12-21-07 Pupin's letters ("AT&T treaked me"). Winter Solstace. Conservatives "blow stuff up". Photons like billiard balls? Page of links to smartest most interesting people. 12-14-07 Major media lied about Pupin, CIP, Frank Fiorini, Thane Cesar, and now 9/11, is everything they say a lie? What else have they lied about? End of "diffraction", replace with "reflection"? 12-07-07 I have many videos but don't have time to post them 11-16-07 Lots of violence in the news 11-09-07 Ethics because of Dieties. video of Sun. Musharraf police state. outsiders can't possibly hookup, but how on earth can insiders not hook up (besides living during an epoch of antipleasure ferver)? Other "right wing" that is anti-murder. Beyond blue/red, left/right, we are earthlings versus life of other stars when it comes to competition for controlling matter. Hydrogen probably fuel of future. $30 Inverter and car battery useful for power outages. Key to seeing sending thought may be tuning into specific frequency of photons emitted and absorbed by molecules in neurons not found elsewhere. Oral histories and the phenomenon of how we repeat our thoughts out loud. How were electric camera images in houses recorded at AT&T, on plastic film? So stupid people that are against pleasure. 11-02-07 Naomi Wolfe video, Pupin archive, knowing the laws on sex, MIT spelled in E. Coli using photons to push, authorities find kid who started fires, "The Lost Gospel" smart analysis of early Christian history, saw Richard Stallman talk, asked him about complete freedom of all information, says doesn't know what that is
10-26-07 "One frame at a time"=only method to calculate future, microscopic thought seeing cameras sprayed on with water? Measuring mass of charged particle independent of charge, danger of "sane" people, if you have to tel (sic) insiders violence is wrong, you know they aren't stopping it. "CM" possibly did 9/11/01 Pentagon mass murder in a plane. Quantity of food eaten still most important to diet. Seeing thought 100 year anniversary in October 2010. Huntington makes concession on bigger telescope=farther galaxies argument: Bigger telescope argument might not be accurate since at 15 billion light years, light beams are so red-shifted that no coherent image can be put together. 10-19-07 Audio of my question to Kip Thorne and his answer. Weight=242lbs. 10-12-07 "1984" in 1956. just one time for earth. universe at steady state now? fun business cards. Video about Pupin. "CIP". 2 women. Top Ted 41 statements. Weight=243.5lbs. 10-07-07 Inspirational and informational audio 10-05-07 Fahrenheit 451 coffee pot hint? Awesome free videos on Annenberg/CPB page, in particular "The Mechanical Universe". Light Polarization is from direction of light, not from wave nature: see my video demonstration. many old songs now on songs page. subscribed to "Penthouse" and "Vegetarian Times". Drug laws w/o statute of limits? Can you feel the heat from a person's head? Sagan hints CIA responsible for his death. "Ted in ten minutes". illegal prost keeps women poor. rude included. insider savages don't even tell outsiders thought can be sent. weight=245lbs.
09-28-07 The end of aging but not for us, no homosexuals in Iran because all bi, Mijalo Pupin's FITI tells about "wiping memory", sleepy old AT&T the biggest spy camera network on earth? V for vendetta, grimaldi experiment simulation has 3 reflections on each side that Grimaldi didn't account for, my lung inhale muscle was stopped for about 5 to 10 seconds. Numerous well done Annenberg/CPB free videos on the web in particular "The Mechanical Universe". Examples of clear transitions between galaxies from blue prespirals to yellow and globular. 248lbs. 09-23-07 Audio comments 09-21-07 Republicans should be a third party because of their extreme and violent views. Distinguish between star death and star birth nebuli? 250lbs. 09-14-07 It occured to me, that only the horniest survive since sex is required for reproduction. Total full democracy actually protects the lives of powerful leaders, since dependence on them is limited. No law granting parents exceptions for granting their children adult rights (vote, work, to see nudity)? Kathy Griffin's censored comment, Lynn Margulis speaks out about 9/11 being an inside job, Mother Jones sells out, 252lbs. 09-07-07 Right to quit military campaign. More corpuscular videos. Lisa Nova bad mouths porn. Jodie Foster surrenders to God cult. Why no tv station XOF, or NNC? 256lbs! 08-31-07 My top ten goals. Single-hole in box produces spectra. Little know science history. More photon simulation videos. audio messages. 263 lbs. 08-24-07 Not since French atheletes saluted Hitler has there been this bad of foresight. Republican problem=no amount of money can make murder of innocent look good. Many hypothetical corpuscular light theory models. Wave theory and corpuscular basic difference=light beams can cancel out. audio messages. 268 lbs. 08-17-07 Corpuscular theory interpretation of Francesco Grimaldi's "diffraction" experiment, reveals interesting videos. Characteristic and pattern comparison of Nazis and Neocons exposes surprising similarities but with subtle differences. Can the titles "Republican" and "Democrat" be compared to "Murderer" and "The Murder's Victim"? Drug War comes down to single question: jail them or not? 272 lbs!
08-10-07 Top 10 reasons why to tell the truth about seeing, hearing and sending thought (SHAST), "yeah but are they violent?", Sagan and Asimov murdered? I lost 24 pounds, D breast most beautiful or no? 08-07-07 Reiterating my message to old friends from high school 08-03-07 Went to Santa Cruz, losing weight, movie science. 07-27-07 More comments about "Kevin and Bean" show. 07-24-07 Ay carramba! Three of my youtube debate questions were played on the KROQ "Kevin and Bean" show and I they are going to chat with me over the phone tomorrow on the show! Very exciting! 07-20-07 For those who control the secret neuron net, "chewing gun" not "gum" is more to their almost-all-powerful and violently criminal liking. Those are not "freudian slips", but "fraudian slips". Changing your words, making you drop stuff average for the high school drop out camera-thought net controllers. Non-religious should be more fearful and informed about the history and intentions of mainstream religious (Democrat, Republican or other) and the massive cult of Jesus and cult of God, generally they aren't much like us when it comes to values and have a history of killing atheists to their religion. 07-13-07 Lawful woman forced to be electrocuted in NY, no massive smart group in cam-net pulling in other smarties yet, 9/11+war=secret 2000 campaign promise? President reveals immoral government secrets. Gore score with Live Earth. More possible benefit shows. Phone company records every phone call you ever made? 07-06-07 CP=cunt power?, UK blasts=repubs early campaigning? Who cares if classic murderers and their victims were repubs or dems? The more simple bipartisan teams are: murderers vs antimurderers. 06-29-07 Supreme Court just votes their own personal opinion, anybody can do that, and why do 9 people decide the laws for 300 million people whose votes can very easily be counted? 06-25-07 digital video camera for $100, public should be able to do criminal cases, typical "ad" major media paid to mislead, drum riff after most of Bush's statements, more subtle sex laws probably in our future 06-15-07 for minors: drugs and alcohol are ok, sex is no way. Incest might not be best, but again antisexuals lose all sense of logic when pleasure is involved. Nazistic love of pain to genitals and butt. Remember that for every thought and pain: is it real or is it camera-net? Blood hound Forensic Files, America's Most Wanted, and COPS fans finally catch up with 9/11 killers? Voluntary STD database. Photons affected by gravity? People that check-in to prison for free food? 06-08-07 Mysterious "CP", Dem and Repub debates, people think other nations are terrible to their own people, but how many nations killed 3000 of their own citizens? None are that monsterous. 06-01-07 Bush jr worst leader of US history, but worst of all-time? My goals if demoted to President of the US. 9/11 and Guiliani. always with the "gay or strait", what happened to bi? I guess that never happens in nature. The ultimate matter reducer: neuron beams just separate any matter you want to throw away, yes even dookie. But how we build back the dookie from photons still remains a mystery. 05-25-07 Does earth perihelion change relative to the sun? Maybe that explains Mercury perihelion anomoly. Slogans for dems in 2008. More good 9/11 videos. PhD and MD have come to mean pile on unnecessary products and services, so consumers/patients beware in particular of: psychologers, dentists, optomatrists. 05-18-07 Pope, religion 05-11-07 The invention of writing must have caused a renaissance similar to the one caused by the printing press, and the Internet. Inanna, Ishtar, Aphrodite, Venus are all names for the supposed god of planet Venus. 05-04-07 Jimmy Carter talk. Is George Bush jr. an incubus/dark angel that results from 50 years of failure to stop violence? 7/7 "good old boys" problem. New method to measure mass of particles: measure their delay against earth's gravity. Choice between Democrat and Republican a choice between life and death. 04-27-07 The earliest evidence of human writing includes a pornographic image. The right to be wrong. Two classic secret science experiments. The speed of light may be limited because the distance between two photons and gravitational attraction between two photons might by finite. Jimmy Carter talking at UCI. 04-20-07 The Virginia Tech murders had to be a stand-down maybe to cause a wave of helpful indignation. Up with DNA and down to hell with Thane!
04-17-07 Virginia Tech shooting.
04-13-07 early vision of free speech helps us now, medium length-haired police, what never punished roming free insider murderer's initials will be on your epitaph? Will you be FF'd like JFK?, TC'd like RFK, or AO'd like the WTC victims? 04-06-07 We live in a very violent epoch. Mistake in giving uneducated violent exclusive access to advanced technology. ULSF/9-11 paradox. Broken ribs=collapse to dust? As usual insiders fail to stop or simply allow murder at U of Washington and CNN. 04-02-07 People overly critical of others, global currency already exists as the credit card, pro-gay versus anti-gay in this century of "Gay Wars" 03-23-07 quasars probably just distant galaxies, shifted not overly intense light, Mossbauer effect may mean that photons have variable velocity? 03-20-07 Summary on my Mom 03-12-07 My Mom is dead and it is very upsetting. 03-02-07 Move "Final Cut", camera-thought net+9/11 in 5 minutes 02-23-07 Seeing eyes may be in thermal range (10-20cm), Daniel Hopsicker videos, the right to assault children popular with conservatives 02-16-07 4 screens in brain (2 video, 2 audio), good video about CIA, average particle velocity may be misleading in conservation of momentum calculations. 02-09-07 Psychology diagnosis as valid as test for virus? Abney infrared photography recipe. All waves are particle by nature. What are the exact differences between neutrons and hydrogen atoms? 02-05-07 new voting system!, making an ir old-time camera, molesto-week extravaganza, Interpol has Nazi roots, psychology rebuttle, greatest scientists 01-29-07 Is this stalin china that we can't openly question official stories? Last of 3 on grassy knoll dead, tracing back JFK murder. Velocity cannot be converted to matter. What to get the mass-murderer who has everything. Celibacy, monogomy and denial of senses the height of honor and respect? 01-19-07 There is always a New World. 01-01-07 Happy time to you. Universe probably contains more like 40% hydrogen. Gravity red shifts light. Camera-thought net uses wires so can only be GE and AT&T.
I wonder if that is gravity or an electromagnetic field that brings the liquid back down. It's interesting the way gas or liquid is spewed up off the surface like a geyser and then comes back down to the surface. I wonder what kind of atoms that stuff is made off...maybe its motel iron, or hydrogen gas. I guess we could be looking at a solid, liquid or a gas. If this is a gas, we are looking at like a cloud layer like those on earth but of course much higher temperature, but the same density. The material in the streams is definitely finely grained, so is either gas, liquid or as a low probability, granular solid. But whatever it is is emiting light particles in the wavelength of the detector that recorded this. Probably most of the material on the surface of the Sun is emiting light particle at various rates, much more than on a planet.
11/07/07
It's terrible what is happening in Pakistan. It was wrong when Musharaff and the military took over in a coup d'etat in 1999 ousting Nawaz Sharif (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pervez_Musharraf for more info), the elected Prime Minister, and notice how the Bush jr admin readily supported Muscharaff, without any complaint about Musharaff overthrowing the representative democracy. It lessens the excuse that they wanted to remove Saddam Hussain because he was a dictator, since clearly Musharaff is a dictator that they are willing to work with and support. Our government gives Pakistan 1 billion dollars a year, I definitely cast my vote against that, maybe work to end starvation and dehydration there, but that's it. And now Musharaff has made a police state. Some people are arguing that this is some kind of test for the Bush jr admin who may want to implement a police state and suspend the constitution (what remains of it) and the body of laws that came after it, with the excuse of "terrorism" before the 2008 "election". The news stories in the US claim that Musharraf is opposed to Islamic extremists, but it seems more likely that, like all dictators, the largest source of opposition comes from pro-democracy/anti-monarchy people. Packistan and Musharraf's role in 9/11 certainly needs to be fully exposed and explored, clearly one of his closest friends and fellow General Mahmoud Ahmed funded Atta: from the article abouve:
"On July 22, 2004, The Guardian reported that Omar Sheikh, a British-born Islamist, had, on the instructions of General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), wired $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker. When Ahmed was exposed by the Wall Street Journal as having sent the money to the hijackers, Musharraf forced him to retire.[80] The 9/11 commission did not investigate this funding."
Look how Musharraf just makes him retire...like Ahmed was one of the thousands with their hands in the 9/11 mass murder who was caught, ... it's like the stop murder forces just made a quick swipe through the thousands of participants and all they could pull out was Ahmed...and so Musharraf just makes him retire and everybody apparently forgets...like oh! you, my close friend who I work with everyday, we're mysteriously funding a 9/11 hijacker patsie...what a surprise that I know nothing about...now I must punish you for being involved with murdering 3000 people by making you retire. No criminal charge, no criminal investigation...I mean its publicly obvious that they are involved and not seeking to expose what happened on 9/11. The shocking thing is here, we funded the 9/11 murders and murderers...they were almost all tax-payed funded, nice eh?
That's kind of interesting if it costs $50,000 to place a full page ad in the NYTimes, then maybe it costs around $5,000 to pay for an article or "news" story that occupies 1/10th of the page.
Probably there will be holidays for every special interest group: weed-mas/drug-mas (I can see a tree with various bongs, crack pipes), gun-mas/weapon-day (perhaps a tree with various weapons), sex-mas, every special interest group there is, for me though, I don't have time to celebrate, I want to end aging, build my walking robots, and get going to alpha centauri before I get much older.
Just thinking back about the "The Thought Reading Machine" book. I sent my Mom a copy and it is nowhere to be found in her possessions, and I think that speaks volumes about the kind of torment she must have endured with insiders stealing her property and beaming who-knows-what onto her mind.
There is a funny thing, sometimes insiders are like...why can't you hook up with anybody around you?...and you know ..it's basically impossible for an outsider to hook up with an insider...it's like dating a blind and deaf person...not many people are willing to endure it...because they communicate through thought but yhe outsider doesn't hear thought...the insider has to say out loud everything...but the exact opposite is true for the included...how can you not hook up when you are included?...I mean you can hear thoughts....there is no mystery at all...it's probably like...hey wanna do it? yeah ok...and it's done...in a millisecond..where for the outsider they never really know...does this person wanna do it or no? do they like me or despise me? etc. Beyond that...the insiders can scour the landscape...all the insides of houses and heads...looking for physical and intellectual matches....an outsider is lucky to be able to scrape up even a date or a kiss ... with anybody...and generally a person not remotely similar, probably not one of the better matches possible. It is incredibly easy to hook up for insiders...it can't fail....but the exact opposite is true for outsiders...it can't possibly succeed...and then add into that evil insiders who beam "don't do it!" onto both outsiders minds...and you can see it will never succeed. And that is part of the Nazistic truth about the at&t pupin people-the insiders...just like a typical auschwitz...they horde everything for themselves....the cup spilleth over for them....while only 2 cm away people are dying from supply shortage.... And then why? only because they are a different race, religion, simply never knew anybody who was inside, an intellectual, who knows...generally honest and wise people are excluded, while the violent and stupid are included...(and like Nazis they hide and remove any trace of what they've done)...maybe I'm wrong, only all the secret at&t videos will show the truth should the public ever care to force them to open up the archive.
11/08/07
I'm tried of people pretending the "right" is a bunch of murdering Nazi criminals. There are many right wingers who are anti-murder, who are anti-Nazi, and I think it's long overdue to hear from those people. People who are disgusted by the secret murdering of the current leaders of the Republicans, people who want full democracy, full rule by the people, and reject the current beaurocratic representative form, in particular with it's dishonest murderous idiot leaders like the Bush family. The right-wing murdering Nazis such as the Bush family have ruled the USA for far too long, and it's time for the true lawful honest right to rise up, expose the Bush's murders (which are in the millions), do the right thing, be honest, tell the truth, stamp out the violent Nazi criminals, and restore decency to the USA. What is going on now goes beyond right and left and relates to good and bad, true and false, those who murder and those who jail murderers, etc. it goes far beyond the trivial white or black, left or right, blue or red analogies.
It's shocking to me that people could allow murderers to roam free just because they feel that the murderer is a "right winger" like them, that is total idiocy and a path to extinction. As I said before, who the fuck cares if the Green River Killer is a Republican?! I mean c'mon what the fuck?
In some way, I compare the left versus right debate to our founding members as a nation, they opposed oppressive and undemocratic rule, they believed in religious and philosophical freedom, we're they right or left? To me, I don't think it mattered, they stood together against injustice and oppression. Another comparison is the right and left of our own bodies, it seems a good example that we need both sides of our body, to use only one side of our body would make life much tougher. We need to think more deeply past the shallow labels of left and right and more towards violent and nonviolent, deeper labels that carry more importance.
One thing that is a unifying force, is the realization that the group of we humans on earth, we earthlings form a relatively small group, and we should be looking to move forward as a species to start colonizing the planets of other stars...we are in a competetition...less against each other, as against life of planets of other stars, who, like us, are also realizing the same things...that to leaverage their future, the future of their kind of life, they need to own a lot of stars...the less matter they control, the less power and influence they will have...but I guess that depends on the idea that all life of the same type would support each other against life of a different kind (if you look at the few science fiction stories...they all show the universal view of earthlings despising life of other stars...in fact there is only one I know of {Contact} where the view of other life from people of earth is not hostile). So perhaps instead of saying go team this, or go team that...we should be saying 'go team earthlings' because ultimately our bigger competitors for supplies and freedoms are those organisms that have made the globular clusters.
Now, when people beam stuff on me, instead of thinking about the item they beamed, I tend to think of where they are...what it is like...a society made of beamers...is it the police? is it the phone company? what buildings are they in? Do they work from home? Is it the electric company? Do they work together to put in cameras? how do the police and military and phone company work together? ... what is their intention in such a beaming? What does it reveal about their environment and beliefs?
It seems clear to me that Hydrogen gas as a fuel is probably going to replace the vast majority of other fuels. Fuels from fossil oil is finite (although from oil made by life is a possibility). Still, I think people will probably figure out how to extract hydrogen the most simple atom from any matter...like the big incinerator in the sky...they will turn garbage into hydrogen gas...it can't be impossible...it must have been recognized as a very early important goal...no doubt it only take a few beams of neutrons and a turning centrifuge or something similar to collect the hydrogen gas that emits from the radioactive garbage. So that being known, it seems like we should have hydrogen combustion engines by now, and in particular hydrogen combustion batteries, hydrogen food grills, ... I mean what is the hold up? I think it has to be the fossil fuel (oil) companies ... but why wouldn't they hop on the hydrogen market? Who knows. It's not 100% certain that hydrogen will be the do-all fuel of the future, but we know fossil fuels are a dead end as a finite resource, I can't see biofuels being fast enough...we have to wait for the bacteria or whatever to reproduce, where with hydrogen we just separate atoms. I guess it's between atom separating and bacteria...but even with bacteria...they may want hydrogen...H2+O2 is a simple combustion...it's the most simple combustion known as far as I know, and probably the most efficient. So where are the hydrogen grills, batteries, generators, cars, helicopters, planes? Why the delay? It must be expensive to create a neutron centrifuge, and then there is no guarantee that it will work...when you are dealing with radioactive material, it can only be expensive and big...It's surprising that there are no bacteria known that can convert H2O into hydrogen gas, maybe using photosynthesis. Clearly in photosynthesis plants are separating H2 and O because they are using the Hydrogen for their hydrocarbon tissues...the hydrogen can only come from H2O...and that is a curious thing in Asimov's encyclopedia of scientists...he doesn't mention that plants use Hydrogen, it seems unusual because that is so obvious, where else could all that massive amount of hydrogen in plant tissue come from? Maybe there are photosynthetic bacteria that produce hydrogen gas from H2O. As I have said before we need to go beyond that into the atom separation realm anyway, because we need to extract hydrogen from atoms on waterless planets and moons.
There is a planned power outage where I live, probably so the phone company can get in there without people's security cameras going and put in more cameras and lasers....lasers that can even kill by making neurons freeze critical muscles such as the human lung inhaling muscle, heart muscle, among many others. But it prompted me to think about getting a battery backup for the electricity in my house. Wouldn't you think that by now people had figured out a way so that a consumer can have a battery backup generator that can last for 24 hours during a power outage...or maybe that can last up to a week? Wouldn't such a thing by the most obviously useful product? But I must be like the first person to ever have thought of this, because there is nothing out there. It's probably one of those "cover-up the technology" phenomena that we (don't) see so often in these fullieval ages. I envision a hydrogen gas generator that runs on water...when you have electricity you build up hydrogen and oxygen gas from water. Then when your electricity goes off, the two tanks of gas start to combust turning an electrical generator and restoring your electricity. The only problem I can think of is how to pressurize the gases...perhaps the water needs to be entered into a closed high-pressure system. Then it will be pressure versus electric seperation of hydrogen and oxygen...yeah I guess the hydrolysis just needs to happen in a closed vessel....also there is the gas pressure versus the water pressure...but I think it would take a lot of pressure to force the gases into the water or back together. So getting back to the power supply backup...it's ridiculously simple...just convert DC from a battery to AC. So there are "UPS" universal power supplies, but they last for under 1 hour...even the most expensive ones you can buy, which is absurd...you know...hey make one with ten batteries...it's ridiculous. Maybe a person could buy ten and string them together? (That "wire them in sequence/why're them in sequins?" of Dave von Kleist resonates on this idea, but maybe its coincidence). Most of the "electrical generators" people can buy are all fossil fuel gas generators. It seems inefficient to run the gas motor all the time, even thoough you only need electricity from time to time, plus it needs to be running all the time, or ready to automatically start when there is a power drop. I see here a gas generator that will go 12 hours on half load...but you can't wheel that into yer house...and it's loud. I think I need to search for an "indoor electrical generator price" or maybe "battery electrical generator price". Xantrex makes some battery generators, but they don't have UPS abillity. People use "watts" to determine how long a battery will last, but also there are amp-hours which is how long a battery will last at 1 amp of use. Rechargable lead acid batteries definitely wear down over time and go bad within a year I think if they are not constantly charged. The lead-acid battery needs to be replaced by something else, maybe lithium, or hydrogen combustion. Another point on this is that possibly I could just get an inverter to connect to any car battery. Here are some: http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/automotive/387680011/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_auto_1_4_last/103-8343419-8269401 For $30 you can have a 400 watt inverter that with a good 12volt car battery will last for a few hours in the event of a power outage. I'm surprised more people don't use these. One person commented that these should be standard in cars, and I would add, and in houses. Some people were saying "in-vert" and that word resonates on this handy item too. Now I need something so that this thing can automatically turn on when the electricity stops. Maybe there is some way of using a UPS that has two inputs, one from the wall and one from a battery, but it only takes from the wall unless there is nothing there. Here is an anomaly: are there now UPS devices with jumper cables or 3-prong plug for an external battery supply? The UPS battery could be vastly extended by simply connecting it to a car battery. Then it would charge the battery when not in use. In theory I guess a person can plug a battery charger into a wall, connect it to a 12V car battery, also connect the inverter to the car battery, and then just run off the inverter. The backup computer with your security cameras would pull current from the battery (I think or possibly from the voltage on the charger...but that could be hazardous if the charger is only designed to handle a few amps and the computer pulls more than the wire thickness is designed for), the rate of charging would have to be higher than the rate of usage, and these batteries take hours to recharge so I doubt this scheme is workable. In some way I think which current is drawn from depends on what has less resistance the wall voltage or battery. It's interesting that the thickness of a wire determines how much current it can move...from robot building I found that a large current can burn apart a thin wire...and melt the insulation around it....even thick wires get hot when moving a large amount of current...it's really interesting. So I would say as a novice to UPS devices, that what an average person would want is a UPS with 2 inputs one from wall and one from car battery(s), and a few outputs to plug devices into. The UPS normally charges the external batteries, unless a voltage drop is detected in which case it uses the battery supply. This is basically a UPS with the option of an external battery which it can charge, and mysteriously there are no such devices available for purchase to my knowledge. With an inverter you can handle a planned power outage, but most power outages are unplanned. http://www.tripplite.com/products/ups/accessories/index.cfm has a UPS that uses external batteries. To sum up, it looks grim. There are no long lasting (24-hours for 1 computer and router) UPS devices in the $100 range (or even above apparently!) to my knowledge. A gas generator is an option, but that needs to be outside, it's noisy and smelly. The best thing I can see is possibly rewiring a UPS to take electricity from an external car battery, and I don't think I am going to bother, but maybe someday I will experiment with it. The inverter with a car battery looks like a possibility for planned outages, and also for a few hours of electricity when the power goes out. I would rather buy a car battery from sears, and replace it for free periodically than have to constantly buy UPS devices when the battery runs out. A UPS is an inverter, a battery charger, and a smart switch all in one, so maybe the rewire to a car battery is the way to go. Here's a useful device: kill-a-watt to measure how many watt a device is using. An inverter seems just like a good low cost device to buy any way, I think I am just going to buy the Xantrex Technologies XPower Plus 400-Watt Inverter #851-0400 and see how long my security camera can last with a 12v battery. With the robot motors, they used the electricity very quickly, within an hour, so I doubt this will last for 8 hours, but maybe. IT's interesting that many people are depended on the electricity and phone wire network, knowing that all eggs are in that one basket, probably some kind of alternative electricity supply and wireless networks will form as the primary backup for those systems...in the even that the phone network is down people would possibly connect wirelessly to some wireless-only satellite network. If those wall and ceiling neuron lasers went out I'm not sure how many people would complain, probably those who aren't the victims of constant assault and molestation with them only would.
Amnesty International sent this out:
"Unpopular and desperate, Musharraf suspended the bulk of Pakistan's Constitution, shut down the judicial system, raided the Office of Human Rights Commission, arrested human rights activists, and restricted TV and radio stations from broadcasting. He is justifying his actions by blaming terrorists -- but he's only targeting opposition leaders, peaceful demonstrators, lawyers and judges. Days ago, he detained several of the Supreme Court Justices, including the Chief Justice."
One interesting point is that electricity flows through the telephone wire too, although I'm not exactly sure what the voltage or current is, both are no doubt small compared to electrical wires in a house, and same for cable television wires, they also carry electricity but what voltage and current they don't care to divulge to the public.
I think possibly that the key to seeing and sending eyes and thought images is tuning into a single frequency of light, one that is emitted and absorbed from neurons. Since no other molecules around are emitting in that wavelength it is easy to isolate to a brain, and in addition, perhaps when neurons absorb photons of that same wavelength (and no doubt there are a variety of frequencies to choose from depending on the molecules in neurons) eventually they will fire, because the absorbed photons have to go somewhere.
11/09/07
Some of the "Oral histories" interviews at Columbia University are interesting.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/indiv/oral/interviews.html
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/indiv/oral/heads.html http://www.inthefirstperson.com/firp/firp.result.words.aspx?word=pupin&sortorder=collection In one, Stephen Dunwell states: "Pupin, who did the repeater coil, that made long distance telephone possible, was there. Charles Dunning, who literally holds the patent on the atomic bomb, was there. That was all an earlier period. So it was quite a prestigious place to be if you were into engineering."
The "repeater coil": we basically repeat what we think out loud, but it is unecessary for those who hear thought. This implies that PUpin was involved with hearing thought too. This is a real feature of this 1910s technology, that humans (and other species that make sounds) play a potential statement in their brain before repeating it out loud by moving their mouth muscles. And so, for those few who hear thoughts...they know what the person is going to say before the person says it. But, for some evil reasons, they have chosen not to reveal this simple fact to the public...it's been 100 years and they still have not told the public. It's clear evidence of the nature of many people to look down on their fellow humans, and view them as lesser people who don't deserve equality or even to know the truth. It's shocking that people know how to build a nuclear bomb, and that nuclear bombs exist, but not that thought can be heard. That technology has been kept secret. It's greed too. People realized that hearing thought gives them an unbelievable advantage over those that cannot hear thought, in every way shape and form. There are disadvantages too, however, for example...to outsiders they have to repeat their thoughts...everything takes twice as long if not longer to complete. Plus the corruption of murderers in the inside who can't be exposed and the power and force of public opinion can't be brought in to jail them...and so they are a great risk to the safety of even the insiders because they can murder many people without ever being punished. I don't doubt that the oral histories reveal some good info about the history of science. A person could spend the rest of their life researching the history of 1900s science alone, trying to piece together the actual secret stories. It's similar to reconstructing what really happened with the Bible text. You have to piece together the fragments of text and think deeply about the context, keeping an open mind to all the possibilities....it's a tough thing, but I think it can be done to some extent. I can't believe I figured out that Pupin saw thought, for example, but it was through this method of piecing together fragments, insider hints, etc. How much better and smarter simply telling the public the truth in full detail would be. I think it's a matter of creating laws that protect people who reveal secrets...basically making a government without the possibility of keeping secrets. Perhaps then, secrecy would shift to private companies, but even they could be forced open by the public in a full democracy. It seems clear that once full free info is rolling, there will be very little opportunity for even "private" businesses and people to keep secrets. In my mind, that's a good thing because this planet is too small, and the survival of life far too precious to allow a small group of people to do something secretly. We need to know everything that is going on, everything that might be a threat to the continued survival of life on earth. We have already been overly reckless in allowing secrecy to start wars that very well could have ended civilization. WW1 and 2, Vietnam, Argentina, Panama, 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq, are all clear examples of how secrecy led to the murder of thousands of innocent people and risked destruction of the tiny planet by lasers, by nuclear fission, even by conventional explosives and guns. My advice to the public is to actively end secrecy, in particular until we can secure life on the moon, mars and on planets of Alpha Centauri...then I think people might be able to relax and be more careless about secrecy.
Somebody really should draw this out for the public...showing how a person thinks something, and then says it aloud. I don't think I've ever seen that.
What's interesting and no doubt a secret is how people for decades after the electric camera, which I have pinpointed to no later than 1900 and probably around 1890 or earlier, how people must have recorded images from electronic cameras (basically like television) onto film...was this done by directly filming a CRT, or through some electronic method? Clearly the electronic minicameras were in all the houses, the electronic signals came back to the phone company, and then what...they have to have a film reel for every camera...and then do they also have a CRT for every camera signal? It would save them money to just have the signal go directly to film...possibly like the early fax machine...they make a line of lights and shine it row by row onto the film? I don't know but I'm sure they figured it out, probably even before 1900. By the time of Pupin in 1910 all this stuff must have already been in place, and no doubt there are movies even of Pupin first seeing thought at AT&T.
To me, people are so stupid in this century, because they reject pleasure...I don't understand it...why they curse physical pleasure...and pretend that they don't like the feeling of physical pleasure...it's ironic and idiotic because pleasure feel so good...I don't think people will ever stop calling people perv's and peds, certainly no time soon, while murderers and assaulters roam free. It's pure idiocy on the part of the majority, but eventually I think the coldness is going to thaw, already it has over the 2 millenia since the rise of Christianity...but antisexuality goes back before Christianity...antisexuality appears to have very distant roots, although for example, the earliest writing shows a society (Sumeria) that accepted and felt no shame about prostitution for example. It's terrible that people have made this a "celebate planet"...that's why when I hear antisexuals it disgusts me knowing how frigid the planet is already...but ultimately I want to try and reach those people, to educate them and change their minds about consensual pleasure or at least help them to recognize and address the problem of unconsenual pain and violence that plagues the planet. The funniest line about this phenomenon is "who are these people who are getting too much pleasure that they can speak out against it?", the antisexuals...apparently they are experiencing a surplus of pleasure...which is hard to imagine in this bone dry era...a few grains of pleasure is far too much for them...that they speak out against and actively try to stop consensual pleasure (even at the level of kissing and message), sexuality (oral, mast, anything remotely related to genitals...many are for actively and involuntarily severing genitals), nudity, prost, etc...it's so stupid. I have to put that up there with the woman who stated "we don't know where it came from!" when asked about her husbands alleged sexual antics. That also applies to most of society in terms of their views on linking sex and why evolution and the human species continues. How about their shock and dismay at seeing two people of the same gender? At seeing nudity? masturbation? It's bizarre. For some, images of nudity are more shocking than graphic images of violence...not to me.
It's interesting that many of these "laser" people that zap us, and also that survail us, ... their primary occupation is "spin"...to spin public opinion...in their favor. I think people need to be able to throw off their powerful suggestions and turn to analysis of how to expose them...what they do...how to stop them...understanding what they are trying to do...where they have made mistakes...that would be a better use of precious time from your mind. Always, the zap given to you, should be returned to them, automatically I think...obviously the victim doesn't want that shit...send it back to the source. The violent criminals have had their turn, now it's the victims' turn.
This is kind of an interesting view we don't hear about too often: the idea that photons enter into material (which is also made of photons) by finding openings, they then bounce around reflecting off of other photons (in atoms), they get "trapped" in the maze of atomic lattice. In bouncing around they push other photons, and I don't know if these photons maintain the same velocity, or change velocity...that is a debate that will last probably for a long time, but maybe the incoming photon's velocity contributes to the average velocity of the other photons in the atoms, and therefore increases it's so-called "temperature", which Maxwell defined as the average velocity of particles (in some volume of space). It's an interesting thing that as light falls on an object, photons are reflected (some bounce off..and here...it would seems that to bounce off at the same angle, they would have to have collided with the exact top of another spherical photon ... any other part of the photon would result in a different angle of reflection, and of course some are absorbed...perhaps it is by gravity that a photon is pulled into orbit of other photons, or perhaps just by limited number of openings in the atomic structure, or both..and this bouncing around of the photons...or the increase of photons in atoms...I'm not sure...heats up the object...as any object heats up in a beam of light ...different atoms absorb and emit different specific frequencies of photons and that is something also to think about...but yet that would seem to be a violation of the black-body radiation principle if they do not emit according to the black-body curve..actually I think they emit at discrete frequencies but all near the lower end...I need to think about it more...when the light is turned off...perhaps the photons in the atom find exits and escape which lowers the overall collision count within an atomic lattice and therefore lowers the temperature. In someway temperature relates to matter density, but it seems to relate to matter movement more than quantity of matter.
It's slow going but I still lost a pound this week and was at 239lbs this morning.
10/29/07
I saw an interesting video of a talk by Naomi Wolfe: http://youtube.com/watch?v=RjALf12PAWc I agree with a lot of what Wolfe says about the parallels of what is happening now with 9/11, Afghanistan and Iraq and past models of the rise of a fascist government. I'm pro-pornography and consensual sexuality (it's not clear to me what Wolfe's views are on those issues, but many femanists are against pornography and sexuality which I think is wrong), to me it is so simple and clear that violence is the big problem, not sexuality or information no matter how upsetting. Wolfe refers to "insiders" as some people are doing which is hopeful for us who are excluded from seeing, hearing and sending thought. I would characterize this talk as progressive. It's kind of funny when Wolfe says "is everybody ok?", I must be unlike most people in having a high tolerance for the shocking truth. Seeing the video http://youtube.com/watch?v=doKkduuY-M4 of Wolfe on Colbert is interesting too. It's amazing how quick Colbert is...and how fast the exchange is. Wolfe is just talking about the tip of the iceburg with the massive secret injustice happening. It's interesting that Wolfe is just a little older than me. It's nice to see a person that is somewhat good looking talking about these issues. Wolfe is a good public speaker, but the problem with many modern speakers, for me, is that they are too boring. This talk I barely sat through because of the themes of fascism were interesting enough to me. And interesting point is that Wolfe did not post this video herself, and to my knowledge no major femanists post videos on youtube yet.
While I am in New York State I thought I might possibly go to Columbia University and look at the Pupin archive: http://clio.cul.columbia.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBRecID=4079580&v2=1
there are 10 boxes, but people can only access microfilm copies of the contents, and then only the contents of boxes 1,2 6 and 7. The key would be to just get an electronic copy of all the images. I think I am interested in finding the names of Pupin's lab assistants. It's possible all 3 major achievements (seeing, hearing and sending) were all part of a "Manhattan project" and done at Columbia, potentially under Pupin's direction. In any event Pupin is clearly the starting point for all this research into sarisammtafb. Perhaps there are some carefully chosen words in his correspondence that might hint at what happened. I doubt seriously there will be any explicit writing, and if there was, that it would not be available to the public. Still, I think that something would be gained from looking at the archive. I'm not sure how to find out who were Pupin's assistants, that would be good info. Columbia is about 4 hours from Syracuse, so I don't know if I am going to go.
The location of these microfilms are: Rare Book, Butler 6th Fl. East (Non-Circulating). The video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EEm0E_zZa0 on Pupin has the archive at the Low Library. Potentially some of the names of Pupin's assistants might come from the Physics department records 1870-1983:
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/archival/collections/ldpd_4079671/index.html
Interesting Pupin links:
http://www.pupintelecom.co.yu/en/ who states: "in the spirit of cooperation and partnership keeping in mind ecological aspects."
http://www.imp.bg.ac.yu/index.htm Institute Mihailo Pupin which has an image of a woman's eye just like my "business" card.
An interesting part of the archive is:
"Professor Pupin’s daughter, Varvara Smith, and his son-in-law, Louis Graham Smith. His daughter’s letters and documents deal with her financial difficulties, her administration of Pupin’s estate and her claims against Columbia University. Louis G. Smith’s letters deal with his anti-Communist sentiments and his manuscripts a..."
a lot of anti-commie stuff interestingly enough, where is the pro-full-democracy and anti-Nazi stuff I wonder? I know my anti-Nazi pro-full-democracy archive is large.
But look how Pupin's daughter has "financial difficulties"...that indicates that Pupin didn't get a lot of dough for being the first to see thought, but AT&T did. Think about how much people will pay to see inside people houses and to hear thoughts...that has to be a lot of dough.
Some people found that sunlight may reduce a woman's chance of breast cancer, but how tah hellas are they going to get sunlight on their breasts when nudity has been banished?
There was an AP article about how most young people don't know the laws relating to sex, and that is a major topic and should be a ripe vein of activity, because we need to seriously look at our sex laws, can a parent show a child porno? can you have sex if you are under 18? All those questions should be answered and clear, not hidden and secret...then the next thing you know you are looking at 10 years in jail because you didn't know what you did was illegal and what the punishments could be. The same goes for the violence laws. We need to clean up the jungle of our laws too as a third point. We need to fully democratize everything so we can vote and clear out old and unpopular laws.
10/30/07
One cool model is a field of spheres separated by space and then send through a line of spheres. It's one possible simulation of a beam of light particles entering an atom lattice (or even a photon lattice). It's similar to a pachinko or pinball game the way the spheres bounce around. I am trying to find a model for refraction that might explain why a straight beam passes through unbent, but a beam angled to the surface is bent.
Interesting about the Federal indictment of OC Sheriff Corona, I don't know what happened as an outsider, only insiders probably know or maybe not, but usually these Federal charges, in particular when it's money related (and not serious crime such as violent crime related), usually means the victim pissed off the Bush administry or whoever the US President administry happens to be. I used to think Corona was probably not too good, because of all the zapping I get, but now I think maybe he did something good, to be pissing off the Bush jr and the Fed. Or maybe the secret cam thought net turned against Corona, they coughed up an audio recording of Corona...well, Corona must be an insider so...he knows everything is recorded, but AT&T just don't show the public anything...but they make small exceptions for stuff like this. Again, I want to remind people of the possible write in of "Ted Huntington" on the next election, because I think we should let the public vote directly, stop violence, end the drug war, decrim prost, make health care consentual only-clean up psych system, total free info, fully democratic police.
Interesting story about moving microscopic objects with photons:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071030/ap_on_hi_te/miniature_tractor_beam;_ylt=Asy_6WETx7MtPRjkzHXSEwys0NUE It's a hopeful bujt meager indication of the tiniest steps forward.
Some people spelled out "MIT" in E. Coli, but there is no image of it. The must be something unsavory about seeing "MIT" spelled in E. Coli, but this is one of the problems with the current view of science and news, that no images are required. You don't announce that people spelled "MIT" in E. Coli and then not show the image of it...but I guess in this pre-scriptural society you do!
10/31/07
Let me get this straight: the authorities culled through millions of people and square miles, and found a kid who started the fires in California by "playing with matches", something sounds unlikely, more likely, the neocons got pissed and laser started the fires from lasers on satellites we funded owned by their private military.
11/01/07
I'm reading an interesting book about the historical story of Christianity according to scholars who study this particular subject. This book is "The Lost Gospel" by Burton Mack who also wrote the more recent "Who wrote the New Testament?" which I am going to look at too. So it will be back-to-back Mack. This book is clearly written which is nice. It's an interesting analysis of the so-called "Q" source. Then the view that the earliest writings are similar to the cynics as Q1, and the later the end-of-the-world text is added as Q2, and there is a later Q3, which are merged together. Then Mark wrote the story of Jesus and these scholars claim, something very interesting, that Mark is basically the originater of the classic story of Jesus, Matthew and Luke copying from the Mark text and using the Q text as a secondary source. It's interesting that the Q source hypothesis arose before there was any physical evidence (other than the actual text of the gospels) for such a document and so there must have been a lot of doubt about it, but then the Gospel of Thomas was found which is a "Jesus sayings" gospel, and is in the genre of the Q text, and is a piece of evidence that such a text actually existed and that this "Jesus' sayings" was the style of early followers of Jesus. Then it's interesting how Mack and other scholars separate the Q source into chronological order. There are 2 clear parts to the Q text which Q1: Jesus giving out philosophical teachings and Q2: Jesus as talking about the day of judgement. This, Mack relates is a clear issue among the Christian scholars, as to ... was Jesus talking about the day of Judgement and then the teachings were added later to soften the message, or as Mack and others argue, was Jesus more of like the Q1 text, giving cynic-like advice (to live in poverty, without possessions, etc), and later Q2 (day of judgement) was added. (I'm not doing this topic justice because I'm not a Christian history scholar, so see the book for a better explanation). So that is very interesting, that Jesus and his early followers may have been similar to cynics in their philosophy. Mack draws an interesting comparison with the early writings of Paul's missionary activity where they lived in voluntary poverty and receive their support (I guess food, clothes, etc) from settled communities in exchange for Christian instruction (as is found in the Q text). It's interesting to me, to try and piece together the actual history of the earth as best as possible without any supernatural beliefs.
11/02/07
I saw Richard Stallman talk against software patents, and I am against all patents including software patents. I made a video of my question "Do you think that the public will ever vote for full information?" and Stallman's answer: "I don't even know what that is.", and I will post that here later. Seeing public speakers is kind of unpleasant because it's usually very dull and repressive, nobody ever says anything interesting, nor asks any interesting questions, because we live in a stone age, where people are entertained by soap opera and sitcom material. After some lady looked at me and said "go", and I thought my latest sound-bite "hey why not learn to tolerate people different from you", but perhaps she was saying "go Ted!", somehow I have trouble believing that. Probably the people at UCI (in thought) forbade Stallman from answering anything other than software patent questions, who to gehana knows, only the insiders know, or even then perhaps they know not. Perhaps it was self censorship. I would never want to limit my interaction with the public in that way, but as I said, maybe that is the price paid to be able to talk to groups of people. My impression is almost always the same, most people are so brutal and mean, we live in a stone age, and a little touch of nausia. Until I can get some walking robots to prepare the journey to Centauri I'm going to have to try to make the best of it. Stallman did some funny things, like hopped around on one leg, I think this may mean that the robots in the military are very dexterous by now, jumping, hopping, sprinting, and no doubt as smart as any human...but the terrible thing is that they are being kept secret. I think again the walking robots are going to have to come through the hobbiest and/or consumer door just like seeing, hearing and sending thought probably will. I'm glad I got out the concept of complete freedom of all information, to a few hundred people. I agree with Stallman on most issues, but there was one issue I probably disagree with Stallman on, and that is free international trade which Stallman refered to as a "sweatshop treaty" or something similar. I view the answer to sweatshops, as free information and full democracy...many people would not support injustice if ever they saw it. I'm not in favor of sweatshops, and soon robots will probably replace all low skill labor anyway, but as long as work is consensual I see nothing wrong with it, the key is to stop violence, stop starvation, etc. Stallman expressed the view that we need to stop people using businesses as weapons to force patent legislation, where I take the view that free info and full democracy are going to be the answers to those problemsm and not some kind of new laws to restrict a company's right to move in or out of a nation. So I record my vote in favor of a full free market, and international democracy where the public gets to vote. Stallman said in a true democracy Bill Gates' vote would be equal to his, and I think to a certain extent that is true, certainly Gates' vote would have the value of a single human, the same as all of our votes, but free info and free market implies that wealthy people will always be able to use their money to influence votes, even to buy votes (as I argue is already happening). It's full democracy and the free market, and I don't think it should be regulated except by itself, and to some degree that is unavoidable, anytime a minority view wins legislation, a majority can and usually will overturn it in the long run. So it's interesting to me that Stallman would not see the inevitability of complete freedom of all information. I am glad to say that Stallman was very approachable, I said "hi" and he took the time to stop, turn around, shake my hand and let me introduce myself, Stallman even stayed around to sell GNU products after his talk and chat with a small group of people. I thought I might stop and chat more about this idea of complete freedom of all information, but then I thought...it would probably just annoy him as people generally appear to be annoyed by me and my questions, and there is a danger in persisting because I could get in trouble for thought and speech crimes, and the Pupin camera thought net might not hear genuine allegience in my "long live big brother!" greeting, and a fire squad might have to instead of put out fires, burn books they find in my house, and obviously I don't want that to happen. Stallman did a few word plays (or perhaps his mouth muscles were remotely moved), one memorable one was "j-ped", I wonder if that relates to krusto or philo?
Cheers to Drew Carey who took part in a video to advocate the US decriminalizing marijuana for medical use, which is already supported by 72% of the public.
it occurs to me that it is unusual that we don't have solid data on how many psychosurgeries are being performed, where we have solid data on how many other surgeries are being performed. There is a curtain of secrecy around psychological health treatments, in particular those performed unconsensually and/or against clear objection of the patient.
One thing that is interesting in this Orwellian age is that some people in the cam-thought net, in the police, could easily get your DNA from your garbage, and plant it at a murder scene. It would not take too much trouble, but fortunately, so far as I know as an outsider, these kinds of things, have not happened...that is framing innocent people for murders committed by other people who are not publicly identified to the outsiders. One tool in your defense would be any video showing you somewhere else at the time of the murder, but who constantly videos themselves all day?
My weight is at 240lbs, and appears to have reached some kind of bedrock. It hasn't changed significantly for weeks and I am keeping the same program, perhaps I am eating larger portions, but there is little else different. I am sometimes eating a larger lunch, but I can't believe that that makes a major difference, in particular because I'm hungry around 5pm anyway which to me signals that all the food has been processed.
I think this is evidence that microscopic photon sending and receiving devices could have been developed even in the early 20th century, but certainly by the late 1900s. Clearly Pupin uses the word "microscopic", and that likely hints that, even by 1920 microscopic miniturization of photon sending and receiving components probably evolved. That is definitely part of the story of science, even though there is not a lot of physical evidence to prove its existence. As an interesting aside, since the phone company (no doubt funded by the massive money we give to the US military) has access to very close to everybody's house...I mean certainly at the street if not closer, and underground...they can use a huge-ass receiver there where nobody would care, and have the nano or micro devices in people houses which only need to reach the receiver only a few meters away. The video is interesting, in particular how an aluminum sheet is used to block the photon signal. It hints that clearly the anti-blocking technology had to evolve. There were all kinds of subtle technological advances...notice how you can turn your head when you are being zapped and the zapping continues...the many lasers are coordinated to continue a beam on your head no matter how your head moves...although it is probably to your advantage to move as much as possible since you might find "dead areas" where no laser has been installed yet. In addition, I'm sure some of us, I know I have, outsiders have tried to block the beams with metal objects, and I have found from very limited testing that...certainly the lasers can adjust to go through your hand...but maybe metal is tougher to penetrate. This is a long the lines of the running joke about next everybody is going to be wearing a tinfoil hat...still I think tin foil could be penetrated, but isn't that funny. It's ridiculous that society would come to that. I definitely appreciate this NY Times article, they should have accurately reported on what Pupin did in 1910, certainly by 1920, 1930, 1940, 1950 and by 1960 at the latest.
Sci: I think it's important to carefully measure the mass of various particles using a method that is independent of electrical charge. Not only to find the actual true mass of particles but to see if there is, and what the nature of the relationship between mass and charge may be if any. Perhaps one method to determine mass without using charge, is to measure the force conveyed by a beam of particles on some measuring device (but here, the quantity per unit length of beam would have to be known, in addition to the particle velocity). There must be other methods, measuring the movement of charged particles around similar sized neutral particles since the gravity exerted on two masses results in their mutual acceleration, the acceleration (for two similar mass objects) is an indication of the mass.
These psychology believing "sane" people are a dangerous idiotic group in my view, certainly some of psychology is consensual, and free speech of course must never be punished, however...like the rise of the nazis...hey we don't want to support these evil ideas of locking nonviolent people in hospitals for their lives. They are dangerous in particular these people who are included and see inside houses and heads because as I have said many times, while murderers, and assaulters roam free, they are busy locking up the "weird" who have never been violent ever...it's so stupid, and it fits perfectly with an elite secret camera communication system ... hey who ever isn't included...lock them away forever...who cares about them? its gross, and I hope the day comes when they are all exposed, what a wonderful day that will be, hopefully some time in my lifetime. For people to see how decrepid they are, how terrible their values are, the vast and numerous...countless...crimes they committed...and how empty their minds. I'm shocked that I have to come up with some of these arguments and defenses...it's shocking...gee...did you ever think that pleasure might be good? that the violent might be a bigger problem than the weird? jever think that the claims of religion held so dearly by many might be delusion? jever learn about what the nazis did? .... why do I have to be the single source for any of this most absolutely most simple logic...? Gee...why are the violent allowed to beam on us? gee...who are they? hey why not start with excluding the murderers? how is that for a new idea? and forget about the drug addicts, the prosts, the pervs, yes, even the pervs...its unbelivable, the atheists, the nonreligious...just the murderers thanks....just if you can start or ...someday voice some concerns....about excluding them...they, again, the murderers...whom you all see....about jailing them....about seeing them...cmon...I mean duuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhh all the duuuuuhhhhh you can pile in there too. Addition is more difficult, ok? But these nazi people will continue to focus on nonviolent issues because it's like a bird feeder....they push the perv drugs button and they get the food....and the murderers are safe again. People dont think alot about the danger of these psychology people...or the antisexuals...or the violent...but yet...it is a very real danger...anybody can be locked away w/o a trial for no crime whatsoever...by murderers you never punished...you never even saw....by those who out of fear protect the murderers....it's what gave us nazism...by people too embarassed to tell the truth about religions, about sex, about science, about seeing, hearing and sending thought, etc....these thought people, are a very dangerous group, and they've been growing for 100 years and counting...they have an enormous advantage over the rest of us. Many of them would like to keep that enormous advantage and continue to excluded the rest of society, and murder without punishment any they want to. Again, I am shocked...that I'm the only person who is thinking...hey...don't let these murderers...you know 9/11 controlled demolition, fiorini, cesar, killer of my mom, of so many....hey....don't let them go free! Don't let them see in houses and heads!... and...how can you honestly have a problem with people like me or others who are nonviolent in the face of these murderers running free? and unseen?! ... and I'm excluded....they couldn't figure that out by now? That murderers are the one's to excluded and nonviolent people...no matter what the problem....are of less priority...? I'm the biggest problem in their view? a person who has never controlled demolitioned a building or neuron activationed an innocent old lady to death? that is nazism, that is orwellian, the inquisition, etc. when people actually and truly believe that...that murderers are no problem, but nonviolent people must be murdered. It's as many have said over the centuries completely upside down. Murderers on top, their victims on the bottom. But I somehow, even excluded, see the simplicity of the "violence bad, all else who cares" argument....Even after 100 years of seeing thought, of seeing inside houses...or hearing and seeing million's of people's most intimate and deepest secrets...still...they can't figure out "if violent then problem else not problem;" logic.
In addition, I think there is added complexity by the fact that violence against a person who is in the act of violence is definitely justified, but even so, people should be looking to stop violence, expose and jail the violent. Killing killers might be a temporary answer, and certainly justified, but ultimately we need to expose and jail killers of nonviolent people. And this stuff to me, seems like a no brainer, but yet...it must be beyond the common sense of a great many people.
And the saddest thing is that, the insiders can't do it...they cannot stop the violent...they cannot even excluded the violent...they can't do it. It's the simple example of..."if you have you tell somebody that murder is wrong...to jail the murderers....they don't tell you that....you can forget them actually understanding that...or doing anything to stop murder", obviously. And this is why Frank Fiorini, Thane Cesar, the controlled 9/11 demolition people go completely free...never a day in jail...their crimes never even seen by the outsiders and many insiders even, only the results of dead people and a few pieces of physical evidence.
As an added thing about 9/11, from Loose Change it may be that the mass murderer of hundreds of innocent people employed in our government at the Pentagon on 09/11/01 has the initials "CM" and was in a plane because of the statement "Cruise Missile". Somewhat likely that AO, TE, and now CM are 3 major murderers in the USA, and of course quite possibly Rick Gibney too for the patsey passenger plane over Pennsylvania. It's amazing that like in Chili, where 50 years later, people are still trying to piece together the mass murders of 50 years before, and punish those involved. The backwardness and shocking barbaric nature of 9/11 is a disgrace to the USA, and I cannot believe that we as a people are going to allow these monsters to walk away free from that monsterous mass murder and so many others. I think we can do far far better, and we definitely have to!
10/25/07
A couple of people told me that quantity of food isn't what is important in dieting/losing weight, and reasons given were 1) the body shuts down without food and you may actually gain weight...you might diet yourself into obesity, and 2) the kinds of food you eat matters more, you should have low-fat, non-sugary foods. I think there may be something to the idea that eating a little food gets our digestive system going and it may digest more food than going without eating. But I think a simple statement that nobody can argue with is that: you cannot add weight from matter you don't eat...in other words, you can't possibly gain weight from food you don't eat, and so I still think the quantity of food input is the main source of weight gain and loss. It's tough to quantify liquids, since our body outputs most of the liquid (water) that we put into our bodies. All summed, I would say that this idea of limiting the quantity of food input has been the best method I have ever found for losing weight (coupled with regular 15-minute exercize). Knowing that there is a set period for eating (small lunch and dinner only) that begins and ends, without any possibility of snacking outside of that except all the liquids a person wants, is acceptable to me. With this method I haven't been losing a lot of weight each week (aside from the initial loss), but I am still consistently losing about 1 or 2 pounds a week. I say this because, I hope people interested in losing weight are not duped by the many other misleading claims and info. This is a long period of millenia of pseudoscience and illogical beliefs, and I want to try to introduce logic to the planet.
10/26/07
If Pupin saw thought in October of 1910, we outside excluded should be trying to ask insiders for hints about which day, and looking for those anniversary hints. We are coming on the 100 year anniversary of seeing thought in 2010, and we should figure out which day in October 2010, for celebrations.
My weight is around 241lbs so only a loss of 1 pound. It's slow going, so slow, I don't know if I am going to continue to report it. I may be stuck around 240, I hope not, and am certainly going to try to go all the way to 200 or to where I don't look overweight at all. It was interesting that I stopped chewing gum, which I had started and was doing for a few months. I like the sugarfree bubble-gum flavored gum. I don't think people would gain much weight from chewing sugar-free gum, and it might also fulfill the craving for chewing associated with eating, and help to ease boredom that leads to eating. Gum kinds of picks up stuff like popcorn pieces from in between teeth too and generally cleans them in that way, although getting new habits, that some find annoying like gum chewing is something I worry about. But as far as habits go, gum chewing to me is not upsetting or unhealthy at all, and it can make breath nicer.
There is one argument that I think is convincing in favor of a big bang background radiation expanding universe theory, and that is that, at a certain distance, well within the range of an average ground reflecting telescope, light is so red-shifted, that it arrives with such a long wavelength, 1 photon a year or whatever, 1 photon every 1000 years, that distance galaxies are undetectable. I think this idea of light so redshifted that it can't be seen after a certain distance is definitely a possibility. Then it makes disproving the big-bang expanding universe even more difficult, because even a bigger telescope might not matter (this is the argument I would make against the "bigger telescope" arguement if I believed in the red-shift due to expanding universe theory, but few if any do). Still, I think there are possibilities for a larger telescope seeing more distant galaxies. One thing that is interesting is that, we never hear astronomers tell us...in the 1600s the farthest known object was x, in 1700s it was y..., in the 1800s this generation of telescopes received photons from z, in the 1900s the Hubble saw the farthest galaxy which is ..., etc. And don't astronomers have the dream of an even larger telescope than Hubble? larger than the largest ground-based telescope? or far more sensitive than any previous telescope? I think that secretly people have figured out how to detect photons in small areas, because here these people have microcameras in every room, and beam on the tiny neurons in our brain, but they can't produce sub-millimeter pixels or photon detectors? But getting back to this argument about red-shifted light. Another explanation is that some red-shifting happens because of Doppler shift, but much is because of the effects of gravity on beams of light, either by curving them and spreading them out or slowing them down either temporarily or permanently. The pound-rebka experiment is evidence that the speed of photons is not constant, and that even tiny gravity can cause beams of light to be red-shifted. So it may be that light is so bent from the pinball-machine-like journey (another analogy is like a pachinko board journey), that after a certain distance no other galaxies can be seen. But I seriously doubt that there are no galaxies beyond that distance even if photons from them cannot penetrate the sphere in which we are at the center. So perhaps the better question is: how can we be sure that the increasing red-shift of light from galaxies is not due to gravitational red-shift? I still think there are possibilities for a larger telescope seeing farther because it is only natural to presume that a larger mirror would capture photons a smaller mirror would not. Obviously, an 8-inch telescope is going to see more distant galaxies than a 4-inch telescope. I guess there is a limit because of red-shift, that sets a boundary no matter how large a telescope may be...in that case, the only way to see past that limit, would be to move in that direction. We are moving in some direction relative to the other stars we see all the time, and so looking in the direction of our movement, we might see more distant galaxies than when moving in other directions. Seeing more distant galaxies over time because of us moving in that direction is going to be evidence that the universe is probably infinite in size....because clearly the galaxy in that direction we thought represented the beginning of time was not at the beginning. I want to think more about a larger telescope...for example, it seems clear that at some point, no matter how large, it simply may be that no photon can penetrate this far into the sphere we are at the center of, because of all the matter in between, but it seems like since the universe is mostly space as opposed to matter, there might be some path to see more distance. But maybe this limit of seeing distant photons reveals to us something about the size of the photon, if it cannot penetrate over 15 billion light years, than is it similar to 1/15-billionth of a light-year in size? A light year is huge at 9.461e15 m, and so that would would put the size into million of meters, and so that is unlikely. I need to think about the size of detectors, and the nature of how gravity red shifts light beams more before I can reach more solid conclusions. But I can see this arguement that after some distance the red-shift is too large for any light from distant galaxies to get here. But again, I don't think that disproves an infinite universe, because light can simply be red-shifted (and absorbed or reflected) by all the matter in between here and there. I think it does potentially rule out the bigger telescope seeing farther galaxies however, but I think that should be confirmed by building a larger telescope, a second generation Hubble which is larger with more and smaller photon detectors, and then a careful comparison of images from both telescopes. So I think the clear difference between the infinite universe and big bang competing theories is that for the infinite universe a person needs to move to see farther, while the big bang expanding universe people would say that there is nothing to see no matter how much a person moves in the universe. I guess, I mean, I think this is another good point...are the big bangers saying that even moving significantly will result in us all seeing the same most distant galaxies? That seems unlikely. In other words that the most distant galaxies for us are the also the most distant for those observing from M31? That is hard to believe for me. Still, that is a pisser that my bigger-telescope argument which was so wonderful might be gone, oy!
One big mystery about Pupinization is how do the cameras and microphones get into every body's houses? Including the thought seeing and sending cameras and lasers...how do they get into our houses? Because they must be there...I don't think they can see through the walls...
and one answer is that people just spray these nanochips onto the wall with water or something...or perhaps it's part of the telephone wire...but it seems clear that the chips have to be on the surface of the dry wall, on top of the paint.
I made a second video because my analysis in the first video is not entirely accurate, but I still think that atomic structure and not some aspect of light as a wave is responsible for polarization and am still producing models that provide evidence that this view might be accurate. I don't think people should feel embarrassment when they are wrong, but sometimes we can't help it. We shouldn't feel embarrassment, because it doesn't matter, we are only interested in the truth, finding out a person is wrong, is good because you are that much closer to the actual truth. All I care about is what is the actual truth, and I don't think many other people on earth are like that, they care more about what is popular, traditional and what is not embarrassing instead of what is the actual truth. Anyway, I tried this with a regular flashlight and find no difference, so this an interesting video find anyway that I want to think more about. I think possibly just the shape of the laser is enough to cause dimming against the grain of the polarizing lattice, I'm still thinking about it, but here we have a physical phenomenon to explain, a change is definitely happening that depends on the angle of the laser.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=2lr_-TiX-hw
I did go to the last part of the talk given by Cal Tech professor Kip Thorne and was able to ask my question and Thorne did respond to my question. Here is the audio: kip_thorne_question.mp3 One thing that was interesting, I had never heard Thorne talk and he has an interesting habit of every few seconds says "awwwt", which I don't think I have ever seen in a person before, and I wonder why that is. I wonder if it is involuntary. To me, the main importance is the content of character and not physical appearance or delivery obviously, but physical traits etc of course cannot be denied. On that topic, the race-based speculation recently by Watson seems to me inaccurate. Of course we need to tolerate total free speech and thought, and in particular nonviolent speech and thought, but I think the evidence to me, although I have not really looked into it, simply from my own personal experience is that race and gender play no role in intelligence, and intelligence is very difficult to define and quantify, which makes such claims very speculative, so speculative as to be useless in my opinion. But by all means, let survey's be conducted, and let people try to understand what intelligence is, and who possesses it, etc. even based on gender and race, although as I said that is not an area of interest to me. My own personal opinion is that we need to undo the injustice done to the persecuted people, such as women, non-white, atheist, etc. people and focus on bringing them (and all people) into science education, to learn about the history of evolution, science, and the future, and of course giving every body equal opportunity to education and science. But getting back to the Thorne talk, most of my comments are recorded in audio and I will post those later. Here was my entire question, but I only got out the first few sentences...up to about the word "aether":
======
Hi Kip, my name is Ted Huntington and (nicholson) I don't believe in the Big Bang theory, man, (pause for laugh) I believe in a universe of infinite size and age. Because (sagan) I doubt the universe just ends 15 billion light years out. There must be galaxies so far away that not 1 particle of light emitted from them is going in the precise direction of our tiny photon detectors.
And I doubt the theory of time dilation. I think the current time is the same time everywhere in the universe. The theory of space dilation was created by George FitzGerald in the early 1900s to save the aether theory after the Michelson-Morley experiment. Einstein dropped the aether, but included time dilation into the theory of relativity. Time and space dilation is the only difference distinguishing the theories of relativity and Newtonian gravity. So I think we as the public need to closely reexamine the so-called proofs of time dilation such as the perihelion of mercury.
And there's an unhealthy conformity and intolerance for theories opposed to traditional beliefs. For example, I think that the photon is matter and the basis of all matter, but no journal will publish that, and no major scientists will even explain why that might be inaccurate. In science we need to tolerate total free thought, a wide variety of theories, and question the theories of science and in particular the religions, nonviolently, remaining friendly while disagreeing.
So my question is: Do you think that there are galaxies beyond the visible universe? Will we see more currently unknown distant galaxies simply by building a larger telescope? And can you address my doubts about time-dilation. Do you, yourself have doubts about the big bang expanding background radiation universe and time-dilation theories? thankee.
other stuff
1) Pound-Rebka evidence that speed of photons not constant?
2) conservation of velocity and mass, but not exchange of mass into velocity not velocity into mass.
3) thoughts on Sagan and his legacy?
4) globular clusters made by life and natural evolution of life?
5) thoughts on getting history of science to the public?
6) people figured out how to see, hear and send thought images and sounds?
7) psychological treatment by consent only?
8) drug war?
9) views on religions?
10) Any predictions for the far future of life on earth?
======
Ok so, I will transcribe the actual audio:
Virginia Trimble (Host): "Maybe that should be the last question...yeah"
Ted Huntington: "Hi Kip, my name is Ted Huntington and (Jack Nicholson impression) I don't believe in the Big Bang theory, man, (crowd laughs), you know it's funny, I believe in the universe of infinite size and age, interesting(ly) enough. Because I just have trouble believing (Carl Sagan impression) that the universe just ends 15 billion years...15 billion light-years out (showing edge with hand...ok I somewhat botched my Sagan impression...but you have to understand the hostility of society...there is a lot of pressure and beamings).....(and that was about the breaking line for the patience of the host....)
Trimble: "Do you have a question?!...."
Huntington: "Ok, so my question is: ...and I doubt time-dilation because George Fitzgerald was the first person....
Trimble: "That's not a question!" (damn people are so impatient...it's ridiculous...like we are supposed to just ask a quick 1 second questoin...well some of these questions require some set-up, this shows how intolerant people in mainstream science are, but I guess I am lucky that they did let me ask my question...and of only two questions allowed to be asked...the first question was not memorable...I have it in audio...I don't know I didn't listen to it, maybe I will later...)...."ask your question..."
Huntington: "...I'm just setting up my question...ok and so my question is, do you think that there are galaxies beyond the visible universe? Will we see more currently unknown distant galaxies simply by building a larger telescope? And can you address my doubts about time-dilation and George Fitzgerald who created to save the aether......" (Thorne starts answering before I could get out:'Do you, yourself have doubts about the big bang expanding background radiation universe and time-dilation theories?')
Thorne: (I think this starts out...) "I don't have time to answer all those questions....but let me say first..."
Ted: "thankee."
Thorne: "that the only way to see beyond what we call the cosmological horizon is to wait..." (audience laughs) ".(until)..the cosmic horizon has expanded farther...because when your looking out at the cosmological horizon you're looking back in time to the big bang birth of the universe..."
Trimble: "And if W was less than -1 even that won't work..." [t Trimble..you big banging bastad!]
Thorne: "..that's yes...so the answer is no, not in our lifetime we won't see beyond that... The phenomenon you talk about: the time-dilation, the Lorentz contraction, and the big-bang, they are extremely well verified observationally, observational facts, aight?...so-called dark energy, I didn't believe it when the first data came it, I didn't believe it when the second method of detecting the dark energy came in, finally when the third method... (audience laughs)...the f-first method was disagreement between the ages of the oldest stars and the apparent age of the universe, the second method was supernova observations, magnitude of observation of, the third method was (based) off the microwave background radiation, only when we had 3 very good, completely independent pieces of evidence was I ready to throw in the towel. I was at least as skeptical about that as you are about these things...but science is an observational thing, and as ugly as dark energy always seemed to me to be...I gotta live with it...and so we now are trying to figure out what it is"
Trimble: "But you have a special advantage when omega, when the W less than minus one takes over, the big rip, the great risk in the big rip is that eventually the universe will expand so fast it will pull your hair out..." (audience laughs...and claps...)
Trimble: "We have one small...."
===========
So, my after thoughts were...that damn I should have said "and I'm an atheist", or something so I would not just be dismissed as a creationist, but instead be viewed as an "infinite universer". But addressing Thorne's response: I just again have to give the example of building a larger telescope. I ask that people think about this idea of building a bigger telescope. If we build a bigger telescope we will detect more photons, and in detecting more photons we will no doubt see galaxies farther away whose few photons were scattered too far apart for smaller telescopes to detect. It seems clear to me: build a bigger telescope, see more distance galaxies. And that has been a fact for all of history. With each larger telescope, more distant galaxies were observed and recorded in the catalog of known galaxies (although curiously this simple fact is never told). So imagine that we keep building bigger telescopes, and seeing more distant galaxies...where does the universe end? In my opinion the universe probably doesn't end...that we would continue to see farther and farther into the universe. The two methods (again wonderful research idea to fund) are 1) build a bigger telescope or 2) build smaller sized photon detectors. I think it is clear that when we start to coordinate telescope on earth with those of the earth moon and mars we will see more distant galaxies (through interferometry...but really this should be called something else because interferometry was coined, to the best of my knowledge, by Albert Michelson and relates to light interference, not a method of a very large virtual distributed telescope mirror/lens)...and then my hope is that the popular scientists don't then say "well, it looks like we have to move back the origin of the big bang!"...but instead recognize that..."well, the universe probably extends forever in every direction...."
So onto the next issue:
Thorne: "The phenomenon you talk about: the time-dilation, the Lorentz contraction, and the big-bang, they are extremely well verified observationally, observational facts, aight?"
Lorentz basically adapted Fitzgerald's claim of space-dilation and added time-dilation (again check the history of science as this is just from my memory). So in terms of time dilation, I want to state something that I think all people will agree with, and that is that space dilation originated as an attempt to save the aether theory after the Michelson-Morley experiment provided evidence against a change in velocity of light because of the earth moving through an aether. I think that is established historical fact on which the majority of people will agree. So with that truth revealed, the best light that can be put on space and time dilation is that "ok so space-dilation was wrong in terms of proving that there is an aether, but coincidentally...space-dilation happens to be accurate in describing the geometry of the universe but without an aether.", and that seems to be hard to believe for me....that space-dilation, originally developed to defend the idea of an aether...Fitzgerald claimed that space elongates in the direction of motion (contracts in the opposite direction) just enough to compensate for the expected faster velocity of light in the motion of the earth relative to a light source. This "just enough" argument is very unintuitive, and I think for the record it should be stated that Albert Michelson bravely expressed his own doubts about the theory of time dilation in print in "Studies in Optics" in the 1920s. But all this points to the idea that we need to carefully examine the so-called evidence for time dilation. In particular the early proofs and the major proofs. They are: the perihelion of Mercury, the slowing down of charged particles when accelerated by an electric field, and measurements of time difference between those on the surface of earth and those in a plane. It seems much more logical to me that the current time is the same time throughout the entire universe. And interestingly, that makes the physics of the universe that much easier to understand since one variable (t) is always constant for all x,y,z. I think the direction for me (and others who want to pursue this line of research) are a variety of ideas: 1) show 3D images of how matter warps space using the y dimension to show the force of gravity exerted by a collective mass, and how gravity is equivalent with the idea of matter warping or bending space even thought time is viewed as constant for all locations...basically the view of space-time, but where time is a constant for all spacial dimensions 2) interpretting the quantum dynamic equations with the quantum as a photon only or viewing energy only as a combination of mass and velocity governed by the idea that mass and velocyt are conserved but not interchangable...moving forward the quantum equation(s) for particle beams with photon interval (as opposed to wavelength). 3) careful inspection of time-dilation so-called proofs, reproduction of those experiments, explaining them in corpuscular terms (for example, how is the bending of light around the sun different from a photon as a piece of matter?)....and these are just a few beginning ideas... But all of this is theoretical physics, and although it is very nice to know the basics of the universe, we are already with Newton gravity to start the more practical side of science which mainly involves moving life to other moons, planets and stars, supporting pleasure and justice and ending pain and injustice while here on earth....teaching the history of science...which I view as the opposite of this highly speculative theoretical physics .....teaching the history of science in my view is the most basic starting point for all of science, including all science research no matter how advanced, theoretical or speculative.
I have been looking at a corpuscular interpretation of light polarization and have some videos coming that show what it might look like at the atomic level.
This is kind of nasty, a guy who organizes the SoCal Science Cafe, Brian Hart, a graduate student in physics at UCI whom I met before, wrote to me:
"I see where you're coming from about the Big Bang; however science is NOT a free exchange of ideas in a civilized way -- that's philosophy. Science is a disciplined means of obtaining knowledge whereby wrong theories are thrown away and ignored. I was disheartened by your conduct in the Kip Thorne lecture - it was not becoming a science participant."
and I responded:
"I think you took my question in the wrong light and are being overly judgemental. I think my questions about the big-bang and time-dilation are wonderful and proper questions. That theories of science are not to be questioned=path to worse age than now in. bigger telescope=see farther galaxies, that is simple. Fitzgerald created space contraction to save the aether theory=fact. Learn history, keep an open mind, answer the questions of those who have doubts or offer alternative explanations."
but in addition, I don't think he understands that the tone of my question is comical...it made people laugh...these uptight neck-tied traditional dull people need to lighten up, they are the force that is stopping truth, pleasure, justice...so many things...like oh no..you can't question the 13 hijacker story! you can't question the single-bullet theory!... it's frightening and terrible in my opinion what these people are going for.
Beyond that, what kind of definition of science is that? That is ridiculous...science is definitely a free exchange of ideas in a civilized way...and let the best ideas win....anything else is censorship and closed minded dogma, single-minded one-party thought-control. And then, "disheartened"...I must be alone in this, but the heart is not the seat of consciousness, as Sagan, and Herophilus before him stated, and I think the cloud-brained people of earth need to wake up. This view is that everybody should kiss the ass of the establishment, and I completely reject that, in favor of the search for and allegience to truth. I don't want people to pay lip service to me, I want people to pay lip service to the truth, and of course I feel better if they honestly agree with me and even enhance the explanation, but ultimately I think I feel best when all the physical phenomena support the theory I most believe. I think there is plenty of evidence against the big bang, as opposed to the theory of evolution which the evidence is in accord with. The big bang and time dilation both were major mistakes, as was the sine wave-electromagnetic theory of light, and it's time for people to understand it and correct it. At a minimum, people are certainly justified in questioning the big bang theory on scientific grounds, as they are the claims of religions, and all other claims. Plus the tone of this email is like of the nature of banning me from their talks which is fine, but certainly is elitist, they feeling is that everybody must tow the party line, and I reject that kind of society. This talk was not organized by them anyway, so Hart is kind of talking as an organizer but was actually just an audience member. I can't stomach the current fraud happening with the Pupin secret, the obviously wrong massive mega-billion dollar industry of big bang-expanding universe-background photons-time dilation theory. I would have to say about 99% of the science cafe talks are all either pseudoscience, or too trivial to bother with. Interestingly enough, this will sound arrogant, but it's rare for people to hear me give a public opinion...it's a total hassle for me, and I don't know why I do it...it's work...it's a total bother...but I went to ask my question to try and state the truth publicly...that there is somebody that rejects the multi-billion dollar big-bang-expanding-background-radiation fraud, so the record will reflect at least a tiny millisecond of truth being spoken publicly on earth. Also, not to insult Thorne who was friends with Sagan by not going, and not backing down from criticising this massive fraud and suggesting the more likely alternative of an infinitely sized universem and as an outsider I never know if a person is coming here to talk just to hear a question from me, perhaps to try and reduce my influence...I can only guess...but my basic rule is not to waste my time on people speaking, I can lecture to the insiders (although not outsiders) from my thoughts! but because time is so precious, and this ULSF project is very important to me, and to the future of life on earth. It's stomach turning...that I am the only person telling the history of science in video, and not from the fraudulent big bang perspective....the truth about Pupin...the massive secret murders of the past...it's nausiating...and then the neck-tied religious people with billy clubs who work as capos trying to stop any progress or exposing of the truth. Generally I do my talking on video for the people on the web, and I think it's not a good idea to talk about hearing thoughts, etc around those I work with, and I thought about that, but I made a special exception, and I think everybody had a good laugh, and hopefully...very hopefully...some people heard me out and looked into who George Fitzgerald is, what he did, and thought about "the bigger telescope". I mean c'mon, this is basic.
I have every right to believe in anything I want to, to reject religion, to reject the big bang, to accept the theory of evolution....what ever thoughts I want to...that is in my view the basis of science...that each person must decide for themselves what they believe the most accurate truth is.
Hart responded again, this could go on forever, so I am not going to go on...the trend of these convos seems clear, they completely reject the points I make (bigger telescope=see more, time dilation=to save aether theory) and just go on with mistaken beliefs.
Hart: "Science is not about keeping an open mind. Science is about discerning what is and what is not true about the Universe. My point is it's wrong to question a theory without clinching, factual evidence or data proving it wrong. That's how science works actually, is proving things wrong. My friend, aether theory and Steady-State cosmologies have both been utterly falsified. And it's highly irresponsible of you to refuse to accept what is -- that those theories are wrong, proven by experiment."
Ted: "Science is definitely about keeping an open mind, but we can agree to disagree. My intent is definitely not to offend or anger people, and I'm sorry if I do that, but I want these opinions to be heard and debated. There is far too much single-minded conformity in mainstream science, the insiders have a monopoly on everything. You fail to answer my claim of bigger telescope=see farther and George Fitzgerald created space contraction to save the aether theory. You mistake my view: I reject the aether theory...the obvious point I am making is that if space contraction was created to save the aether theory after the Michelson-Morley experiment how could it be any more accurate for relativity? Michelson himself expressed doubts about space contraction in print: "Studies in Optics". And I reject the portion of the traditional (Hoyle's) steady-state theory belief of matter being created out of empty space, I support the view of matter not being created or destroyed but always here."
======
10/20/07 update: Hart sent yet another message to me:
"I am not going to debate you in this forum because these issues have already been settled in the peer-reviewed literature. Just know that any further outbursts like at Kip Thorne at any future Science Cafe events will get you removed from this group. Not because of what you said, however because of how you chose to conduct yourself in a very offensive way to all present."
If people viewed my conduct as offensive, I am sorry, it wasn't intended to be offensive, it was intended to be funny...some people did laugh and understand that I was doing impressions. I wouldn't call what I did an "outburst" because I was called on to ask my question, presented my question and was silent during and after the answer. That view on scientific debate is overly closed to me, and I think that type of view where theories cannot be questioned and defended is a path to a dark age, worse than we already live in. Beyond that, people like Hart are way too intolerant. I'm looking to make friends and not enemies, and so I think I'm hopeful that people interested in science will support a history of science for the large screen. Many of us may disagree about the interpretation of the universe, but much of the history of science we all can agree about. For example, I don't think many people reject what Lavoisier did, and much of the science before 1900, and so we should be bringing that info to the public. In particular much of the pre-Christian science, and questioning of religion is important in my opinion, but perhaps there is a lot of disagreement there, but certainly in terms of engineering inventions, etc, most people, even religious people would allow to be shown. That is one piece of advice to people with unpopular theories in science: leanr and tell the history that surrounds your theory, and in particular around the popular theory that is opposed to your unpopular theory. Because, that can't possibly be deemed "offensive", since it is simply history, although perhaps your interpretation of the historical facts might differ. I am familiar with intolerance, and it's like everything a person says or does is unseemly, and many times the anger directed at one person, or a group of people, turns into violence, and that is a terrible truth, for example, for some people, people of a different religion not only don't have a right to express their views, and their views appear as "offensive", but they are not even allowed to live! Their existence alone is offensive! That is where this kind of intolerance leads to I think. It's a majority so disgusted by a minority, or a weaker excluded group, that their existence, their very existence is viewed as offensive.
That's kind of interesting that Hart has no issue with the content of my question, apparently, although I have doubts, but on the method of delivery. Well, whatever...it was an attempt at comedy that perhaps failed for some. Perhaps my question was too long, that I can accept, however, at the same time, the host interrupted too soon in my opinion.
I think there is another key thing to notice: that none of the people address the work of, or mention "George Fitzgerald", nor "a bigger telescope sees farther", and this is something to look for in any debate. Like the 9/11 debate, look how the pro-official story people never address the actual issues, they only try to discredit the person who presents the issue (for example, how could WTC1 fall at free-fall speed? Why no delay is pancaking?)...that is a key thing to look for in any debate....do they answer directly the specific question, or do they brush it aside with some generality or other topic? People might think...'hey yeah..that's right...what about fitzgerald and the bigger telescope?...why didn't they say 'yes fitzgerald was defending the aether theory...but space contraction is still true even without aether' and 'no a bigger telescope would only see more of the galaxies we already see...there are no galaxies beyond the comic horizon"...but they don't address those specific issues....for 9/11 'why free fall speed? because the weight and force of the floors collapsing is so large as to instantaneously break the next floor as if there was no resistence', etc. So watch for those typical techniques...they don't address the actual issue, but instead make threats or put-downs, many of a psychological nature...watch a typical Fox show with a 9/11 truth advocate...it's unending "yer nuts"...and never any factual physical info...and doesn't that show the evils of psychology? That this is the number one tool these 9/11 killers are using.
=========
One interesting thing I think I can see in the future I hadn't addressed before, is what seems to me an inevitable realization by the public that the big bang expanding universe is incorrect and the same from time dilation, so I think we can expect this on the timeline of our future...but when? I think it will not be for 50 to 100 years if not longer. See my audio comments (when I post them later) about how while listening to Thorne I had this few seconds of view into the future of how this inaccurate branch of science might actually grow and prosper into an even more massive industry of big-bang-expanding-background-photons-ology ... one comparison is Christianity and the views of those in the 200s (like Pliny the Younger) 300s (like Julian) 400s 500s 600s...who didn't think Christianity would last....because my oh my did it....little did they know that it would grow and form into a massive industry around Jesus for thousands of years, dominating and brutally repressing and murdering opposition (in the form of honest opinion) from supporters of science and atheism.
It's kind of funny, I'm like most people, when on my own I view everything on earth as pleasant, but interacting with other people, one step into a store, turning on television, turning on radio, etc...and it's a quick nausiating realization that it's a vicious barbaric society....not at all like my gentle inquisitive perspective on the universe and life.... One line that relates in my mind is in "People versus Larry Flynt" where Harrelson as Flynt says "send him out to the animals!"...and that is my feeling...average people are so vicious and uneducated about history...brainwashed by religion, psychology and antisexuality and corrupted by the pupin secret. I guess another line is like..."we're not in Kansas anymore Toto", but it's really the opposite because these people are ignorant, violent, uneducated, antisexual, etc. but certainly the slick disceptive dishonest take-the-honest-rube's-money-and-run view of those in the big city applies. But I'm optimistic about the future, I think that we will end violence, establish total free info, get the history of evolution and science out to the public, form an educated full democracy, tolerate rec drug addiction, obesity, end aging, learn science, accept and celebrate consensual pleasure, nudity, prost, and sexuality, etc.
This was something that was scary and I almost didn't mention it:
Last night on my way to exercize there was a red ambulance with the door open...and I thought...I doubt seriously this is all for show for those watching my eyes...but yet...you know...it's...it fits in well...a lot of insiders are saying "sane" etc... and I don't doubt that a nazi insider could easily call 911 and say "there was this guy acting strange at this lecture...and I'm concerned about him being a danger to the community or himself"....or republicans can easily dig up some cash to divert an ambulance (needed for real health emergencies) for propaganda and pseudoscience purposes.....just for asking a question that appears unusual... Can you imagine a society where any body who question the prevailing "science" theory is treated for delusion? That is frightening.
I'm glad I stated the truth for the record, or at least what I think will be proven to be true, early on in the history of earth. And that Thorne had to defend the big bang and time dilation theories publicly on record, which is no big deal anyway...it's like looking back in history at those poor people who...for example...tried to publicly reject the aether theory when aether was the established belief (Pupin was one and of course Michelson stood as a focus of opposition by Fitzgerald and others of the aether camp). We look back and say...how could they have questioned the sun-centered theory...all the evidence pointed in that direction, but yet, the earth-centered people took their belief very very seriously...deathly seriously murdering many who opposed.
Those things, attending lectures and asking funny questions, although I made myself kind of a laugh, and others perhaps got a laugh, are too unpleasant, and I prefer just preaching into a camera on the web, and quietly figuring out my beliefs, and presenting them in text and video in a relaxed setting the public can enjoy at their own leisure. If I am a welcome guest, I think that is fine, I have many many opinions, and of course, I have a very important set of messages for the people of earth that I want to be heard. But even so, I think a large audience is where it's at, I don't want to go from small audience to small audience repeating the same crap.
Come to think about Hoyle, it's interesting that Hoyle rejected the big bang, as far as I know... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hoyle ...he died in 08/20/2001 ... rejected the big bang (although accepted the expanding universe)...that was another point...at the last minute I withdrew the nicholson impression saying "I don't believe in the big bang expanding background radiation universe theory man"...because I thought the shorter would be better, but thinking now...the longer might have been better...That takes a lot of presence of mind to stand tall, not to have your voice quiver, not to be nervous and deliver an accurate impression...people may overlook that fact....But getting back to Hoyle...he was not trounced upon with trunchions for his views...not that I have...but I all but have! Yes Hoyle rejected the big bang, and had the steady state as an alternative, but I am putting forward the "infinite universe, matter not created, or destroyed but always there" interpretation/theory. Basically the "infinite universe", with the distinctly different features that 1) the universe is not expanding 2) all the matter is made of photons which cannot be created or destroyed, were always here and probably always will be here. Interestingly Hoyle was atheist, and it was his atheism apparently the article claims that was one reason he rejected a big bang. It's interesting that a big bang neatly tucks away questions of an infinite universe, and a beginning, by apparently neatly providing a beginning and presumable ending...but any prolonged thought about a big bang quickly results in the realization of questions such as those asked by Sagan "what came before that?" and we again are confronted with the idea infinity, so the infinite universe may seem far out, but the issues of infinity are always with us even with the big bang theory. I don't see why an infinite universe might be hard for a godder to accept, because in some way...it might seem to add an element of mysticism and unknown to the universe...(although it is completely 100% science, and reality...any mysticism is only apparent from the unknown of what might be out there beyond the universe we can see)
I was thinking about Sagan, and it always surprised me that he would suggest that an advanced civilization living with advanced technology might not be able to survive technological adolescense...I found that, when younger to be so unlikely as to be certainly under 10%...but that was before I knew about the Pupin secret, and Frank Fiorini, and everything else, and the more you look at the rise of religion with it's shockingly opposite-the-truth-and-logic views, the pupin secret, the election of mass murderers...9/11...I mean...does the idea of some idiots or even some bacteria destroying humans seem that unlikely? After all we are all stuck here on a tiny sphere hurdling through space around a massive burning iron ball...if something happens here...that's it for this tiny experiment of humans with brains. Looking at the truth about 9/11 and the people who did 9/11's lust for war...it's not surprising. And then look at Sagan...the one guy who provides new and interesting info...and they (probably) killed him...it doesn't bode well for our planet. And here a few of us understand finally...the system of the universe...how life evolves...pulls stars together...that we are actually all on the same tiny team...and they probably killed one of our all-star players...nice... so few of us understand that if we survive we will grow cities on the moon, mars, and grow to colonize the planets of other stars, pull them closer together, export matter from those newly colonized stars back to our home base stars, and start to interact with other life of the milky way....but only a few of us understand this...we are a tiny minority...and we need to reach the others with this important message...we are competing less between each other, and against other life (potentially) for our own species...the more stars we can colonize and the faster, the more guaranteed our future survival and future position compared to other life. We probably will of course love the other life, but we might not be able to screw them...and so who wants to propagate something you can't screw? But maybe we will merge together with them, and introduce screwing to them, and they some other fun thing for our DNA.
I just realized I didn't examine the last part of Thorne's answer:
"...so-called dark energy, I didn't believe it when the first data came it, I didn't believe it when the second method of detecting the dark energy came in, finally when the third method... (audience laughs)...the f-first method was disagreement between the ages of the oldest stars and the apparent age of the universe, the second method was supernova observations, magnitude of observation of, the third method was (based) off the microwave background radiation, only when we had 3 very good, completely independent pieces of evidence was I ready to throw in the towel. I was at least as skeptical about that as you are about these things...but science is an observational thing, and as ugly as dark energy always seemed to me to be...I gotta live with it...and so we now are trying to figure out what it is"
Well again, this idea of dark energy...I don't ever know the claim is, but my view is this:
there is no "dark matter", all matter emits photons...there is probably only "matter whose photons we can't detect, but the existence of the matter can be deduced from objects whose photons we can detect"...it's basically average matter...I would say a planet who mass we can see from the Doppler shift of stars with planets we cannot see the photons of directly would be called "dark matter"...but it's average matter...let there never be the myth that so-called "dark matter" is anything other than average everyday matter...but it doesnt' emit enough photons in our direction to be seen...it seems clear now that any dark matter must be small objects. So then "dark energy"...again I reject the idea of a new form of energy...and the idea of energy represents a welding of mass and velocity, but must be understood to mean that mass and velocity are conserved but not interchanged. So dark energy can only be average energy, but in masses too small to be seen from our distance. I think we need to remove the obfuscation...any deliberate deception...but people in mainstream multimillion dollar science seem to have the opposite view! Perhaps there is more money in research that the funder cannot understand. I don't know but I think purposeful deception is real...such as using a label like "dark energy" without explaining quickly and clearly that it is just your average "energy"...and is a shorthand for the energy of matter we don't see but which we must include in calculations of how much matter is in the visible universe. And this is what these people are doing is trying to measure the amount of matter in the universe..which is a good idea..but I think it only tells us what the ratio between space and matter for the visible portion of the universe is...is that useful? Its probably good to know...but...it's not going to directly affect our everyday lives and our mission to develop a globular cluster of our own. So I'm not sure if Thorne is talking simply about matter we don't see or not. I am going to presume that he is. The first argument presumes that the big bang is true (I plan on revising my "universe" song for the infinite universe theory)...because what these people do is to try to estimate the rate of expansion of the universe and then come up with an age for the universe, but as I said...in a universe of infinite size and age...it's only as big and old as our largest telescope can see...and so...poof...there goes that calculation....the red-shift is the big phenomenon that is the source of the expanding universe theory...and I can't believe that no other explanation besides Doppler shift is tolerated...because I think there is a good arguement that can be made for gravitational red shift...and the party line is "gravitational red shift is not enough" but that was created by a person with a lot invested in the expanding universe theory, because I don't think it's true...because it's complex...we can't rule out red shift from a wide variety of matter...maybe the light we see has been bent by many different objects...and then how are we to know what it's original direction and original quantity was? Distance we should determine by apparent size + color. I think red shift may be an average measure of distance, but it isn't exact, because some light can be more bent than other light, light in the path of more matter is bent more, light in a path with less matter is bent less...we can only guess how much each light was bent, or delayed...and this is an interesting point, and I have to admit that I am still undecided about the true explanation of red shift...certainly some is Doppler...but some is from gravity...and nobody rejects this. But I think there is an added possibility and that is that the speed of light is not constant but is variable, but generally it remains very fast, and only large gravity can delay it, and then only by a tiny amount..I'm still exploring this idea...it seems unlikely ...and we should detect a change in velocity. The pound-rebka experiment is evidence of the velocity of light not being constant because....how can photon-interval change in empty space because of gravity and the photons keep their same speed?...It can't be unless the experiment was wrong. I think the pound-rebka experiment is somewhat convincing evidence that the speed of light is not constant, and I've said this before. So I think a person interested in this...and this is what I was think about earlier..is that probably an opposing camp will actually rise up...it seems inevitable because...we as a planet need to get to the truth eventually...it will probably require people in the big-bang-is-probably-wrong camp to have influential positions and ownership of major media even to have the ideas heard in print, audio and video.
I think I'm going to go back to my research, ULSF, retool my arguments, with the "bigger telescope=farther galaxies" and "time dilation=fitzgerald creates to save ether", I think I definitely have established 2 decent arguments, one mainly against the big bang and the other against time and space dilation, but I want to come up with even more simple statements that, in my view, chart a course that already exists but waits to be found, of more accurate science into the future.
Here are some cool videos of one of many corpuscular interpretations of polarization:
I would characterize this as one of the most simple atomic geometries:
I would say that anybody that was offended or angered by my questions yesterday, is missing a sense of humor...I mean Nicholson impression...Sagan impression...people need to lighten up and be able to enjoy some playfulness...and it definitely was not my intent to sound mean, to upset people, to be rude, ... physics and science should be dominated by smart and fun playful people...not dull and prim and proper without any fun...in fact Thorne was casually making jokes through the entire lecture...that is the so-called spirit of science in my mind...smart people having fun putting forward their views...in a way that is not insultive...that may be whimsical...etc. It's too dull to me to just be placid, emotionless and subservient, etc. People like me like to stir up the conversation with some whitty riffs, to nonviolently kick it up a notch with some spices, to pump up the jam with some style, ok well you understand, I'm trying to put some a clump of brown sugar in the usual oatmeal.
It was true too that off the entire audience of maybe a hundred people there were only two hands in the air at the end, the person with the first question and me. But unfortunately I think I came off probably as an old timer, religious fanatic for creationism, or local towney who wandered in from a farm on the outskirts of Irvine to reject the new fangled big bang time dilation.
That was one thing that I thought was rude on the hosts part to not even let me finish my question...I'm like...and I doubt time dilation because George Fitzgerald created...ok!...if I were the speaker and host I would allow a person a little more time...and only say "ok that's enough" if they continue for over a minute with an unending rant...in particular about religion....or in particular if they continue to ask questions after their initial question...although in my own opinion one followup comment (or quick question) is fine, but no more than a single follow up. My statements were all in the realm of science, at no time did I advocate religious explanations, .... I didn't even get out my question...which does require setup....it goes...1) I doubt this...2) here is why....3) can you address these doubts? and I got all of 1) but only part of 2) and then all of 3). In addition there was a statment in between which would have been nice, but by now I should know that the level of tolerance (Ted Kennedy did not let me give my questions about Frank Sturgis and Thane Cesar and the legacy of violence in the USA at his talk...wouldn't that have been a perfect spring board to say...'I doubt it was Oswald and or Sirhan...and I encourage people to investigate the truth about those terrible injustices....and yes...there is a terrible legacy of violence in the USA...and it shocks me that many people are ambivalent and indifferent about violence....we need to change that...and I and others have made vigorous efforts to change that with this bill and this bill, and so on), but there were many other people who had questions too)...I should know by now that the level of tolerance is like 10 seconds if not 5 seconds before the hook comes out, far too early in my opinion.
Believe it or not, for you outsiders, or maybe even some insiders who don't know it, there is a video biography on Michael Pupin. It was made in 1993. Here are some clips of it: http://youtube.com/watch?v=-EEm0E_zZa0
and a link where to buy a VHS version (apparently there is no DVD available):
http://www.serbianorthodoxchurch.net/cgi-bin/bshop.cgi?cat=videos
also here:
http://www.teslasociety.com/pupintape.htm
The Tesla Society, I think, is the group that made it possible.
I got mine from the church, but I probably should have gone through the Tesla society, because look at the other videos, all about Jesus and one about how homosexuals are getting access to children in school. Nice eh? I can't understand why christians are so nazistic about pleasure, it's their tradition I guess, it's bizarre, and they care little about violence it seems but everybody is different. Why no video on stopping violence? Or religious violence of the past and why it is wrong? Religious people are not known for their wisdom or allegience to truth and logic, and as terrible as that sounds, I think it is truthful, and accurate. But anyway, getting back to the video. Ok in this video are numerous hints, but not a huge number...and the hints are very subtle...but the narrator ends with "cip"
"CIP"
=====
...it seems like the neuron activation guy is "cp" so potentially, "cip" how coincidental it would be with "mip", maybe insiders are saying "cp" worked under Pupin. As I said before there was a CP that funded Pupin (as this video reveals), an older guy who ran for US President, whose name I can't think of right now. CIP, like so many words the insiders use probably has more than one connection, they probably use computers to find the most relevent words, CIP also can be "chip" like "microchip", and it seems possible that some of these microchips are microscopic. I think CP, and maybe CIP clearly is somebody too, I don't know who...
Possible CPs:
Cecil Powell (problem: too late, Pupin already has "memory wiped" in 1920s, also not CIP: Cecil Frank Powell)
I think a good idea is to get the names of those people who worked under Pupin. Are there any CPs there?
Possibly last name "Potter" (coffee pot in Farenheit 451 movie, harry potter might be public play on his name), or similar "Peterson", first name could be "Peter". Possibly DP is David Potter, as a wild-azz guess.
others:
Charles H. Townes, the inventor of the maser, clearly may be linked to neuron activation, and that is CT. I think it is very likely that the maser was invented perhaps as early as 1920, maybe 1918. Some people are hinting about 8, in the video they say "some 8 million people"...is it a hint?
One thing that is interesting is the electric camera. It probably happened about the same time as the CRT (way back in 1879 by Karl Braun in Germany). That is more than enough time for people to have figured out how to use the magnets to draw a picture, in fact, I think there is a good argument that in 1879 the first electric camera was invented along with the CRT, the CRT being invented to draw the image from the electric camera...who knows...maybe the CRT started as a way to represent various current with a line or point display. It all blossumed from the use of electron beams from the vacuum tube. But why the secrecy around the electric camera? Clearly it was around by 1910 when Pupin made his major find. Why didn't the inventors just openly show the electric camera and CRT? The CRT was public...why not the electric camera? Why not until Farnsworth and others ... not until the 1920s do they unveil it? And why even then if keeping it secret for that long? What caused the powers that be to release the electric camera (for visible light) to the public? Was it the money that selling the cameras might generate? That has to have been a strong incentive to go public with the technology, just as it must for the seeing thought camera-"phone" technology. But with seeing thought...the powers that be have just been very greedy and conservative about letting it go public.
I think I have found the best way to start talking about sarisammtafb: Simply saying "you know I am becoming kind of well known around the planet....I was on the kevin and bean show in LA....I'm known as the guy who thinks that people figured out how to see, hear and send images and sounds to and from brains wirelessly....etc", that way it's not so abrupt...it's a little more whimsical..."well, there is not a lot of physical evidence for it, and maybe I'm wrong...but if true...it would be an important finding no? And it's a valid line of research...trying to see the images people see and think of eh?". I can see the tone of conversation for the next few centuries...it's going to be outsiders and insiders in out aparteid planet, and the outsiders are going to have to quickly ascertain if the person they are talking to is an insider or not...it's not as easy as you might think. Many insiders are kind enough to say "I see!...I hear you!..." etc. That is the universal insider to outsider phrase to acknowedge that yes, they do see and hear thought. Once that has been established the conversation goes in a different direction. The first decision is: inside or out? if out=watchout, explain technology to fellow outsider or lying insider, if in=try to confirm info, 1910 with Pupin is clear, but 1911 for hear? 1913? 1918 for neuron activation? be ready for a barrage of "what are you talking about?" and "I don't understand what you mean?"...and all kinds of dumb playing...talking with insiders is tricky, but then so is talking to outsiders. For insiders it's one technique, for outsiders it's another. For outsiders...you have to prove that sarisammtafb is definitely possible, to point them out to books, videos, etc., that 9/11 was an inside job, that frank fiorini the watergate burgler was probably the killer of jfk, that thane cesar killed rfk...it's important not to rush and appear frantic....it's not the end of the universe if they don't know...try to hear their doubts and reactions....accept that there are doubts and uncertainties....admit that maybe you sound crazy....but to hear me out.... for insiders ... you have to try to get them to divulge info from the massive database of important information they have access to....did sarisammtafb have anything to do with ww1 and 2? did the nazis have sarisammtafb? etc. Did people try to tell the public like the nytimes, etc? have people been killed who told people without permission? Are the number of included increasing or decreasing over time? Was the person who heard thought working under Pupin? working at Columbia? Was the first person to remotely make a neuron fire the same person to send an image to a brain? Did they work together?
Some people who support the 9/11 murderers say "whooo!" and it's somehow linked to claims of incest between me and my mom, or one version of 5ws where I sing "whooo", perhaps beamed on, or who knows? But woo...who gives a shit...it's a bunch of sound....and it's similar to how these murder supporters say "everything!" which people use, even my brother used, not to try and open up a rift, but it is simply reporting on fact, and was probably paid for, but how much I don't know, could have been beamed, but sounded deliberate, anyway, people are so bizarre and hysterical about sex and pleasure...it's bizarre...they come up with far fetched theories...but yet believable to those who are hysterical about sex...willing to believe even the wildest and most abstract unproven illogical claims...like the Freudian theories of incest...I think if we simply casually perused people's masturbation thought images we would rarely see incestuous images, very rarely, most people are repulsed sexually by their parents, ... the funnies part is that...those who claim this certainly do not escape the same claim for them and their parent(s)...which is just annoying and stupid...even to them...they are gluttons for punishment and idiots to live a constant anger and cast insults onto others only to have them inevitably and consistently thrown back at them. But beyond that, if people do have consensual incest, hey who gives a shit? There's no crime there. What a bunch of idiots...here they make oral sex illegal, anal sex illegal...porn illegall...prost illegal...and on and on...hay...why not get your mits off our genitals and consensual sex lives? You fuck-free fucked up puritan hypocrite antipleasurists? And while on the topic why not hunt down, identify and jail those who murder and assault without consent? duh! talking about hyper about sex...everything about sex is so overwhelmingly apparently new and shocking...everybody might be "gay"...constantly people claim that I am gay, never "bi", we never hear accusations of "bi". As I have said before those people are either liars or their minds are chained with self imposed chains from pressure from other people who see their thought images. There is a lot of chains that are placed on thoughts when you become included probably, you suddenly see that only the outsiders talk about...or so called "cat call" beautiful people...they have trained themselves not to think of genitals, not to think about sex...they have made themselves like some dull gray prisonors. It's interesting that physical pleasure is so shut out of life, even for so-called "genius" people, physical pleasure is not considered to be a part of life, they are to derive all of their pleasure from books, videos, the Internet, from sports, ...not from physical touching...it's shocking absent from life. Unlike millions of other species, because of the uncomfortableness with pleasure that the religious have, humans don't embrace physical pleasure, even thought many secretly and naturally want to.
It's a funny thing and this is in my audio notes too: Two women, both have sex once a week, so their vaginas take the same amount of wear, but one is monogomous and the other isn't...but yet, the non-monogomous woman is called a whore and a slut....but yet...they have exactly the same quantity of sex....so clearly such labels have only to do with the quantity of partners and nothing to do with quantity of sex. Sex once a week is natural, and in my mind, it doesn't really matter how many different people a person has sex with, sex is simply natural, biological, etc. Beyond that, there are plenty of forms of consensual pleasure that absolutely do not cause pregnancy, oral sex, kissing, anal sex, hugging, sleeping together, back rubbing, back scratching, message, masturbating, genital fondling, breast touching, butt touching, etc....all these things....and there is absolutely no chance of pregnancy...so why would people who engage in those activities be immoral or unethical...I don't think they are. The only problem are STDs and of course other viruses that come along whenever two or more humans touch. Free info is the answer to that, but already there are other answers, low cost quick 1 minute tests for the major viruses and bacteria, and then this awesome idea of a voluntary-STD-clean database that people can access, and is completely voluntary...maybe the db owners can pay for the free testing, it could be a wonderful charity and provide an excellent service to the public. It's ironic too that those people who label others "slut" and "whore" are probably not the warmest people on earth...and I have to wonder how they can get into their own monogomous sex while simulateously chastizing the sex of others...it seems unlikely...more likely they are bent against sex altogether, not just promonogomous sex...I mean if they are so critical about other people having sex with too many other people, can they still separate that antisexual feeling, with a strong pro-sexual feeling for the monogomous sex of their own relationship? I kind of think no, that their anti-slut views impede their own monogomous sex, but maybe I'm wrong, maybe even the most vicious anti-slut person, is totally experienced and actively enjoys vigorous sexual activities with their monogomous partner. I just know that the nature of sexual arousal for most people is variety and new experiences, and that works against arousal with the same partner, but possibly like in prisons and hospitals, people in extreme situations such as monogomany can trick themselves into arousal.
Lately I find that I instead of getting in "word matches" with insiders I prefer to step back and just observe where they are coming from with their opinions. But word matches are almost always inevitable, but as an outsider among insiders, it seems pointless for me to say out loud what I think, but in some way it sends a clear message, and for whatever reason, you have not seen an insider pissed until you say a rebuttle out loud and challange their one-word put-down. Another reason to be pensive is that many time their mouth muscle neurons was moved, and as an outsider, and no doubt even more than a few insiders might not know between muscle neuron move and intentional put-down. One key is among those who generally are friendly, I understand that they are beamed on to be mean, and so it's better to brush off any put downs of theirs, time is so precious that I want to focus on positive productive things, we could sit here in a "perv" versus "brutal" match until the end of time. By the way here are common wasy word matches:
"perv": "brutal", "harsh", "callous", "thanks voyeur (thanks for your)", "thane you" (thank you)
"crazy": "brutal", "harsh", "judge mental", "yer healed", "thought police (tough one to fit in)", perhaps "speech"...I have to make these up myself, there has never been a person taking on involuntary psychology, antisexuality, or religion...I was thinking a new one might be "consent"...although it's remote...that psychology health care should be consent only.
"gay": "sourpuss", "not see",
The insiders have a tremendous advantage at quick put-downs because they have a massive team of like-minded insiders feeding them, where outsiders only have their own minds generally speaking. It's stupid to waste time in a constant put-down match, but sometimes a "harsh" or "brutal" might advance life forward for others. It might be worth the air and a few seconds, but otherwise, don't let them get you down, and at least know in your own mind the truth.
It's kind of an amazing thing to know that my own mind is being beamed with nasty suggestions all the time, but particularly when I meet a friend, I know it, and have become used to it, but then to realize too, that they must be receiving similar nasty suggestions, in addition to the nasty suggestions beamed on me, and my own feeble efforts to reject them or replace the beamed images and sounds.
I want to add more science contributions and important science topics to my "Ted in 10 minutes" so here it is again but now in edited form:
I need to put together a 5 minute quick all-encompassing statement for myself. It has to seemlessly cover these major topics:
1) images, sounds, muscle movements sent and received from brains wirelessly (sarisammtafb)+pupin,1910+evidence
2) photon is matter, basis of all matter, straight line not sine wave
3) no big bang, infinite universe
4) stop violence
5) full democracy
6) full free info
7) decrim drugs
8) decrim prost
9) psychology=make consensual
10) fiorini=jfk,cesar=rfk, 9/11=controlled demolition
11) antireligions
12) against antisexuality
13) decrim nudity
somehow I want to squeeze in:
14) cloud->spiral->life->globular galaxy
15) mass and velocity conserved, but not exchanged
16) antimatter is simply matter with electric charge
17) reject time dilation, time everywhere the same
18) current in permanet magnet causes electric not magnetic field
19) combustion must involve total separation of some atoms
20) velocity of light might not be constant, pound-rebka experiment
21) polarization based on direction not wave aspect of light
22) photon basic unit of mass measurement
23) course of matter in universe set but unknowable
24) all human languages contain same sounds, one letter equal one sound alphabet
25) no entropy, only matter, space, time, gravity
26) gravity and permanent electric field source of constant motion
27) doubt nuclear force, but might be, like energy and electricity, useful description
28) photon not carrier of electromagnetic force, light not electromagnetic wave
29) humans started as ovum and sperm protists
30) atom separation is possible reason for light from stars and planets
31) Within 20 years, walking robots in every major city
32) Within 100 years flying helicopter cars, roads layered above and below ground
33) eventually even oceans filled with houses
34) in the far future descendents may actually convert all matter of the planets to build and fuel optimized house-ships
35) Within 1000 years humans will have stopped the process of aging by customizing human DNA, humans age to 20 and later stages of aging are stopped.
----- (beyond this are things of lower or questionable accuracy)
36) neutron may be proton and electron
37) electron is probably photon
38) DNA of reproduction might be most conserved as necessary for survival
39) dual nature of atom, is not spherical
40) light interference may be result of photons bouncing off each other, or absorption and emission, reflection rate of atoms. (possibly reflection from surface features)
41) doubt existence of gravitons or quarks.
I'm still developing this and smoothing everything out so maybe next week for a final paragraph and top 40 list.
One piece of helpful advice to people is that if you get threats of terrible methods of death, you should realize that, the current technology can kill a person in milliseconds, and the preferred method is that method which was probably used on my Mom and millions of others: to simply turn off critical muscles until a person dies...so all the tales of being burned, drowned, etc are all very very unlikely, and more or less used to scare people, because if they want to kill you they will with a neuron beam in a few seconds, for whatever reason, that simply is not possible for them or they choose not to if you are still alive. Clear evidence that there must be some force of good working against the massively huge force of evil that has grown and multiplied on earth since the rise of religion.
My advice to those who want to make contributions to science is simple:
1) learn the details of the history of science
2) drop religion
3) don't be afraid to doubt the accuracy of popular existing theories (drop authority)
I would say that studying the details of the history of science is the richest source of new contributions to science, however, having a fresh new self-created interpretation and analysis of the universe and phenomena may also be the source of new advances in science, since you may not be limited by the paths worn out by others. Ultimately the physical observation, the simplicity and logic of the scientific theory is going to be the
10/04/07
I need to put together a 5 minute quick all-encompassing statement for myself. This is when you are on very precious air-time, which is the first few minutes of any interview. This is when the person thanks you for being on the show, and asks you what your deal is. It's important to squish as many important sentences into the smallest time possible, because, millions of people are going to hear and/or see these interviews. In addition, even for smaller interviews, people might only watch or listen to the first few minutes so it's smart to try and dump your load then. After that, you can feel more freely about chit-chatting, but even so, you can use that time to work in important issues of less importance than your prime-time issues.
My statement has to seemlessly cover these major topics:
1) images, sounds, muscle movements sent and received from brains wirelessly (sarisammtafb)+evidence
2) photon is matter, basis of all matter
3) no big bang, infinite universe
4) stop violence
5) full democracy
6) full free info
7) decrim drugs
8) decrim prost
9) psychology=make consensual
10) fiorini=jfk,cesar=rfk, 9/11=controlled demolition
11) antireligions
12) against antisexuality
13) decrim nudity
other possibilities:
14) history of science, evolution (describe ULSF)
15) kid's rights
16) my music
and here is what I have so far (I am calling this "Ted in ten minutes"):
I am known for many things, in particular for claiming that all the matter in the universe is made of particles of light, that particles of light are matter and the basis of all matter, that the big band expanding background radiation theory of the universe is probably wrong and that the universe is probably infinitely large because think of it, the universe doesn't just end 15 billion light years out, there have to be galaxies so far away that not one particle of light from them reaches our tiny telescopes. I'm also know for being one of the only people to advocate full democracy, where we the people get to vote directly on all government decisions, laws, and even court decisions, and I support total freedom of information, that is that nobody should be jailed or punished for any image owned (even if it violates copyright, privacy, pornography, etc other laws). Beyond that, I am one of the many people to support decriminalizing recreational drugs and prostitution. I tell people don't get addicted to recreational drugs, but by all means let's not jail those people who do get addicted to drugs, and if we do jail them, let is be only for a few weeks until they dry out, sober up, and can get a fresh start not for years and years, which is somekind of social program where we pay for their food, clothes and shelter for years. I am one of the only people to publicly finger Frank Fiorini Sturgis as the killer of JFK, one of the few people that identify Thane Cesar as the killer of RFK, and one of the growing group that think the world trade center building were brought down in controlled demolitions. So I am a person who is one of the few to publicly speak out against violence, against religions, nobody punished for religious and delusional beliefs, and in favor of truth, honesty, and science. But probably I am most known as a person who publicly claims that many years ago people figured out how to send and receive images sounds and muscle movements remotely to and from any brain, basically that people figured out how to see, hear and send thought wirelessly, and people are going to claim that I am crazy for saying that, and on the topic of psychology, the key thing I say there is that psychiatric health care needs to be made consensual only, because think about it, we don't let people remove one of our lungs without our clear written consent, so why would psychiatric treatment be any different, those people need the right to a trial, no 4 point restraints, no forcible or co-hearsed drugging. Just quickly, delusion needs to be legal, people should not be punished for being wrong, and religion is the best example, people reject evolution, believe that Jesus brought people back to life, that Muhommed was divine, etc, and those are all clearly delusional, and inaccurate, but nobody should be jailed for believing those things. It is very very hard for people to accept that thought can be seen and heard, but how hard is it to believe that people figured out how to see, hear and send thought. I think it was Mijalo Idvorsky Pupin at Columbia University in 1910 that first figured out how to see what people's eyes see by tuning in a specific wavelength of radio wavelength light from behind a person's head, then somebody must have figured out how to make neurons fire remotely by using invisible beams of light. It sounds unbelievable but there actually is some evidence. For example in 1937, Andre Maurois wrote a book "The Thought Reading Machine" which describes a scientist inventing a device that can hear thought and how they go into business selling the machine, any of you can buy on the Internet for $20. Definitely see the movie "The Final Cut" with Robin Williams who is a comical genius which shows how what a person sees and hears through out there life can be assembled at their death into a movie of their memories. Probably the most convincing evidence is this movie I have on my web site and youtube that shows a researcher at the University of California in Berkeley, Yang Dan, who made a movie of what a cat sees made only from the neurons of the cat. This is clear evidence that people are trying to figure out how to see and hear thought, and trying to see and hear thought is absolutely a valid scientific endeavor, there is nothing pseudoscience about trying to see and hear thought, it is definitely a valid and serious line of scientific research. The key thing to tell you people out there, is to defend yourselves against this technology, because the images and sounds in yo head might not be your own, but instead might be being beamed there by high school drop-outs in our government with advanced secret technology. Finally, beyond that, I am a person who stands up in favor of pleasure and against pain. I think we are living in an antisexual revolution, and it's ironic that people look down upon nudity and sex, in particular because there is a reason that sex feels so good, and that is if sex did not feel good, we wouldn't have sex, females wouldn't get pregnant, and the sexual species would not continue to reproduce, so it is so stupid and ironic that people come down so harshly against physical pleasure and consensual sex...it's almost to say a person is anti-life, since sex is the reason humans keep reproducing and surviving, but yet nobody will publicly admit that they are sexually aroused and like sex and nudity even though biologically they have to be lying.
I have a message, other people go on talk shows and say like "I'm fine...my family is fine...what have I been doing lately? hanging out....", no not me, I have a lot to f'in say my sistas and brothas. I have a message to deliver, and deliver it I am in the process of doing. I have a message from the universe, and it's high time the public heard it. See the above paragraph for a condensed summary of the instructions I have been given.
My drum set came in, I bought this thing for $270 dollars from musiciansfriend.com, and it rocks, but I have to find a place to play it because it would be too loud, but it's ready to roll. I just need some cymbals now too.
Probably another CIA John Lennon lyric is in the song "How", "and the world she is tough, some time I think I've had enough", that would be typical of the CIA's type of writing or whoever they are, high school drop-outs in our government with access to advanced secret beam technology and no good ideas about how to use it.
I am on a quest to see how seeing, hearing and neuron activation was invented and has grown, but also on a quest to duplicate the technology myself, and demonstrate it to the public. Of course, all that might be stopped if I am suddenly included, but it looks like that is not going to happen any time soon, so I am on course for trying to duplicate the technology myself, and to continue to piece together this unbelivable, but yet most probably true story.
One thing that the data agrees with but many people may not think is true, is that those who are against decriminalizing prostitution, whether they know it or not, are actually generally lowering the income of the female gender, because on average those paying for genital touching are males, and those receiving the money are females. So people who are keeping prostitution illegal are stopping large amounts of money from reaching many female's bank accounts from male's. Prostitution being illegal, and even soliciting prostitution being illegal, is not just stopping women from walking the streets, we are talking about middle income women who might be interested in being paid a few thousand dollars just to touch some (probably older) wealthy guy's genitals for a few minutes. Those women are being denied potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in income and revenue. People will say this is wrong, that it is a distorsion, all kinds of other reasons, but the fact remains that those people working to keep prostitution illegal, are, whether they know it or not, drastically and deeply limiting the potential income of the entire female gender, since it is females generally in this day and age who receive the massive quantity of money that would be exchanged for consensual physical pleasure services. I've said it a thousand times, but this kind of view of making prost illegal, of oral and anal sex laws, etc...it's a thing of the past...I don't think the majority even still supports these old puritanical laws...but no representatives want to be called "pervert" and so even if the public supports it, the reps won't enact it. It's going to take ballot measures, and then some kind of US ballot measure to pound this crapper through.
I am willing to admit that I think that there may be some plan for the universe, that we can't possibly ever know, some kind of program, where the photons, space and time are working themselves out, that there is some exact and unchanging course for all the matter and space in the universe, but I reject the old human-made idea of there being any kinds of gods though. The idea of gods is an old fashioned idea, based on the idea that human-like beings control everything in the universe, and even if it was updated, I still reject the entire line of theory as less accurate than expanations offered by science. The best evidence I can give you against belief in a god, changes from time to time, but currently, in my mind, it is this: "for centuries there was no monotheism, only polytheism, then within the last 3000 years there was monotheism, if belief in many gods, was reduced to belief in only one god, and recently, why not just add one more god to the list of non-existant dieties?" People worshipped many gods for centuries before monotheism, and then only a single god...well, if all those other gods don't need to be worshipped, why worship a single god? There are many other arguments, people argued against the existence of gods even before Christianity and Islam, and that is an interesting fact.
A tit apparently accidentally was beamed onto a screen by a US representative recently, and I think at some point, because nudity has been made so illegal and taboo, we might have to display images of actual breasts to identify the nature of the breast that appeared...ok I'm joking....but we can always just simply show breasts anyway for pure entertainment value. People either love or loathe the female breast, but one thing is for sure, they are excited by it.
10/05/07
Vegetarian Times has come forward with their first gestapo insider put-down of "creepy", a word that CNN accepted a few million dollars for. The insiders like it because they think it works against my rising popularity by relating "tee-pee" with "creepy", and providing a theoretical justification for excluding atheists and others based on the shakey foundation of psychological theory. In my own defense, and as a feeble opposition to this all powerful evil empire, I can only say that, Ann Gentry and Ephrom Zimbalest Jr the owners of "Vegetarian Times", maybe are friendly people for those who have ever seen them, but one thing we outsiders should remember is that Gentry and Zimbalest Jr are part of a disgusting secret society of people that voyeuristically and secretly watch people and even their thoughts in their own houses. And among camera-thought net insider addicts, there is little honor, no honesty, and even less wisdom. They will give all kinds of excuses, and try to change the topic, but the simple fact remains that they do watch people in their houses and see thought, and I think the public should at least hear that truth and understand that in the interest of fairness. They publicly do not admit to watching people in their houses, or seeing thought, but yet it is the truth and appears to be a simple fact. Whenever I see these low-brow paid-for propaganda I am somewhat amazed that all this is for me, done by people who watch endless hours of me and my thoughts. Insiders like Gentry and Zimbalest have watched hours of me, all my copyrighted songs, endless hours of my thoughts, but have not shared a single thought image of themselves with me. If we outsiders want to see what Gentry or Zimbalest are up to we have to pay top copyright dollar, but if they want to see us, they just grab whatever they want from our thoughts, and we have not received a single dollar. I'm for total free info, so maybe that is why people, like Bill Gates, and Zimbalest who have received millions of dollars from this one-sided copyright system, would oppose the idea of total free info. I'm interested in what the eye videos show behind this use of the word "creepy", who paid for it? What was the motivation behind it? Probably monetary. It's amazing, here these people have millions, but they are so greedy that they take more millions to dump on poor outsiders instead of taking the higher and longer term financial gain or being kind to both sides. It's similar to an aparteid society of Hutu and Tutsi. My only hope is that the excluded get smart and start to understand how this other group watches them and their thought, and has been part of a disgusting secret society that has existed for 100 years and longer, certainly since the invention of the camera that sees eyes by Michael Pupin in 1910. There are many points, but just quickly, another phenomenon I see in today's society are people who are uneducated, they are suspicious and care nothing about science, they readily accept many of the pseudoscience claims of psychology and religions. It's shocking to explain to people new to the earth that a massive group of people are part of a cult around a Jewish preacher who lived 2000 years ago...that they still worship this guy 2000 years later...it's tough to explain that. Many insiders callously and cruelly support the torture and indefinite detentions of lawful people in psychiatric hospitals. They remain silent about those people not getting free legal defense, a trial, a finite sentence, or even applaud and actively support such a system. One reason people fear speaking out against involuntary psychiatric treatment, is because they don't want people viewing them as having a psychiatric disorder. A perfect example is how Nixon won an election by exposing that the VP running mate of McGovern has seen a psychiatrist. Even the thought that a person might have some kind of psychiatric problem was enough for him to be dropped from the ticket...just talking to some psychiatrist about your marriage, job, or life in general was enough to create a myth of mental instability, and this from people like Nixon who supported and actively engaged in cold blooded first degree murder of innocent people. Like Nelson Mandela said of the white elites in South Africa, I am saying that these savages that watch us in our house and for whom we cannot see a single thought, who have secretly watched and been accessories after the fact to a million murders, are going to preach to us about ethics? But getting back to that issue of no education and easily duped by pseudoscience, many people believe all these inaccurate claims, those of the religions, those of psychology, that there is something bad about science, I see this in the "raw" people too, like there is something unnatural about cooking food, or something spiritual about uncooked food. I like raw food, but I don't have any pseudoscience mystic belief that there is anything unhealthy with cooked food. I hope the excluded wake up sometime soon and start to work against this massive evil insider empire. Throughout history there have always been massive evil empires that ruled with advanced technology oppressing and abusing the weaker groups. However, there are always those, like myself, that oppose the empires, even when the Nazi empire ruled Europe with an iron first, secretly murdering millions, there were many anti-Nazis who worked against them, and ultimately the Nazi empire was toppled, although many of them kept their secret pupin technology and continue to this day. What the outside public sees are films like "Der Ewige Jude" massively spinning propaganda, while the truth of how the Nazis secretly were murdering millions of innocent people with zyklon B continued for years, unknown by the outsider until Eisenhower allowed movies to be released of Auschwitz and other Nazi military work, prison, psychiatric hospital, and death camps. I'm hopeful that even this evil camera-thought phone company information hording empire will collapse, and those involved be punished by the newly informed outsiders. I see this kind of polluted view all the time, I can't turn on a television show or open a magazine, enter a restaurant without the rude included putting me down, the pupin secret, religion, antisexuality, antiscience has polluted every aspect of the planet, and if that were not enough, this evil crap can be beamed directly onto our minds now. So, this kind of stuff with "creepy" it's typical, it's like racism, we can't ever escape it, we have to live with it, and I am working my best to try and educate people about as many truths as possible. There couldn't be a massive secret voyeur elite society and none of their gross views leak out to the public. Some of that disgustingness always seeps out to the public. It's terrible when you look up to see who is shuffling you into the death camp train or the psychiatric prison camp, and it's a liberal vegetarian, a liberal who didn't have a lot of choices who made some bad choices in order to survive in a brutal society, and those people like Gentry and Zimbalest, although tutsi insiders for which, sadly, there will always be a clear and distinct difference, are nothing compared to those who killed JFK, RFK, those in 9/11 and I can only imagine how many others, as I have said when historians in 2500 are summarizing this century, probably the list of those not murdered by secret beam technology will be smaller. Probably the most offensive thing about words like "creepy", "weird", "psycho", "scitzo", "sane", etc. is simply the fact that millions of people are currently the victim of barbaric and human rights violating (but be certain that Amnesty International will not address the involuntary psychiatric treatment question for any nation) unconsensual "treatments". The money behind those at CNN and Vegetarian Times who bought "creepy" (people can buy advertising in magazines, television...even a word like "psycho", etc, but of course, we outsiders don't know the name of the buyer, only the seller), may come from the big psychological pharmaceutical companies who want to continue forcing people to buy their products for a huge cornucopia of made up or trivial diseases with little or no scientific evidence and not one physical diagnostic test for (unlike tests for HIV, cancer, broken bones, etc), and we are talking about people being forced to buy and injest these experimental drugs by law, mandated by law, mandated by court order and government laws, forced to take drugs upon pain of imprisonment and somebody else drugging them. So people look at me like "you are overreacting", but I just want to state for the record, that these "psychol" people are filling the hospitals full of lawful people for indefinite sentences, with no trial to prove themselves innocent of the charge of a neighbor, government police officer, or doctor, supporting forced drugging laws, ... I mean I am pulling my hair out over here, being the only person to understand this...I mean this shit is shocking....and these people who think a god floats around in the clouds, that Jesus is in a cracker, and Jesus watches over them...I mean and on and on...are going to tell us about reality? Even that there is a big bang and the universe just ends 15 billion light years out...just ends...no more universe there....they are going to tell us about reality. Forced psychological treatment is a nightmare of this century, and I hope it ends in this century. But that is going to require radical and massive change on the part of the public, that doesn't appear to be coming anytime soon. I reject the idea that taking money to print "psycho", "creep", articles defending the erroneous 9/11 story, the oswald story, etc, is giving right wing people a say, there are right wing people who are not rude, who reject violence, who reject the Bush's reign of murder, who support science, etc. For example, I support Ron Paul's brand of Republicanism, I am for small government, less taxes, I'm against the sales tax, I'm against a massive overspending military, unnecessary and costly wars, against government legislating our own recreational drug and consensual sex choices, while I support programs to end starvation and basic non-insurance-company-based health care, I'm against massive social programs that have to do with psychology, counciling and other unnecessary services, I'm against massive regulations, for free market, for full democracy where the public gets to vote directly (a policy neither side currently supports), etc. To me it's simple economics, even though they have millions they see these quick-fix short-term payments as beneficial, without worrying about the long term because most people tend to forget the past. What these evil insiders are involved in is a kind of selection, against atheists, against honest, ethical, educated people, by trying to stop them from reproducing, and even from finding conjugal partners, it's eugenics, and a form of genocide, by trying to discredit and exclude those people who reject religion, who reject secrecy, generally anybody that disagrees with those who control Pupin's invention, etc. I doubt we will see "total free info fried food item", "9/11 inside job-pasta", "stop violence soup", "pupin thought seeing pasta", "no drug war sandwich", "pseudoscience ...", "decriminalized ...", "legalize the prost pudding", "consensual health care only loaf", "jesus was only a human burger", "religions are idiocy slaw", "I see people thoughts veggie mash", "let us vote directly on the laws shishkabobs", "evolution is a fact bun", "moon city pie", "new new york state on mars tea", "frank fiorini killed jfk now we want some justice bake", "thane cesar killed rfk now wtf you going to do about it LA? BBQ seitan sandwich", because people are more into money than truth, justice, honesty, progress, science, etc.
Since atheists cannot be punished for "heresy" and "blasphemy" psychology serves as a convenient alternative. Many religious people view atheism as a psychological disorder (just as many atheists view religion as a psychiatric disorder, however there are far more religious than atheists, and so the religious generally have been prevailing). I think I take the high road in saying that nobody should be jailed or locked in a hospital, or legally required to take drugs for their religious, delusional, or inaccurate beliefs.
I generally continue going to businesses even though their employees are rude included, because I have little choice, I have to go to grocery stores, I sometimes like to go to a restaurant, read a magazine, etc...and so of course I have come to accept the disgusting background of filthy camera-thought propaganda and vicious views. It must be a similar feeling for black people in an antiblack society, you have done nothing wrong, but yet you are viewed like a slave, second class citizen or criminal just because of your race, your gender, your religion, etc. and then ironically by a group of actual evil criminals. My view is that generally people who are rude and have inaccurate views days before, still have them today, and will continue to be rude and have those inaccurate views, probably until they die, those "creepy" people will always be out there, and so of course, like racism, violence, dishonesty, it's going to be around here on earth for a long time. I can feel good knowing that I am working overtime to try and teach those who can be reached, to expose those who operate behind a curtain of secrecy, and generally speak out for the truth, against injustice and against popular inaccurate beliefs.
I don't know where to begin with this disgusting disgusting thing:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071005/ap_on_hi_te/downloading_music;_ylt=At2EPIMzX3N2tbNydJb16Hus0NUE
Here this poor woman who probably gets under $50k a year is fined $222,000 for copyright violation. This is absolutely nazisticly disgusting. Those people in the recording industry are total monsters and shocking hypocrites for watching people in their houses and copying their thought images and sounds. This is grosser than gross. This shows you how disgusting and vicious the music companies are. The public has to go in and vote down the copyright penalties, and democratize the court system. It is going to take us years to reverse these massive injustices done to the excluded by insider wealthy fascist elites. I hope they tried to argue that those people all have watched thought thanks to Pupin for 100 years, why not if you are looking at a 1/4 million dollar settlement, and are a person who will not get 1/4 millions dollars over the sum of your life? What a bunch of terrible people on the grand jury. I have to ask who are these shocking idiots who think this woman has $222,000 laying around? People on juries are so stupid with these ridiculously huge monetary settlements, in particular for a nonviolent crime that these hypocrites in the recording industry commit every 5 minutes. I think we are all salivating waiting for the day when RHIA and all the other copyright companies get exposed for copyright and privacy violations and have to shell out huge sums to the public for whom they have been watching for a century.
To me, I cannot get over how these insiders savages have, over 100 years, not even bothered to tell the outsider public that thought can be seen, heard and sent to their minds. I mean that is vicious, to not even tell them, forget that they would not get to use this technology, but to not even tell them that such technology exists is viciously monsterous and idiotic.
My weight is down to 245lbs, I am reporting this for myself, and don't care if others know. It's nice for me to have a quick record, and for my mind to know where I was at, and if others enjoy it that's fine too. These pounds are clearly harder to lose because I don't think I am doing too many things differently. This is moving my average down to .3 or .4 lbs/day, which is 2-3lbs/week, 8-12lbs/month. At that rate I will not be at 200 for almost 4 months: February 2008, and I don't know if I am going to go to 180, but that would take an additional 2 months to April 2008.
As an outsider, get familiar with the "get away from me" prank phone call, and my advice for you to respond is with "you leave me alone, you fuck-free fascist nazis...dont call me...get away from me...dont call my mind....leave me the fuck alone...turn the channel...watch somebody else constantly....you scummy pieces of fascist secret voyeur shit...." and similar thoughts. Can you imagine a piece of shit calling you just to tell you not to call them? What a bunch of idiot shit heads. If a person has something nice to say, by all means call, but don't waste my time with rude shithead comments and put-downs. In particular, the nature of the mind is much more intrusive and those who prank call the mind should be facing tougher penalties than just for harassing phone calls which a person can choose not answer.
I should say that there is a lot of good stuff in the two "Vegetarian Times" mags I have received. For example, it's wonderful to have a food magazine for which (not being vegan) 100% of the recipes apply to me instead of the usual 10% of meat food magazines. The recipes are creative and many are within the reach of an average person. In addition, most of the material is somewhat liberal-friendly. I just want to state for the record the reality of what is going on behind the scenes, because we are living in a ridiculously unfair one-sided society (and a shockingly violently criminal side at that...I mean to have killed many on 9/11, JFK, RFK...and then the murderers don't do a day of time in jail...I mean we are talking about a very vicious group of people, then add in Pupin's secret for 100 years to make matters much worse). I hate to see a fine group of people steam-rolled over without so much as a whimper of protest or objection.
Here is a model I just did of Grimaldi's experiment. This prompts me to notice that Grimaldi, nor Young ever mention, to my knowledge, the material, or depth of the slots used.
09/28/07
Something kind of wild happened to me this morning. While I was sleeping a person in the camera-thought net, a better title might be: sending and receiving data to a from brains (SARDTAFB) or possibly sending and receiving images, sounds and muscle movements to and from brains (SARISAMMTAFB which is like sorry sam tafb), so somebody in the sarisammtafb net stopped my lung muscle from working, which disabled my ability to inhale air for about 5 to 10 seconds. There are a few important points:
1) You might have lingering doubts about this technology until you actually experience it...then you will have far fewer doubts....when you feel what it is like to not be able to breathe in air...it's like suffocation in air...they don't even need to touch you to choke you now.
2) They tend to do these things when you are just waking up, or lightly sleeping, because you tend to write it off as a dream or unusual unknown "sleeping phenomenon".
I wonder if this is how Sylvia was murdered. There are many ways to kill a person when you can control their muscles remotely.
This event makes me want to describe the known ways of using neuron activation to kill a person (this does not include lasers as burning weapons):
quickly and directly:
1) stop their heart (which is a muscle)
2) stop their lung inhaling muscle
3) possibly a muscle that can be made to stop blood circulation
4) cause a heart attack (fibrillation)
quickly and indirectly:
1) beam suggestions of suicide
2) beam suggestions that would, unknown to them, result in their death
Suffocation is very difficult to detect as a cause of death, as is heart stopping. Unlike laser burning, these methods of murder are very difficult to detect, in particular for an outsider to sarisammtafb (sardtafb).
Weight update: 248lbs. Again, the next 50 pounds appear to be tougher than the first 50. Still this diet appears to be slowly and progressively producing results. I think one aspect of this losing weight is like so many things, I think these kinds of things only happen when a person really wants them to, and not just that it would be nice, but that they are really determined, and a change is made in their mind. For example like quitting smoking, it helped to set a day for me, but I had to be convinced in my mind that I wanted to do that or else I don't think it ever would have worked. It has to be something that a person really wants thoroughly, but also I think understanding your mind helps. The change has to be something that you understand the reasons for and have a large amount of logic, reasons, statements, etc to help you if there are weak moments. I think that after a few weeks of staying with some specific change, the toughest part is over, and your body is adapted to the new system (w/o smoking, or to your new eating habits, etc).
I was thinking that maybe why the name google is so successful is because "goo" combines sex and reproduction in one word, through sex, the male goo will cause a baby who will then say "goo goo".
Glad to see the 8% decline in violent crime in LA according to latimes.com. Maybe people are finally turning against violence, and using the technology to stop it.
I am so pissed at myself, the UCI Libraries just had a book and video sale, and there were these VHS videos of "The Mechanical Universe and Beyond", which is a series of videos that explain the history of science concepts. Each was being sold for $1. I thought...you know...VHS...I never even use my VCR anymore...I'm not sure it still works. So I just bought 1 video in the series. But I watched it, and it's very well done. They describe the current sad story of science, and it could be a useful resource for ULSF. I wish I had bought the rest in the series damn! Then come to find out that these tapes are very expensive. On Amazon the cheapest one, and this is VHS, is going for $20, and the rest for $50 and $100. To imagine that it was almost like some person had just set out $1000 in cash on a video rack. I didn't realize that at the time however! And then all from the bogus information laws, isn't that amazing? That;s how Bill Gates became the wealthiest person on earth, just from the sale of information...just for selling air almost. update: atheistic shit! (I am trying to find new phrases for 'holy shit' 'non-holy shit' is yet another) it is free on the web (although copyrighted and somewhat small resolution):
http://www.learner.org/resources/series42.html?pop=yes&vodid=728970&pid=604#
I found this out thanks to wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mechanical_Universe
sweet, otherwise I would never get to see these people try and explain the popular albethey backwards views of science. I think I will have video material to watch during dinner for a few months. very nice. That's kind of bizarre how they give it away for free on the web, but sell the DVDs for $50 each. Since clearly they seem to be more focused on the info reaching the public, they should just cover their costs, but who knows, maybe the extra money goes to new science video projects.
This is kind of wild, the Annenberg/CPB channel is on the web for free too: http://www.learner.org/channel/broadband/video.html
and this series is playing there too. They need to advertise more, because I would love to have seen this series earlier.
I think maybe I need to have a "free web videos page"
This series is actually on google videos too: http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=the+mechanical+universe&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv How wrong I was about this video being hard to see!
Speaking about bizarre high priced info items. Try to buy a cheepo copy of the "1984" DVD. Most DVDs sell for <$10 on ebay, even recent DVDs. For example you can buy the more recent "V for Vendetta" for $6, but the 2005 version of "1984" is at least $20. update: I see now that "1984" is out of print, perhaps that explains it?
Rough ideas for songs. I didn't want to release these until I officially record them, but I am accumulating so many songs that I'm not going to bother to wait until they are recording, which could be years from now. These are just rough ideas, not finished song recordings. The Republicans Girl!
There are so many points, but one that is memorable is how terrible the people in the major medai are to the 9/11 truth people, their like gestapo capos, average people are not that vicious. It's really interesting. These people like vonKleist and so many others are the heros of this century, and yet they are unrecognized by the majority. Hopefully someday people will look back and know that these people stood up against all the lies and violence.
09/18/07
Just for the record: "pre-spiral galaxy" returns not one image in google.com, nor does "pre-elliptical galaxy" return any images or text results.
Perhaps we should distinguish between exploded stars and star forming nebuli, or perhaps by sizes of nebuli (for example which ones are star sized and which are galaxy sized?). Perhaps there is not much difference between a star forming cloud versus a star death cloud, but the star death clouds generally have a small star at the center.
09/19/07
One thing that I think the E=mc2 equation and Einstein should be credited with is, in some way, this equation implies, if not stating explicitly that all matter is made of particles of light.
I decided to go back to the standard 5th tuning for violin and cello, because (not necessarily in order of importance):
1) the cello C string could not be tuned to an E easily
2) the violin notes are smaller than a guitar (because the neck is much shorter) and so having an octave compressed to two strings (4 notes on a typical scale instead of the 3 typical for a guitar scale) seems more natural and a better fit.
3) it is nice to be able to relate to other violin, cello players and pieces (some pieces are easier to play with the standard tuning because they were written on an instrument with standard tuning)
I do think that there are possibilities for a longer neck violin, similar to a guitar that seems a natural evolution of a new musical instrument, basically a bowed guitar held at the shoulder (I think the only major difference would be the need for a very round fretboard, and of course frets could be done away with too).
In addition, I think it's possible that a 5th tuning for guitar might be a way to standardize string instruments, but, I don't know. I have learned on a 4th tuning and there are certain advantages to a 4th tuning, such as chord structure, but I am sure many things are possible with a 5th tuning too, and new creative structure might be created with a guitar tuned to 5ths.
When people come at'cha with "crazy" you can come back with the "brutal", "callous", "harsh" (in particular for liberal psycholprison lovers), "cold" (also works for antisexual remarks), "vicious", "judgemental". Also "dull", "languid", "boring", etc. You have to practice to remember this stuff, for when these callous bastards come at you with their harshness...most of us outsiders are easy-going positive and friendly...not at all like most insiders who many times for money or for free have been rehearsing their rude put-downs. You can just ignore them, but why not let those aparteid-lovin bastards get a tiny taste of the other side? They might not otherwise know such a view exists. For every tit there should be a tat, should there not? Other good words are "rude", "crude", "mean", on the cold tip: "frigid", "icey", "warm", "nice",... more at http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/callous and let's never forget that classic affirmation of any statement "that's no lie!".
09/20/07
I picked up the Roman Emperor Julian's "Against the Galileans" where I had left off, and it is interesting that Julian uses a number of arguments against Christianity less than 400 years after the time of Jesus. For example, Julian appeals to nationalism and racism arguing that Romans have changed allegience from the native Roman gods to a dead Jewish person. In some sense, this argument shows how, to its credit, Christianity overcame even the strongest racism, for people of so many different races and nations to choose Christianity as their religion. I am against racism, but I think a similar argument might be that Roman people have rejected their Hellenic and Roman science roots to embrace a mystic cult around a preacher. Julian also argues that people have mistakenly misplaced their worship of gods with worship of a human. Those are criticisms that people never hear, not that I share those criticisms, I am atheist and appeal to people to reject all religions in addition to rejecting racism. Still, I think it is healthy to hear some criticism of the unquestioned Christianity, and the other religions too. Among the many arguments Julian makes is a very valid point, although drenched in the elitist language of Hellenic and Roman superiority, that Jesus never did anything noteworthy, nothing in terms of major contributions to science. Jesus appears to have been a typical preacher, an uneducated human, indoctrinated with Judaism, like most people of the age, who arrogantly presumed to have a better understanding of a diety than everybody else.
09/21/07
My weight is only 250 (2 lbs lost since last Friday). I'm not sure what happened. It was really unusual. I ate a nice small Greek dinner at Daphney's last Saturday and noticed that I had gained 2 pounds the next day. The food was fried, but still, I doubt that was the reason. In addition, I have been getting into different juices like the Kern and Hansen "nectar" drinks that have little fat, but have sugar in the form of corn syrup. Still they are delicious, and carbohydrates like sugar are more easily separated/reduced than lipids, plus they are mostly water. Conservatives put out a news opinion about how sweet drinks are what is making people overweight, as a counter to this idea of 2 small meals and drink anything diet that is so far successful for me. But then liberals fired back with a news opinion that people should drink their weight in ounces of fluids each day (for me that is 250 ounces...a typical water bottle is 8 ounces, so 31 water bottles a day?! I probably drink no more than 10 so 80 ounces of water a day seems more natural to me). I have been observing my weight and drinking/eating habits, and have learned something interesting. Each piff is about 1 pound. It's amazing that I can drop a full pound just by urinating. One night, I am not lying, I pissed 3 times (without drinking too much more), and dropped 3 pounds, 1 pound for each piss. Shet also will cause loss of a pound and potentially 2. I now rarely shet, and when I do, it's cause for celebration because I know I will lose a pound then. So I don't know why my body just up and gained 2 pounds. But I am staying with my diet. It's been fine, I haven't been hungry and feel fine with just two small meals, exercize 3 times a week, and all the drinks I want. So far I have lost 50 pounds, and I think I have another 50 to go before I reach the weight I want to stay at. One thing that is interesting is that I will eat a very small dinner, and then have a glass of juice, and the juice makes me feel full, almost to the point where I feel like I ate too much. THen I usually relax and enjoy a nice coffee or two. Maybe losing weight is somehow tougher at lower weights? Possibly this is some other kind of fat molecules that are not as easily reduced...some of these fat molecules may be decades old.
I got a DAT player and am going to make available some more old recordings on my web page. I don't think I'm going to do every song, but just ones that I am interested in hearing again. My newer songs are smarter and I like much more. Listening to these old past songs is kind of depressing because I know how badly abused and misdirected by criminals in the camera-thought net I was, and how neglectfully liberal insiders have been in excluding so many of us. But still, the kernel of many good ideas are in many of those songs, and that is positive. Those were the rough beginnings of many of the more polished and honed musical and in particular lyrical ideas I am developing now.
The people's representative in the Federal Senate failed to enact the popular opinion to bring home those people employed in our military. Here is how they voted: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00346
Boxer didn't vote, Dodd voted against, Durban (D-IL) didn't vote, bogus war based on the false-flag 9/11 lovers of murder such as Lieberman (I-CT), Nelson (D-NE), Pryor (D-AR) all voted no, all other democrat senators voted yes. Republicans Hagel (R-NE), Smith (R-OR), Snowe (R-PA) voted yes to end this idiotic carnage. 13 more yes votes would be needed for a 60% (3/5) majority. It was tied 47 to 47 with 6 people not voting.
It's interesting that in Germany the political party names all have "Christian" in the title. Can you imagine a political party in the USA with a title like "the Christian Democrat" party, how terrible that would be, I would definitely be voting the "Atheist Democrat" party, but probably by then we will be voting directly on the laws anyway and not need any "representatives" to vote for us.
When fascist laser people make me scratch my nose I use a 3 fingers right hand gesture, because:
1) I am voting for that person to be jailed for 3 days (plus a multiplier for repeat offenses)
2) The republicans (mainly controlled by weapons/"defense" manufacturers) are trying to start world war 3, because think of the money they are pulling in from Iraq and Afghanistan...wouldn't a world war be even more money? But people in the US need to think about that, we take for granted our current society of (very relative) peace and nonviolence, the change to foxholes and bomb shelters would not be a pleasant one.
3) The republicans in their current and probably final form should be like in SF where they are a third party of radical extremists, like the Nazi party, because that is what they are.
09/12/07
Wikipedia has some new info about one of Mozart's more comical pieces
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lick_Me_in_the_Ass
Some person has made the claim that Mozart had tourett's syndrome, which to me is absurd, and this song is just playful funny, and in some way may be very smart and progressive in terms of defense and support for sexual and speech freedoms. It's amazing that people can mistake comedy for illness, that is a bizarre reaction to comedy. It's amazing that these compositions were only discovered as recently as 1991. I think this puts my "Big Ol' Dick" song into a better light.
I'm trying to come up with a list of creative answers to questions like "how's it going?" so far I have:
1) I'm feeling no pain
The biologist Lynn Margulis (also Carl Sagan's first wife) has stated publicly her belief that 9/11 was an inside job. That is awesome to see. All my support and thanks to Margulis for her brave statement.
http://www.911blogger.com/taxonomy/term/6206
I sent this email in support:
"Hi
My name is Ted Huntington, I have enjoyed your work on the origins of the first eukaryotic cell. For myself, I kind of lean towards a captured eubacteria in another bacteria because binary division in eukaryotes happens first to the nucleus and then the cytoplasm, and it seems that re-evolving binary fission for the cytoplasm would be too unlikely, however, I don't think the hypothesis of a bacteria growing an outer cytoplasmic layer and extending binary fission from the nucleus to the cytoplasm (perhaps similar to planctobacteria/planctomycetes) can be ignored.
One thing I have found that I think is interesting is that in tracing the genetic tree, it seems more likely to me that the reproductive genes and method of reproduction would be the most conserved as opposed to the ribosomal RNA, because ultimately the reproductive apparatus is the most important process needed to survive. So in that light, a species like the green algae Spyro Gyra that reproduces via conjugation might be very ancient. Still, I don't doubt a eukaryote can easily have two or more methods of reproducing. I think the order of repro after that is budding and then sexual fusion.
Anyway, just quickly, I am sure you are very busy, but I wanted to also give you my support and thanks for stating publicly your view about the attacks of 9/11/01 being an inside job, and I share that view too. That's a very brave statement, and this is a shocking and scary truth. Very nice to see a person of your popularity and influence telling the truth on the 9/11 issue.
thanks again,
Ted"
That is really an awesome letter eh? I love my letters.
I got a quick reply:
"NOTE! THIS EMAIL WILL NOT BE READ, PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE.
Professor Margulis does not respond to unsolicited email. She may be contacted via phone: 413-545-3244 (Lab) or 413-545-6602 (Celeste, Margulis Lab Administrator).
Or send mail to:
University of Massachusetts
Department of Geosciences
233 Morrill Science Center
611 North Pleasant Street
Amherst, MA 01003-9297"
I'm too lazy to send an actual letter, but perhaps she will get this through the cam-thought net, you know that mutha has to be included! Nowadays if you have a message for somebody you just lean out your window and yell "hey yo!" and then procede with your message, or more easily just simply think it, and if they are included they will probably get it.
09/13/07
Can you imagine the religious majority passing a new blasphomy law simply by labeling criticism of religion as "hate speech"? Something like that was attempted in NY State but didn't pass. I remember because it was just after a public access channel in Manhattan had aired some of my "Get Real" shows. Criticism of ideas, whether they are religious, or scientific is the basis of progress, and I think punishing people for nonviolent criticisms and speech is a path to extinction or certainly to a very backward society.
In losing this weight, one thing I have learned is that, for me, and probably most other people, the key isn't some trick, special drink, or whatever, it's basically just the quantity of food going in. Once a person controls that variable, losing weight is easy. I'm amazed that I can drink as much as I want and still lose weight. I find that a surprisingly small amount of food can fill me up, in particular drinking coffee and juices after. I hope this advice helps other people out there. Most people are overweight, but I would hate to think that there are underweight people who think they need to lose weight. I'm not sure what weight I am going to settle on, I think I still want to leave some nice muscle and not go for a lanky look. It's wild because I will weigh myself before I go to sleep and my weight is usually about 5 pounds more than in the morning, and then in the morning I weigh myself, and I will have lost the 5 pounds somehow, it must all be through piff, that's my conclusion, it's bizarre.
09/14/07
On the veggie tuna scene:
Mother's won't buy the veggie tuna from Amida and only sell me 2 of the 8 packages that come in a case (for $88). If other vegetarians want to get together and can buy the other packages, we could all chip in to get a case, otherwise I think I am going to have to wait until I live in a place large enough to buy a freezer.
My weight this morning: 252lbs. In August I averaged 1 pound lost per day (31lbs in August), but from 09/14 the average has lowered to .75lbs a day. So far I have lost 48 pounds. I think 250 is like the half-way point on the way to 200 from 300lbs. At this rate I should be at 200 by mid November. At first I thought I was going .5lbs/day, but it's amazing that a person can consistently lose an average of .75lbs a day. In some ways that can be used as a guide (although I might use the .5lb/day as an average guide) to figuring out how long it would take an average person to go from some weight to another using this diet of strictly two very small meals a day plus all the liquids a person wants (plus running 1 mile on a treadmill, 30 situps, 20 bench presses, 3 times a week).
More people to add to the 9/11 sell-out list:
Danny Bonaduce and Mother Jones:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2007/300307executerosie.htm
http://www.motherjones.com/news/featurex/2007/09/homeland-insecurity-myths-and-facts.html
Bonaduce even goes so far as to advocate violence against a celebrity. I said before that I think some aspect of those who advocate violence against popular nonviolent people are antidemocracy to the point of violent fascism/monarchy. Advocating violence against murderers is probably fair, but advocating violence against nonviolent people might be interpretted as illegal if you believe in conpiracy to commit murder. It's amazing to think that Rupert Murdoch and the other owners of Fox will be shown by history to have actively supported the 9/11 murders and subsequent coverup, and some of the most active supporters of protecting those murderers. It's shocking that a wealthy person would involve themselves with murder, clearly they have a barbaric view of society to support murder of innocent people. Any person who advocates violence against innocent people is a total scum. Check the photo of Bonaduce with the nasty sour snarl. People who do violence against nonviolent people should be locked in jail, and those who advocate violence against nonviolent people should be viewed as heading there, and completely not supported. They should be sent to the back of the free bread and room line, because we as a society should not want to support violence against nonviolent people or those who advocate that kind of violent crime. It doesn't take a genius to figure that out. It's kind of funny that, what these 9/11 killers did was wave a few hundred thousand around to see what kind of celebrities they could get to sell out, and Bonaduce was the best they could do. Wikipedia reports that Bonaduce said that "Jane Fonda should have been shot for treason", so it shows the Nazistic, fascist, violent criminal nature of Bonaduce. In 1991, he was arrested for beating up Darius Barney, a transvestite hooker. It's amazing to me that such a chaotic violent asshole is funded by nonviolent people. There are those who do violence against nonviolent people, and they are scum and need to be punished, next there are those that threaten to do violence or advocate violence against nonviolent people, and those people are scum, while I don't think they should be jailed, they certainly shouldn't be promoted or supported in any way.
One insider reported that Mother Jones took 3 something, which must be $3 million probably, for this purposely false story, a thousand per murder...but that's just from 9/11, the number of people that have been murdered as a result of the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq is in the hundreds of thousands. I hope Mother Jones subscribers and readers unsubscribe and stop reading them. I stopped reading Mother Jones years ago. Most media is pure crap because of the cam-thought net. They aren't going to talk about seeing, hearing or sending images and sounds directly to brains, so who gives a shit about them?
Somebody should make some clear lists of those exposing 9/11 as an inside job, and those who have sold out for the 9/11 lie.
If I were the programmer of the laser defense system, I think the inevitable design is a "tit-for-tat" design, run completely by machine, so that any person who does a first strike assault, there is instantly an equivalent response that does not require any human. It's the nature of computer controlled weapons. It should be a system where a person who does first strike violence, instantaneously receives the same quantity of violence back onto their body, so in one sense, it is as if they are assaulting themselves anytime they attempt to do a first strike assault of a nonviolent person. This sytem probably already evolved years ago, it's a natural and probably the most logical defense system. You don't want it to depend on humans, because in the event that many humans are killed in a microsecond, you want the computer to be smart enough to give a similar punishment reponse in a millisecond even without any human...a human would be too slow.
Think about the idiots who assault us with lasers and nasty thoughts all day, of course the same crap has to happen to them, so all they end up doing is making life miserable for everybody...but then, that is the definition of stupidity, and that is what they are, it's just shocking that the public tolerates it or doesn't do something about them.
One thing that is shocking is how little people care about murder...the public seems to be like....oh a killer on the loose? oh we can get them in a few months or a year or two...it's not important. We don't need to look into the details of murders in great detail. But a drug user or pornography oh no! The murderers people apparently don't care about...maybe 9/11 was an inside job...oh...I don't see any reason to pursue that line of questioning...as a result there are hundreds of thousands of murderers on the loose, and the public cares little to nothing about it. It's like sheep that don't recognize wolves...but are obsessed with punishing off-color other sheep...it's really a bizarre phenomenon.
09/06/07
I don't look for constant verbal warfare with people around me, but they always have put-downs for me...and many must be paid for (how greeedy!)...I don't think like that. I'm busy thinking about my cello, or ULSF, or ... the ladies...I'm not looking to go at it about psychology, or who is and isn't perverted, or religion, etc every minute of the day like these people are. It's always the same constant issues...I am a psycho, I am a pervert, I am gay...all this misinformation...they are easily duped by rumor, myth and traditions. It's amazing, I am the one representative of atheism in the workplace...for all the "this thing is cookuu! that I get, I am the only person who can possibly come up with the other side of "hey this thing's got a demon in it!...or this thing has found religion!...this thing is dodo!.."...etc I wage a one-human battle against a massive single-minded machine of millions of cabbage-headed mindless greedy rude people. And the shocking thing to me is...why do they come after me? Look around...there are the 9/11 killers, the kennedy killers, the old lady neuron killers...so many evil people...liars....assaulters....why single me out? Who did I kill? I'm not even rude. I'm polite to those who are polite to me. It's annoying to say the least, but also it's so stupid too...it's amazing that many people live their lives constantly angry at the people around them. I saw this when I was younger in the various jobs I had...just rude people...don't hire them!
I swear this is a typical example, this actually happened: a woman comes up to me and literaly says "is there a psycho in here?" I wish I had thought to say, "no just a dummo rudo, and a friendly harmless brainiac", but I'm not quick like that...I don't like to constantly engage in verbal combat...I generally am friendly to people...I don't hear their thoughts...but if I did I would have time to prepare for their rude paid-for put-downs. Many people in this society live for that...for some new rude put-down...and spend massive amounts of time thinking about the ultimate rude put-down, I don't, but increasingly I spend more time thinking about the "ultimate come-back" to low-brow common misperceptions, as exemplified in my many audio and video recordings....many with information, to my knowledge, never before discussed...for example...when have you ever heard "psycho" and "schitzo" compared with "dummo" and "violento"? I never have before me! Then many of these insiders stand over me like they are a master and I am a slave (or "serf")...always rude to one person...me...never the other insiders. As I have said before...it's like being a black person in the old south....an insider says something rude and there is no punishment (insiders are not even punished for homicide...I mean...it's shocking...they are lawless monsters that control the cam-thought pupin net)...but an outsider says the same exact, word-for-word thing...or equivalent...and holy shit...get ready to be punished. As I said, it's constantly this hoard of cloaked clanners teaming up against individuals such as me. It's so unfair and like a pack of wolves. In fact "pack" might be a nice word to think of when they are rude, because they are a pack of wild dogs, vicious and apathetic about mass murder for one thing. Who else has said "hey how about consensual-only health care?", to me it takes a smart mind to reduce a complex issue into a sentence. It takes a smart mind to build a one-step robot. To play guitar, to play drums, to play piano...it takes some use of the brain. I think it's maybe a jealousy thing, they can't build robots, they can't make videos, they can't play an instrument...and so those who can't do, criticize those who can. Maybe they would accomplish as much if they didn't spend hours in church, paying homage to a guy like Jesus who did nothing praiseworthy, and praying to gods that don't exist. It's so true as the saying goes...everybody is atheist...to some religion....christians are atheists of paganism and hinduism...hindus are atheists of christianity...a person might think by now that people would have learned history, learned about the history of dieties, and religions, but not this group! Religions now, have less to do with philosophy, and almost everything to do with conforming to popular tradition. A person wears a cross only to fit in, only to look appropriate, only to be popular...like a neck tie...like not having any tatoos, etc.
How about the shitheads that make us itch and zap us. I have been thinking more about these people, and I think they fit into this catagory: they are scummy so-anything-for-money people generally speaking. They are like those people, probably in Vegas (like the poor people who shock insiders by playing Russian roulette for large money...it's totally gross), or like in the movies jack-ass that do stupid and evil things strictly for money, just low-brow greedy scumbags. But how about the evil bastards that fund them? What a bunch of scum too. In particular the Russian roulette for big money metaphor is apt, because when they zap people, everybody that sees them knows that they are a greedy low-brow scum, and so their value instantly goes down. It's like they trade whatever may have been their honor for money, and the result is that their future job possibilities are in doubt, because once everybody sees what assholes they were and how they bothered and misdirected millions of people for money, nobody will hire them, and they will be universally hated. as they probably already are among insiders. The pawns, or cogs that do the itching, and the idiots who pay them...both just total stupid scum. Why don't the people of earth get smart and do something about them? When are they going to? It seems inevitable but when?
I would like to work with people to try and get a "RIGHT TO QUIT THE ARMY" advertising and lobbying campaign going. It's a violation of the labor laws to not be able quit a job without punishment. People can quit Walmart and Sears withuot arrest or fine, why can't they quit the US military without punishment? This is an outrage. Let's work together to get this to the public's and their representatives' attention. Let's hope that someday the public can represent themselves and their votes will count.
We should cherish what little democracy we do have, because we very well could lose the little democratic power, we as a public do have (the right to vote on a President every 4 years, the right to vote on State ballot measures, etc). It seems clear that the trend is for the people getting more say over what their employees in the government do, but that is by no means guaranteed, and we could lose what little democracy we have, in particular if people keep voting for dishonest, violent, power hungry, uneducated people.
More jail sentence ideas for camthought netters:
annoying nonviolent images/sounds=1 day
violent images/sounds=3 days
make you physically move to scratch or gesture=3 days
moved muscle, no possible damage=1 day
moved muscle, potential pain, but no pain resulted=2 days
moved muscle, resulted in pain, 5 days
activated pain in brain somewhere in body=5 days/second
In addition, I would definitely support a multiplier or additive time for repeat offenders, perhaps .1 to 1*SENTENCE*Number of offenses.
I saw a good video on South America and the vicious US Republican fascist murdering of innocent people there by John Pilger: The War on Democracy
Although there are a few segments that are like music videos, which are kind of propagandish, much of the video is fair and balanced (anti-democratic people are shown in large numbers). Imagine a television station called XOF where the exact opposite views of the extremist republican fascist Fox news are expressed...all about Sturgis, Cesar, exposing 9/11 as an inside job...where is such a television station? Wouldn't fairness and equality suggest that such a station should exist? In the absence of a XOF, or SBC, CBA, CBN, SBP, NNC, simet kroy wen, or simet A.L., the one-side is getting away with murders of millions of innocent lawful people, and the public is not being shown or told. People may think what I am saying is not true, but I feel confident that history will show that what I am saying is accurate. How else could Frank Sturgis, Thane Cesar, the 9/11 killers go free? When the evidence against them is so clear and openly obvious? How can it be? Only with 5 powerful mouthpieces all in unison beaming into houses and heads, a single message, without any other opposite side being shown.
As of this morning I now weigh 256lbs. That means I have lost 44 pounds. But I am not done yet, as I plan to go all the way to 200 and maybe bejond.
Get familiar with the a/s (antisexuality) and the a/p (antipleasure). That's a big diverter from stopping violence. I feel kind of like a q/a machine of the future. For some reason, I have been given the job of dispelling many mistaken popular views of this century. It's like you ask the computer a question and it tells you the answer using knowledge from the future. I think people in the future will see clearly how people of this time were wrong on caring nothing about stopping violence, were wrong about being so antisexual to such a shocking extreme, were wrong about religions being good, were wrong about being against science, were wrong about privacy/secrecy controls on free info, were wrong about jailing drug users and those participating in prostitution, were wrong about oswald being the killer of JFK, wrong about sirhan sirhan killing RFK, wrong about 13 hijackers doing 9/11, wrong about the big bang expanding universe, wrong about the massless photon, wrong in their belief that people could not see, hear, send thought or move muscles remotely using photons...etc people in the future will easily see that people in this time were wrong on many many issues. And I feel like I am one of the few people trying to change those mistaken beliefs. Whether I want to or don'ot, those answers are the answers I give, even though it lowers my popularity, it angers many people, it is not always pleasant to say, etc.
In an Entertainment magazine Jodie Foster commented that she "thanked God", and to me it's almost like seeing a photo and some text from a person who has surrendered to the Inquisitors...and yer like 'Jodie...what appened?' and they're like 'God is great Ted...I've just found the light of the god...god is in this pop corn and all things...", and so on...You want to say like "what the hades happened to you? What did those monsters do to you?!....". "...Jesus is our savior...and Jesus died fer you...and I found Jesus...and Jesususszzzzz...." and on and on... it's the same in other religions but it's "...and Muhummed, praise be his name...has saved me...yada..." It's like when a person becomes an insider, they turn into these clones who all respond: "I don't hear your thoughts!" (that's a direct quote from my brother, and any of the few people I've accused) and always... "what are you talking about? that's crazy! I'm going to now call the central authorities on you." Like the moonie cult members who praise the rev moon's works whatever those might be. It's like the cabbage-head analogy of SCTV, or like the people from the ship in The Black Hole when Anthony Perkins pulls off the fencing mask on the ship crewmember. Whenever people say "god" my mind automatically thinks "but which one?", and I think the answer many times is "it don't matter which one...the one that get the money, the one that everybody else has, that's which one foo". Dawkins is an example of a person who is atheist and still popular. I don't see many movies, they are all not interesting to me. "Contact" was a relativly good movie (although the idea of space-time wormholes is doubtful in my opinion, but can't be ruled out). I definitely am grateful for Foster's playing an atheist in that movie. Katherine Hepburn publicly admited she was atheist. I don't see why smart people don't make good movies, about going to other stars, about the history of science, of religious persecution, ... all there is, are stupid movies. There aren't many good movies made in this century. They are all so tame and wimpy, not at all like the web videos that expose 9/11, or John Hankey's JFK II, which tells the truth about Bush Senior's role in the JFK murder, or my latest movie "Seeing, Hearing and Sending Thought" which are more interesting and honest. Fiction to me has become uninteresting and a time waster, time is so precious, why waste it watching stuff that never happened? There is so much shocking secret video of stuff that did happen, not even to include all the shocking stories of history that are true. I would like to see some wealthy intellectuals help me to make a movie called "Science", now that is a good story, or "Democracy of Earth", again something that predicts the future of full democracy, something interesting, that goes beyond a relationship story just set on earth. As I have said before, my main criteria for seeing a movie is: "is it set only on planet earth?" if yes, than I probably don't want to see it. Then the movies are all dull, no nudity, but then graphic and gross violence...I'm for full free info, but it's stupid to watch some fake violence...just watching the videos of actual violence that did happen in the past is gross enough, although necessary to identify and jail the violent. The public has to understand that, most people are now watching people in their houses and their thoughts...there is an entirely new and different media...screens and monitors might be completely replaced by this technology of people just getting images beamed directly onto their head. Sadly, the phasing in of this technology is taking decades...and why? There probably are many reasons. But one certainly is, because an evil greedy group is hording it, because of the immense power it provides them, in addition because the archived images reveal all their crimes, and the less people that see them the less chance of them being punished is. Maybe Foster just is saying that she thanked gods in the past?
I have a scoop on vegetarian tuna salad. I had to werk me arse off to figure this out. But there is a tuna salad, and in my opinion this tastes better than tuno. The only problem is that it costs $88.44/case for an 8 3.3lb package case. Potentially Mothers may be willing to order a case, they were kind enough to special order a case of tuno for me. I don't know what product it is, but it's important to distinguish between tuna "fillet" or "steak" and tuna "salad". That took a few minutes to figure out, because generally these products come from asian nations and the people have limited experience with english, but all are in the cam-thought net so that can help. I don't know the name of the product but it is:
a vegefarm product (they also use yellow and green colors on the packaging like vegeking) vegefarm.com.tw item #B073 at Amida Foods
http://www.vegeking.com/shop100/ShowCategory.asp-category_id=5.htm
potentially this is it here:
http://www.vegefarm.com.tw/vgtw/index.php?option=com_jportfolio&cat=7&project=67&Itemid=26
There are vegetarian fast food restaurants as alternatives to BK, McD, Wendys, etc. believe it or not. A friend recommends this vegetarian place in Pasadena: http://www.oreanshealthexpress.com/default.asp
It's too far to go but if I am in LA I will try it out. She likes the Pastrami and root beer float (non-dairy). Her friend likes the fish sandwich. The prices look awesome, if I lived in Pasadena, I would be there once a month! THere is http://www.fattyscafe.com/ too around the same Pasadena area. There is a new place in LA "SOUL VEGETARIAN" at 4067 W. Pico Blvd. (2 Blocks East of Crenshaw), even though there is no soul (nor only 4 fluids, 4 elements, or phlogiston, etc), "soul food" has become part of common language.
The Osama bin Laden tape, I think what this is may be that the US military and CIA works closely with Bin Ladin (aka "Tim Osmond"), and so basically produced this video. Since 9/11 was an inside job, that is obvious, an outsider can only conclude that Ladin is like an actor for the big military conservatives, Ladin will be playing the uncatchable villian in their made-up story that they are trying to sell to the outsider public. That sounds like the most likely explanation. But only the future will reveal to all outsiders the truth about this video, the specifics of the WTC wiring, etc. Potentially, these script writers could have Ladin captured, and create a new super-villian, but who knows, only the insiders know and they aint tellin! The latimes.com has a funny view in that bin ladin's beard is dark black in the video, but gray in others...you have to wonder where the tape comes from. With the cam-thought network there shouldn't be much mystery. Maybe the CIA got Ladin to use some dye or just photoshopped it in?
I am adding audio later to these opinions, so check out below if you missed some audio I added later!
08/22/07
I think people have been narrowing in on some basic standard prison sentences for the laser people:
1) making muscles (eye, finger, etc) twitch: 1 day/second + repeat offender multiplier
2) causes human to itch or scratch: 2 days/second + repeat offender multiplier
3) causes pain but no damage in human: 3 days/second + repeat offender multiplier
Generally speaking, again, I think there is some value in the idea that a person should be jailed for as much time as it takes for the damage they purposely caused to heal or be repaired, and all repairs should be done at their expense.
Here is a summary of my 3 latest simulations of light particles:
(Color change = photon was reflected)
1) Corpuscular model of single-slit diffraction
Larger gif
2) Corpuscular model of single-grating diffraction
Larger gif
3) Corpuscular model of light polarization
Larger gif
I am showing "Loose Change" 2nd Edition on my cable access show in 30 minute segments, and this segment ends with how the FBI confiscated all the 9/11 videos. Somebody pointed out that the FBI is more like the FIB. Hopefully, as time continues we can clean up the system, more democracy, more free info, less secrets, more focus on stopping violence and less on nonviolent activity, that seems obvious to me.
Here is kind of a funny way of lloking at light, instead of wavelength it might be called a light ray or beam's "corpuscular interval", that is the interval between light corpuscles moving in the same direction.
08/23/07
I got an email back from a representative of Kelloggs about Tuno being discontinued:
"At this time, there are no plans to reintroduce this product and we have no plans on releasing another tuna substitute."
Damn foo, put out some mo tuna substitute, what the matter with you! That tuno was fine boi! Still, the veggie frozen food market is expanding in a way that the universe is not. I'm amazed at the constant new stream of products that arrive on mainly Mother's shelves, but now even in the main-stream supermercados.
I think the phone company records many if not all phone calls, because people don't realize that the phone company owns all the massive miles of wires that connect all the houses. It's like...the wires all connect right through their buildings...but they are not going to record the info on them? I have a lot of doubt.
This is kind of an interesting thing about photon collisions, if they happen, and if this is true, I don't know, but it seems like, when two photons collide, if it is a perfectly elastic collision, no loss of matter or velocity, then it really is like no collision, because they exchange velocities, and although they change direction, it is as if they haven't because 2 photons (although exchanged) are still moving in the same original direction. But for a three or more photon collision, things are different. There, presumably, some photons might change their direction to a new direction.
In the polarization model, I think there is a very fundamental point revealed, and that is that, in an atomic lattice, there many be many beams of photons trapped in what is like a maze of reflection. No matter if wave or particle theory, this phenomenon still must happen, it seems. And I think that is a good explanation for why all objects emit low wavelength photons, because those are photons who have, after perhaps centuries of bouncing around inside the objects atomic lattice, finally found a surface exit. The more surface exists, the more freely photons can move in and out of an object. I'm surprised that I have never heard this basic explanation before.
I would like to see good triumph over evil, and I mean in the way that evil has triumphed over good in the last 5 decades, without any glimmer of any opposition, without evil gaining even a fractional victory.
Again, I define evil as mainly murder of nonviolent people and other higher species, violence such as assault (nonsexual or otherwise) against nonviolent people and higher order species, and beyond that, into the realm of evil, although not as serious being nonviolent evil, lies, secrets, theft of physical property (not copying of so-called intellectual property, although lying about the true origin of info is nonviolently evil), etc.
With that Mariah Carey song "you've got me feeling emotion", which is a pleasant song, and very popular. My question is about the next line that sez "higher than the heavens above". Now are we to believe that there is a heaven, and that it is above us? And if yes, the heaven is above us, is it then in the clouds as most of our ancestors thought before people realized that we might actually move above the clouds? It's a little ridiculous, the language that we echo from our ancestors, such as the idea that there is a heaven and that it is above us...extending the idea of above us...is the heaven within the Milky Way?...beyond Sirius and Procyon? I have a lot of doubts about these ancient notions. I think the best explanation believers in a Heaven (or Hell for that matter, which for many years was only Hades, not nearly as necessaily nasty as Christians would interpret the ancient myth of an Underworld where everybody except heros and gods went after death) can give is that, Heaven, which they firmly believe exists, is an immaterial thing, that does not exist in any location within the universe, but is part of a different universe, or some kind of nonmaterial location.
The LaTimes reported that the brother of Robin WIlliams died, and because of the movie "The Final Cut", I think people should be very suspicious of deaths of Williams' family members, or the family members of any people who have hinted about the SHAST secret (Seeing, Hearing and Sending Thought). I would not be surprised if Williams' brother was murdered by neuron activation beam, just like I'm fairly sure my Mom Sylvia and countless others were murdered. But of course, as an outsider, and no doubt even more than a few insiders, can only speculate, but I don't doubt that clear video evidence for or against has clearly been captured.
I was just remembering how the universe looked when I was much younger, how wonderful and peaceful the planet seemed before I knew that there are thousands of unseen criminal elite people violating our minds and bodies, making us itch, filling our minds with terrible images, with lasers every minute.
Again with the polarization similation video: polar12.avi
This is a simulation of how polarization might be happening if light is made of particles (corpuscular theory). Instead of in the wave interpretation where only beams of a certain orientation are passed, with the corpuscular interpretation, only beams of a certain direction are passed. Beams of corpuscles must be directed in an (i,j,k) direction of (0,Y,Z) where sqrt(Y^2+Z^2)=1, Y>0, Z>0. It is easy to understand how a similar second plane rotated 90 degrees would only stop beams with (X,0,Z), X>0, Z>0. Both together, only beams moving in the direction (0,0,1) would be passed. Hopefully I will be able to extend this into an easier to see 3D model. With each photon reflection, the color of the photon changes. Notice how some photons reflect around for a long time trapped in the atomic lattice. Maybe this is an explanation of how all objects emit photons in the lowest radio and infrared wavelengths. Some of them might be from photons that were absorbed years in the past, finally reaching a hole at the surface.
There is one classic debate/question: are beams of a certain wavelength separated in a prism, or grating, from a variety of photons, or from distinct rays of photons that entered before being separated? I think most people would believe that the beams separated by a prism or grating are still intact from before they entered, and are not composed of different photons. The consistency of the spectral lines for various atoms and molecules might be evidence to support this view. But I don't think the other view can be ruled out in my own mind, that rays are assembled from a variety of photons that may have originally been part of a different wavelength of light. The consistency of spectral lines might still be preserved because there are no photons in those intervals that reach the prism or grating. It's a confusing issue, and I think I mainly side on the idea that individual beams are held intact in prisms and gratings. This issue might be similar to the potentially unsolvable question of, are the photons reflected off objects the same photons that went in? Because the possibility always exists that the photons were exchanged with photons in protons, neutrons, electrons, in the atoms of the reflected object. I would side on the original photons being reflected, but still, we may never have visual proof of photon-photon interactions at the photon level.
I was wondering about the gravitational acceleration on the surface of the Sun. Here on the surface of Earth it is 10m/s^2. This is one of the interesting consequences of the massive speed of photons. If they are pieces of matter, which I believe they are, then only the strongest gravity, or the tiniest distance to another object would be able to change their velocity. Going 3e8 meters every second, an acceleration of something like 1e7 m/s^2, a million times more than that of earth would be needed to even slow a photon down noticably over time (although the Pound-Rebka experiment may be evidence that even tiny changes in photon velocity can be measured by discrete wavelength atomic photon absorption-atomcs that only strictly absorb specific wavelengths of photon beams). So the acceleration at the surface of the Sun is:
a=Gm/r^2 = (6.67428e-11 m3/kg-s2)*(1.9891e30kg)/(6.955e8m)^2= 1.327581e20/4.837e17
=274 m/s^2, 274m/s^2 still a tiny acceleration on a particle moving with a velocity of 3e8m/s. And the Sun is typical of the gravity in the universe a photon might see (although there are major questions about the microscaled universe). This is 20x the acceleration we feel on earth for those keeping score at home.
For Jupiter the acceleration at the surface is:
a=Gm/r^2=(6.67428e-11 m3/kg-s2)*(1.8986e27kg)/(7.1492e7m)^2=24.8 m/s^2
=24.8 m/s^2, a pittance, only twice that of earth.
I was thinking about the universe in the microscopic direction, and it is interesting, that, I think it might be safe to conclude that, at some point, at the atomic level, there is far more empty space than matter, and objects of matter would be few and far between, similar to the scale level of the galactic clusters in the universe. Zooming in, for example, past the scale of an electron microscope, would much of what we see by simply empty and black, mostly empty space with only islands of occasional particles? It's tough to know, but it seems clear that many objects with low density, have to be probably mostly empty space, even though they appear to be a solid object.
On the BIM SHAST tip, for those interested in building an array of resonant receiver pixels, an infrared eye-seeing camera, like Pupin's: If we are to believe that the wavelength in question is 10cm to 100cm as people's outstretched hands indicate, that would require a resonant receiver circuit (x1024 for a tiny array of 32x32) tuned to say 10cm, which is basically using the trusty formula c=fl 3e8/.1=3e9 a 3Ghz radio receiver pixel. for 20cm it is 1.5GHz...so basically we are talking about Ghz receiver pixels. 100cm=1m=300Mhz, so a tuned array of receivers that detect .3Ghz to 3Ghz signals might just be able to see what the eyes see from behind the head. This is just between microwaves and radio photon intervals (wavelengths). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Electromagnetic-Spectrum.png
The microwave photons, I think relate to heat, so that makes sense, but I would think seeing what the eyes see might be a smaller wavelength, closer to the infrared 1um to 1mm, still all the people indicate that it is around 10 to 30cm. Maybe it's a wavelength that neurons emit, like some strong spectral line emitted from molecules in neurons, such as photoreceptor molecules, or something. If a person does build a 32x32 grid of tuned 30 cm (1GHtz) receivers, I think it would form an interesting little picture, even if it fails to see the eyes, and then you would at least know that at 30cm the head appears to emit no photons. You could see what does emit photons with that wavelength, and maybe see some interesting things. I would probably use a lens to zoom a large image to the small 32x32 grid, but also try without the lens...see if the lens filters out any photons in that wavelength. Then report your findings to me and the public.
Imagine the humans, our descendents, that see the images sent back from ships with walking robot crews, as they pull within viewing distance of the planets of other stars. People would be, I think, very very interested and excited to see the first images of the planets of other nearby stars. Probably many of the newly seen planets will be lifeless, probably the majority, just orbiting around their star for billions of years, untouched by life. 4 billion earth years of just turning around a star, after the initial chaotic formation period. We can imagine that there are other secrets of the universe, other paths to create intelligent life, but perhaps the DNA-way is the only one, and maybe it's an inevitable path, or a less-likely path. My own view leans toward, DNA being the only, or certainly most common path to intelligent living objects, and then that this process is inevitable given a planet of enough size and temperature. There are interesting variations that must exist, certainly the earth is one example, our history is interesting because only after the rise of oxygen producing organisms did multicellular organisms evolve. Is this an inevitable path? There must be a variety of planet sizes and distances that produce liquid water, which seems to be the key for our form of DNA life, there are living objects that do not need oxygen, but all need and are made out of water. Then another very interesting aspect is that technology appears to happen very quickly...so that there must be two main kinds of life...those far away from a multistar system, and those already at a multistar system...our position is a very temporary one as we are quickly going to be moving to other stars within a few thousand years...we have already evolved the necessary changes after 4 billion years of little or no possibility of leaving the earth. So I think our descendents will find 1) mostly dead life-less planets 2) non-leave-their-planet-intelligent DNA living objects isolated to one planet and finally 3) multistar-intelligent DNA living objects. The change between single and multicellular is a significant one, as is no-nucleus cells to those with a nucleus. Are those inevitablely advantageous to survival on an earth-like planet? I don't think I can rule out other molecules substituting the plane of nucleotides...given billions of years, and knowing the complexity of living objects on earth, I think it is entirely possible that many variations on the DNA and RNA molecular theme can build intelligent living objects. By then, our descendents might very well be "ever-living", or simply "non-aging-to-death" through highly or maybe even entirely customized DNA. And they would be following the robots to the other stars...and time would not be a huge issue because they won't age. The journey to a different star, an accomplishment, we humans cannot yet claim, is a journey of a massive distance. I am sure that humans will be able to build ships that can travel that distance, and that will be an amazing achievement and momentous occasion for the quadrillions of humans that will exist by that time, still all stuck rotating around one lonely star. Humans will probably figure out what kind of mass to velocity ratio they can achieve, and that is going to form the limit on the time needed to make that very very large voyage. The method of propulsion will probably be the biggest limit. One concern will have to be matter in between stars. When a ship is moving very fast between stars, there can easily be a massive ice chunk that could collide with the ship. Perhaps photon lasers would extend in all directions, or simply be activated by radar signals to separate any objects with collision paths. Still, it would have to seriously break up the matter and very quickly. I think it's definitely possible, because the speed of photons is probably going to be much much faster than the speed of any ship our descendents make.
08/24/07
With my weight loss story: I'm now at 268, and am holding at about .5 pound a day. In the morning is when I weigh the least. So I have lost 32 pounds, and I still need to lose a lot more. I am basically going with a program of strictly 2 small meals a day, a lunch and a dinner, and absolutely no food snacks, but plenty of juice and liquid snacks. I've found some exotic juices that will stop feelings of hunger and sweetness, without having any food snacks. Trader Joe's makes some nice juices, it's rare to find, for example, carrot juice which is delicious. For lunch sometimes I only have a small popcorn and that is enough, but lately, I've had the Amy's veggie pot pies which are delicious too. A dinner will typically be 3 or 4 small items. One entry such as a veggie burger, veggie fish, or veggie steak, and 2 or 3 tiny vegetable sides (generally broccali, beans, salad, bread, potatoes, etc). I thin potentially I could even go for a smaller dinner, but I am satisfied to be consistently loseing a pound every two days. If for some reason that stops, then I will need to figure out some other plan.
I was looking at a diffraction grating and noticed that the second and other orders must occur over the areas on the grating that they appear, because when I cover up the order 0 part (the image of the light), the other orders are still visible. It occured to me that light must come diagonally from the central light and reflect at an angle. If the reflection was once, it should come back to a point exactly the same distance the light is from the grating, but on the opposite side, but reflected twice would reflect in the outside direction, while reflected 3 times would be towards the middle, etc. So with that in mind, I looked at a new model with many vertical diffraction lines. grating_multi8.avi and grating_multi9.avi. In this video you can see the pink 1st order, blue second order, and green 3rd order. This is what I had thought, that once-reflected beams come back to the point of the light source but on the opposite side. The difference with a diffraction grating is that, some how, for whatever unknown reason to me, those beams do not go back and reform the white light, but instead are spread out, short of the angle that would go back to the light point. Maybe they are refleted more than once, clearly, their photon interval affects the angle they are reflected at. I think I really need to explore the wave theory. I have a tough time believing that photons can cancel each other out. It's interesting that only very slanted beams of light are going to reflect. I have a feeling that there is some simple corpuscular explanation for why photons separate into beams of different intervals, and maybe it will seem logical and mesh with a wave theory of light. Maybe because of the different angle of the reflected light, a viewer looking in the Z direction, sees a different wavelength of light. One inaccurate theory, is that a 10nm wavelength at a 45 degree angle might look like a 7nm wavelength because for a horizontal detector cell, a photon is not spaced every 10nm but is spaced every 7nm, in arriving from a different angle. If that were true, then a laser would appear to be different colors from different angles which is not observed. One way to look at that is that the portion of the velocity that is vertical to the viewer is slower and so photons arrive with the same wavelength from every angle. Still, maybe I am wrong and there is some thing like that, the change in direction causes a change in perceived wavelength for a horizontal viewer. I have a feeling that there may be some simply explanation, but as I typed before, the answer might be related to complex atom-photon interactions, such as an atom holding a photon temporarily until another photon arrives. If this second case is true, I think a corpuscular interpretation might be a tough sell. Hopefully a simple and logical explanation will be made public. I think all the light intensity would add up if people could measure it and sum it all up, in other words I doubt any light is canceled out.
08/14/07
Watch out for the neocons to do another reichstag fire event. It would be early in my estimates, but maybe not.
08/15/07
I added the same reflection phenomenon, but for a diffraction grating. Here the orders start with n=0 are once reflected, n=1 is twice reflected photons, n=2 thrice reflected, etc. And of course, the same phenomenon is observed. grating07.avi and grating06.avi.
There still remains the question of, why do different wavelengths of light reflect at different angles? What does wavelength have to do with the angle that the photons reflect at? And I honestly, don't know right now, but I have some ideas. I think this question will reveal a great truth about the nature of prisms, diffraction gratings, and the classic Grimaldi experiment, but the question is when is that going to be revealed or answered? And how is it going to be answered? Quite possibly the insiders in the PUpin net have already figured this out long ago, I mean, here, these people who can make us itch our face or feel pain in our toe...certainly they have learned a thing or two about photons. I think that there is definitely a relationship between the way light separates by wavelength with a prism and a grating. Clearly, the index of refraction changes depending on the wavelength of light to account for this separation in a prism, or else the white light would simply pass through unseparated. People, in my experience, have not explained that refraction alone is not enough to account for the separation of light by wavelength in a prism...there is something else happening that accounts for the spreading out of light by wavelength, and so it must be with the grating phenomenon. I think this may be photons colliding off each other (which may explain different directions...shorter wavelengths having less time between collisions and therefore taking a smaller angle), or that atoms hold on to photons for different lengths of time depending on the wavelength of the beam of photons colliding with the atom.
One thing that seems clear is that science advanced tremendously in the 1900s, but those advances were kept from the public. The big problem was communicating those scientific advances to the public, and so the public is living with an 1800s conception of science and technology...it was never updated
For me on the issue of the drug war, it all comes down to one question: "are you going to jail people when they are caught with drugs?". For me, the answer is no. The issue isn't "Are drugs bad?", it's what do you do with them if they do, and prison is not the answer and is far too harsh for a crime that somebody does to themselves that doesn't hurt anybody else. It's similar to being overweight. The issue isn't "Is being overweight bad?", the issue is "Are you going to jail those people who are caught being overweight?". And, again, since being overweight is a person only hurting themselves, without hurting other people, I think prison or any punishment at all is far too harsh. The best we can do is try to inform people with good accurate and honest information to make good choices for themselves about what they should do to their own body.
08/16/07
The similarities to the rise of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party in the 1930s and the rise of the Bush jr administration are really very shocking. First they both have a fake-terrorist act (Hitler: reichstag fire, Bush: 9/11) which is then used to invade a nation starting a war (Hitler: Poland, Bush: Afghanistan), this war is then extended into a neighboring nation (Hitler: Denmark, Norway Bush: Iraq, potentially Iran), and both leaders are mysteriously characterized as very conservative, supporters of a big government military, nationalistic, and devout Christians. Hatred of homosexuality are characteristic. Antisemitism plays a large role in their philosophy (Hitler: Jewish people, Bush: Arab people). The similarities are very identifiable, and I think the reason is that, they both basically are practicing the same philosophy and the same exact technique. There is one major reason for hope, however, because, where Adolf Hitler maintained high popularity and ended the possibility of being unelected, Bush jr has very low popularity and has not ended the possibility of his being unelected, and so there is a glimmer of light, although bleak, that we can stop this second Adolf Hitler and second revival of the so-typically patterned Nazi philosophy.
When we look at history, what can be seen, I think the public, in particular liberals need to wake up to, they need to wake up and smell the cordite, as I have said. It is pretty simple. Look at the people who have been murdered: JFK, MLK, RFK, the many civil rights leaders, John Lennon, Paul Wellstone, Ghandi, etc...so many people...they are all democratically popular intellectual nonviolent leaders, democrats, generally speaking, and who possibly could be murdering them? Who could be allowing those murders to happen in a society where not one thought goes unseen? Who could it be? It can only be the Republicans. It is so obvious. Who is never murdered? The Republicans. Who is always murdered? The Democrats. People need to figure it out already. We might as well change the party names to "Murderers" and "Murder Victims". The two sides now are shockingly simple, those who murder and get away with it, and those who try to expose and stop them. The problem, I think, is that working to expose and jail a murderer of some intellectual leader is unpleasant for the liberals. They have not done a good job of exposing and jailing the murderers of intellectual popular leaders. Frank Sturgis was never caught, it looks clear that Thane Cesar is not going to be caught, the many people involved in 9/11 have not been identified and jailed, the many millions of killers protected behind the Iron Pupin curtain, have not been exposed nor punished...it is tough for the public to punish somebody they cannot see, or to prove that somebody murdered a person (for example like my MOm) without any photographic way of capturing these beams, and then how is a person supposed to know who sent the invisible beam to begin with? But it is really a disservice to those murder victims to forget them, to not pursue justice for their memory, for all they stood for, for their lives. We shouldn't feel any embarrassment or unpleasantness when working to expose, capture and jail the murderers of nonviolent people, and this is something that clearly has to change, we can't keep letting these murderers go unpunished and unseen forever. It seems like a game of musical chairs, because when the music stops, when the public does get to see all the archived thought images, those insider murderers still alive will probably all go to jail, and then probably for life, and I think they may be aware of that. It's only because the music continues to play, that they can continue to murder without ever being seen or punished.
One thing that is terrible is that, not one outsider has figured it out or believes me enough to even send so much as an email saying that they think they might be excluded, that people can see them in their houses, and hear their thoughts, that my video explained a lot of it to them, how they want to talk about it more. It's amazing, I don't think there has ever been a case where the public was more absolutely clueless without the tiniest particle of an idea of the evolution of seeing, hearing and sending thought. It does not even enter the realm of possibility in people's minds I think. Even for me it took years to finally fully accept. I don't doubt for a second that there may be people out there who try to contact me, but the people in control can easily stop an email, or phone call, it can probably be done with a simple program that simply rejects all phone calls and emails to a person, but hopefully not, I wouldn't be surprised though, because after all, they have kept seeing, hearing and sending thought secret for 100 years, that is not exactly an unorganized effort, and murdered millions of innocent people, if they've murdered millions, what is blocking a few emails, phone calls or letters?
08/17/07
One thing that those in control of the beam technology do that pisses me, and no doubt many people off, is that they will beam the image of the face of a friendly person, somebody basically on the same side as me, and then beam a bunch of negative crap, to try and start rifts. It's terrible. The best analogy I can think of is an old "Little Rascals" movie where Alfalfa is reciting "half-a-leg half-a-leg" and after each verse he needs to hold up a shield to stop the onslaught of pellets from the audience. That is the way these beam idiots are. A person will try to be friendly and say something positive, then an onslaught of bad beams comes down from just the most evil a-holes to ever scar the earth, total criminals, who live unseen by the majority, but as soon as society truly embraces free information, their will be seen. Probably these "bad beams" are done on both sides, and it's a total nuisance, a person would think that, like making people itch, both sides would conclude that it is only wasting time and annoying yourself, the constant tit-for-tat, whenever they make somebody itch, somebody always has to return that itch, or bad beam, and so, you would think by now they would have realized that they are only bad beaming themselves and making themselves itch, but these are not incredibly bright people, after all they still follow and believe deeply in things like the Jesus cult. I, for one, am glad, that there are some people who have rejected the all-powerful cult of Jesus, just like there are people who always reject new "messiahs" like Koresh, Jim Jones, ... the list is large, and new cults are formed all the time. But I think the cult that formed around Jesus of Nazareth is the largest and longest-lived cult/religion around a single human in recorded history. Without doubt, there are some people that I deeply respect, Tom Edison, Marie Curie, Michael Faraday, many others, and no doubt those people's lives and message deserve to be honored, remembered and explained, but people like Jesus, who claim to know what a diety wants, seem to me not too special nor brainy, while special and brainy people should be celebrated and promoted.
I feel good I now weigh 272 lbs and so am getting close to having lost 30 lbs of juicy matter to the rest of the universe. I still look overweight and want to get to a healthy weight. Basically I have gratitated towards this general plan: 1 small lunch, 1 small dinner, and only liquids outside of that, no other food goes into my mouth beyond that, although if I
Larger gif
Larger gif
Larger gif