which allowed them to fire them at my steering wheel indefinitely. When they were being fired at the steering wheel one touch at any time in any direction would send one square flying. If you shook your hand you would get quite a few and the speed would increase but you had to do all of this while drifting. I was able to get this chain to go so fast that they couldn’t build faster. There seem to be a few speed barriers that I had to get the code through. Each time I did, I had to consciously make it happen. So when I managed to make it work at the speed of light my last decision in an increasing number of decisions broke through the fabric of space-time. I had to break through the fabric of space-time to be fast enough to make that one last decision and I did. I didn’t know or think I was going to break through the fabric of space time but I had to in order to make it work. After that everything became light and the squares that were travelling in a straight line were now attached to each other in what looks a spring made of 3 dimensional squares. Edited September 13, 2008 by voodoochile
voodoochile Posted September 13, 2008 Author Posted September 13, 2008 your really stuck on the moment of inertia. move on it was just a moment
insane_alien Posted September 13, 2008 Posted September 13, 2008 qhat exactly do you think 'moment of inertia' means? because i have a feeling that what you think it means and what it actually means are two very different things.
voodoochile Posted September 13, 2008 Author Posted September 13, 2008 the moment when grip is lost. a billion yen to the first person who can tell me where the grip goes after the mement of inertia
Recommended Posts