Newsgroup sci.physics 207635

Directory

Subject: Re: THE INDUSTRIAL RELIGION -- From: nwdma@nwlink.com (John)
Subject: Vietmath War: THE DEAD FINITE INTEGERS -- From: Archimedes.Plutonium@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium)
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation? -- From: fw7984@csc.albany.edu (WAPPLER FRANK)
Subject: Re: How Much Math? (Was: Re: How much to invest in such a writer?) -- From: meron@cars3.uchicago.edu
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...) -- From: lew@ihgp167e.ih.att.com (-Mammel,L.H.)
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...) -- From: dcs2e@darwin.clas.virginia.edu (David Swanson)
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...) -- From: dcs2e@darwin.clas.virginia.edu (David Swanson)
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...) -- From: cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter)
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...) -- From: lew@ihgp167e.ih.att.com (-Mammel,L.H.)
Subject: Re: How Much Math? (Was: Re: How much to invest in such a writer?) -- From: coolhand@Glue.umd.edu (Kevin Anthony Scaldeferri)
Subject: Re: Q about atoms... -- From: jac@ibms46.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
Subject: Re: freedom of privacy & thoughts -- From: caesar@copland.udel.edu (Johnny Chien-Min Yu)
Subject: Re: Our current education system (was Re: How Much Math? (not enough)) -- From: nanken@tiac.net (Ken MacIver)
Subject: Re: Ground -- From: Tommy E.
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation? -- From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Subject: Re: freedom of privacy & thoughts -- From: caesar@copland.udel.edu (Johnny Chien-Min Yu)
Subject: Re: Our current education system (was Re: How Much Math? (not enough)) -- From: coolhand@Glue.umd.edu (Kevin Anthony Scaldeferri)
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...) -- From: cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter)
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...) -- From: meron@cars3.uchicago.edu
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation? -- From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation? -- From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation? -- From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Subject: Re: David Hudson's monatomic element/white gold claims -- From: jac@ibms46.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation? -- From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation? -- From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation? -- From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Subject: Re: Hermeneutics and the difficulty to count to three... -- From: jac@ibms46.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
Subject: Re: How Much Math? (Was: Re: How much to invest in such a writer?) -- From: jac@ibms46.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)

Articles

Subject: Re: THE INDUSTRIAL RELIGION
From: nwdma@nwlink.com (John)
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 1996 19:12:38 -0800
In article <3284A9EA.290D@easynet.co.uk>, savage@easynet.co.uk wrote:
> Adam Ierymenko wrote:
> 
> > They shouldn't be persecuted, and don't need to be.  They are persecuted
> > because of anal-retentive politicians and snobs, which doensn't have
anything
> > to do with the so-called "system."
> 
> Except that they run it.
> 
> 
> 
> > >So, I've heard this line many times before, from the ignorant who
don't even
> > >know the first thing about the lives and hygeine of the people they are
> > >talking about. I hear it when families are being thrown off the land with
> > >nowhere else to go, while the pompous spouters of this fascist line
sit snug
> > >in their houses. Some people don't want to live as you do. But they are not
> > >allowed to live in any other way.
> > 
> > You aren't much better.  You want to force other people to live *your* way.
> > I want a society where nobody forces anyone else to live "their" way.  Of
> > course, that's probably just a pipe dream.
> 
> I dont want to _force anyone to _do_ anything. Where on earth did you get
this 
> from? I work against people who impose their will on me and on my freinds. 
> Critisise me as much as you want, but don't make fictional
representations of me 
> and then denounce them. You are just as bigoted as those people who think all 
> black people look the samre and are good dancers.
> 
> You are arguing with _me_ NOT the green movement, so don't lump your
possibly well 
> justified prejudices onto me.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> > >As things stand, I could not get up and walk out of the city and survive.
> > >this is because all the land "belongs" to someone. Some brave people do try
> > >to live like this. They are called travellers and sent to prison. The
reason
> > >they are travellers is that they aren't allowed to stay anywhere. Wherever
> > >they go the locals, in their smug suburban self - satisfaction, won't
> > >tolerate them and have the nerve to call them dirty, while their own sewage
> > >kills the rivers and their rubbish festers in giant landfills or burns in
> > >incinerators, poisoning the ground water and the air... But their
gardens are
> > >nice and tidy aren't they?
> > 
> > Nice bombastic rhetoric, eh?
> 
> True though. 
> 
> > >Their neat, anal-retentive backyards reflect their neurosis, that same
> > >neurosis that is destroying the very fabric of life we depend on. You
cannot
> > >tolerate anyone actually LIVING the way they talk, because then you
wouldn't
> > >be able to sneer "you're all talk" would you? You would be faced with the
> > >incontrovertible proof that people can live quite happily outside of your
> > >sick system whre dancing isn't allowed without a 'license'. Where fun
must be
> > >regulated and channeled into the greed system oyu and your ilk depend
on like
> > >vampires on blood.
> > 
> > Dancing is illegal?  (I live in the U.S... do you live in commie china or
> > something?)
> 
> Didn't say that... said without a licence... can't get licance unless you got 
> loadsamoney, and so on.
> 
> > I think your problem is that you see everything as a unit.  You see the fact
> > that dancing is illegal in whatever fascist hole you live in (the UK?) and
> > technology as being part of the same "system."
> > 
> > There is no need for 80% of the regulations we live under.
> 
> Glad you think so. I agree. I don't see everything as a unit, I see lots of 
> different things being used by the same people to keep things as they
are, when 
> what is needed is drastic change. I don't claim to know what the answer
is, just 
> want agreement
> Andy
> -- 
> http://www.hrc.wmin.ac.uk/campaigns/earthfirst.html
> South Downs EF!,  Prior House      
> 6, Tilbury Place, Brighton BN2 2GY,  UK
> "I can trace my family back to a protoplasmal primordial atomic globule. 
> Consequently, my family pride is something inconceivable."
>         - William Schwenck Gilbert, "The Mikado".
And WHY is this being cross-posted into alt.music.dance?  Looks like spam to me!
Return to Top
Subject: Vietmath War: THE DEAD FINITE INTEGERS
From: Archimedes.Plutonium@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium)
Date: 11 Nov 1996 01:44:39 GMT
THE WALKING DEAD  movie 1995
" Reverend:  A known but not an honored rest
        Symbol of all time shall not reap
      Not once the tart, in that torn breast
    But the myriad millions sleep
Hoover: That was gorgeous reverend, I didn't know you still had a good
prayer in you.
Rev: I don't.  That was a poem by County Colin.  Look at him, goddamed
he's just a kid.... You're cold Hoover. "
-----------
THE DEAD FINITE INTEGERS movie 1996
" Physicist: 
            A known and very honored test
            Numbers of all time shall harvest
              Not once the proof, 
              In that experiment
                But the myriad p-adics 
              In the Quantum Hall Effect
Mathematician: That was gorgeous experiment, but we don't have to
accept it if we don't want to.
Physicist: I know, because mathematicians are kids that never grow-up;
wearing thick glasses and talking about some ridiculous minutae while
the big important things all around them escape their attention. "
Return to Top
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation?
From: fw7984@csc.albany.edu (WAPPLER FRANK)
Date: 11 Nov 1996 01:33:23 GMT
Cees Roos wrote:
    >Viewing facts in the light of your theory is only feasible
    >if you view your theory in the light of the facts.
> Brian Jones wrote: 
> > However, as soon as you say this, SRT becomes untestable, and is no
> > longer scientific.
> On the contrary. Design an experiment which shows absolutes, and you
> have falsified SRT. That is Popper's 'Criterion of demarcation' for
> scientific theories.
There is (`obviously') the problem how to demonstrate absolutes at all,
let alone to `just claim' that an observation >>already made or anticipated<< 
and explained (by SR, or what's based on it: pretty much all physics - via
convergence `principle/proof') would ever prove anything but...
Any >>accidental discovery<< of a phenomenon (be it in some particular
experiment which sets up an `unuaual situation') may falsify a theory if the 
fact is `new' to the theory (one assumes of course that the theory and its 
predictions were `exhaustively checked' before it became established).
Those accidents are exceedingly rare (these days), although the `checking
procedure' still goes on, e.g. with LIGO, LEP, GravB, (...?).
The only other source of information is the theory itself (and the set of
actual and anticipated observations supporting it). In other words, one cannot
design a new theory `in vacuo' but has to explicitly identify and address 
>>observational paradoxa<< in the existing one.
BTW, I support not only to >>compare<< a theory with observations but to
>>base<< a theory on the fact that observations are made and compared (how?).
Hope this helps,                                           Frank  W ~@) R
Return to Top
Subject: Re: How Much Math? (Was: Re: How much to invest in such a writer?)
From: meron@cars3.uchicago.edu
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 02:34:22 GMT
In article <5661gr$q4u@panix2.panix.com>, +@+.+ (G*rd*n) writes:
>meron@cars3.uchicago.edu:
>| ... 
>| Besides, could you try to grasp the point that we're talking about 
>| classical physics versus modern physics not Newton versus Einstein as 
>| individuals.  You got so locked on the notion that it is a matter of 
>| personal reverence that you seem to have a great difficulty to see 
>| what the issues are.
>| ...
>
>What _the_ issues are?  Where, in the Empyrean, or God's
>mind?  My issues are my issues, and your issues are your
>issues, and hopefully there's some overlap; but I don't
>think there are any The-Issues here.
>
OK, good point.
>Anyway -- I'm very curious where you get that I've been
>talking about Newton or Einstein as individuals.  The
>historical individuals Newton and Einstein are, of course,
>parts of their respective institutions; but I don't recall
>talking about either of them very much that way.  The
>reverence I've observed, both on the Net and coming from Mr.
>Pope, is for the institution, I believe.
Well, it was my impression that did mention, more than once, the 
reverence (even "religious reverence") of scientists towards Newton.  
Of course I may be mistaken and I'm not in the mood right now to 
search for quotes on DejaNews.  So, if indeed what you've had in mind 
all the time was Newtonian physics, not Newton as person, I'm 
certainly willing to take your word for it.  Then we can start arguing 
how does one express one's reverence towards F = dp/dt.
Mati Meron			| "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu		|  chances are he is doing just the same"
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...)
From: lew@ihgp167e.ih.att.com (-Mammel,L.H.)
Date: 11 Nov 1996 02:06:35 GMT
In article <5646t1$6lt@news-central.tiac.net>,
Richard Harter  wrote:
>
>You have to remember that Mati is a plumber, er, experimentalist.  His
>focus is on the use of theory in the laboratory.  For this it suffices
>to have the equations, the barest formal theory, and some connection
>with them to their application in the specific experiment.  But
>physicists come in two sorts,  experimentalists and theorists. 
Well, you know what Feynman said ( paraphrasing from memory ):
A theorist is one who thinks and imagines about physics; an
experimentalist is one who does experiments and thinks and imagines.
Just more idle musing to be brushed aside, eh?
Lew Mammel, Jr.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...)
From: dcs2e@darwin.clas.virginia.edu (David Swanson)
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 02:28:16 GMT
In article 
meron@cars3.uchicago.edu writes:
> Sorry but since action at distance is not an explanation (I see 
> another semantics argument brewing) and since Newton specifically 
> stated that he offers no explanations,
Yawn.  No MECHANICAL explanations.
David
"When reading the works of an important thinker, look first for the
apparent absurdities in the text and ask yourself how a sensible person
could have written them.  When you find an answer, . . . when these
passages make sense, then you may find that more central passages,ones
you previously thought you understood, have changed their meaning."
Kuhn
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...)
From: dcs2e@darwin.clas.virginia.edu (David Swanson)
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 02:27:01 GMT
In article 
meron@cars3.uchicago.edu writes:
> Would I have the ability of hearing the music in my 
> mind just by reading the notes (Some people do, so it is not 
> impossible) then plying it wouldn't be necessery.
But playing it would.  Hearing it in your head is not the same thing.
David
"When reading the works of an important thinker, look first for the
apparent absurdities in the text and ask yourself how a sensible person
could have written them.  When you find an answer, . . . when these
passages make sense, then you may find that more central passages,ones
you previously thought you understood, have changed their meaning."
Kuhn
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...)
From: cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter)
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 02:54:37 GMT
lew@ihgp167e.ih.att.com (-Mammel,L.H.) wrote:
>In article <5646t1$6lt@news-central.tiac.net>,
>Richard Harter  wrote:
>>
>>You have to remember that Mati is a plumber, er, experimentalist.  His
>>focus is on the use of theory in the laboratory.  For this it suffices
>>to have the equations, the barest formal theory, and some connection
>>with them to their application in the specific experiment.  But
>>physicists come in two sorts,  experimentalists and theorists. 
>Well, you know what Feynman said ( paraphrasing from memory ):
>A theorist is one who thinks and imagines about physics; an
>experimentalist is one who does experiments and thinks and imagines.
Ah, yes, it is so.  A theorist thinks and imagines about physics.  An
experimentalist thinks he imagines and imagines he thinks.
[For the terminally bewildered the above is humor.  For the illiterate
terminally bewildered, :-)]. 
Richard Harter, cri@tiac.net, The Concord Research Institute
URL = http://www.tiac.net/users/cri, phone = 1-508-369-3911
Life is tough. The other day I was pulled over for doing trochee's
in an iambic pentameter zone and they revoked my poetic license.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...)
From: lew@ihgp167e.ih.att.com (-Mammel,L.H.)
Date: 11 Nov 1996 02:35:11 GMT
In article <561jii$4qu@news-central.tiac.net>,
Richard Harter  wrote:
>lew@ihgp167e.ih.att.com (-Mammel,L.H.) wrote:
>
>>In article <55vqa6$phh@news-central.tiac.net>,
>>Richard Harter  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>... whereas Mati has never had a thought in his life.
>>>
>>>
>>>Was this necessary?
>>>
>
>>Don't you get it? That's what he's claiming! He says we
>>should ignore the opinions of Newton, Einstein, Weyl, Born,
>>Mach, Maxwell, Minkowski, and whoever else you might
>>care to name, because these are all just "thoughts" and
>>"musings". He then LAYS DOWN THE LAW. Bah Dow! Bah Dow! Bah Dow!
>
>>Mati brooks no thought of "thoughts" or "musings". He is the
>>very caricature of the strait-jacketed scientific mind that
>>the fuzzy-headed lame-brained Derrida-besotted pomo ninnys are
>>trying to warn everybody about ... but pay no attention to them!
>>What do they know! They're all involved in "thoughts" and "musings".
>
>
>My apologies.  You had cleverly encapsulated a deliberate and
>malicious misreading of what the man said into a single, concise line;
>I quite missed the force of your enterprise.  You are to be commended,
>I suppose, for the precision of your malice.
>
Sir, I haven't an ounce of malice in my body. Perchance "there
are no readings, only misreadings." BTW, I'm sure you didn't
notice various little digs and slights that I myself have endured,
which I mention only by way of confessing to a certain amount
of felt resentement - "even a worm will turn", you know - but
never malice by a long shot.
Since you say my characterization is so off the mark,
let me cite a portion of an exchange concering the history of the
luminiferous ether concept, which I particularly had in mind:
----------------
Mati:
Actually, the aether got into physics as an attempt to solve the 
crisis brought up by the electromagnetic theory.
Me:
>Actually, no. It was the wave theory of light which required
>an ether, E&M; or not. Huygens discussed the ether and its properties
>before 1700. After 1800, many including Fresnel worked on it.
Mati:
Possible.  As I mentioned before, once you've a wave theory, within 
classical mechanics, it requires a medium since the wave speed is 
imbedded in the equation.
Mati, (one day later):
Definitely.  Just as a reminder (I hope you didn't waste your time 
following this thread) the above was a short piece in an argument 
about absolute frames in physics, when what I said was:
1)  Newtonian physics had no absolute frame.
2)  EM seemed, for a while, to suggest an absolute frame.
3)  SR returned matters to where Newton left them, i.e. no absolute 
frame.
---------------------------
There is the, "Bah Dow! Bah Dow! Bah Dow!", and perhaps I am
not so very remiss in thinking myself justified in perceiving
a certain rigidity of mind in evidence here. I seems to me that
having budged from his "E&M; introduced absolutism" doctrine just a
little, he snapped back to it like a double thick rubberband. THWAAAP!
And don't you love that "Possible." Possibly what? Fresnel existed?
Lew Mammel, Jr.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: How Much Math? (Was: Re: How much to invest in such a writer?)
From: coolhand@Glue.umd.edu (Kevin Anthony Scaldeferri)
Date: 10 Nov 1996 22:07:55 -0500
In article <56601u$nua@panix2.panix.com>, G*rd*n <+@+.+> wrote:
>g*rd*n:
>| >So I've been trying to
>| >get at what they mean by "understand" as a sort of subtopic
>| >within a discussion of the delegitimation.
>
>coolhand@Glue.umd.edu (Kevin Anthony Scaldeferri):
>| OK, I would claim that the scientific usage of the word
>| "understand" is in essence that you can make (correct) predictions about
>| phenomenon that you have not yet observed.  
>| 
>| Does that clarify things for you?  And do you still think that you can
>| understand (in the scientific sense) Netwonian mechanics without
>| Calculus?
>
>If I were discussing physics as just physics, I would of
>course use whatever tools were available, and I would expect
>others to do so as well.
Well, on sci.physics, we are primarily interested in discussing
physics as physics.  If you wish to discuss physics as philosophy or
sociology or croquet or whatever, feel free to do so, but at that
point it is no longr relevant on sci.physics.
>
>However, we're also talking about philosophy, theology,
>aesthetics, sociology, psychology, politics -- Newton's
>texts have many aspects.  Is Caculus required for all of
>them?  If so, can you say why?
In my view, "Newtonian mechanics" is a phrase which refers
specifically to topics in physics.  And Calculus is required for it.
However, you can feel free to discuss whatever aspects of Newton's
work you like.  I don't find much of interest outside his physics and
math since, while he was brilliant in those areas, he was a fairly
lousy philosopher/theologian (in my opinion).
Regardless, discussions of other aspects of his work do not belong in
this newsgroup.  (But that, I mean the newsgroup in which I am reading
it.  It may be on topic in some of the others.)
-- 
======================================================================
Kevin Scaldeferri				University of Maryland
"The trouble is, each of them is plausible without being instictive"
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Q about atoms...
From: jac@ibms46.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
Date: 11 Nov 1996 02:45:16 GMT
Richard Caldwell  writes:
} 
} Bear in mind that the diagram of the atom in your book bears very little 
} resemblance to reality.  
 That does depend on the book, but the planetary model has its 
 value in keeping track of simple bookkeeping issues like levels 
 and transitions.  I know my high school chemistry book from decades 
 ago had reasonable 'cloud' diagrams. 
}                          Nobody really knows what it looks like inside an 
} atom.  We have microscopes that will let us look at individual atoms, if they 
} are big ones, like gold or Uranium.  But, all we know about the internal 
channell@aries.scs.uiuc.edu (Glenn Channell) writes:
>
>	Actually, one of the standards used for Atomic Force MIcroscopy 
>(AFM) is mica, and with that you can get a "picture" of the oxygen atoms
>in the mica lattice.  Of course, this "picture" is simply a three-dimensional
>representation of the area over which the oxygen exerts a measurable force.
>It's not really a true picture of the atom itself.  However, we're getting
>there...
 In principle one should be able to do experiments to determine the 
 spatial and momentum distributions of the electrons in an atom using 
 methods similar to the ones we use to study the nucleon distribution 
 in a nucleus, although I don't know if atomic physics experiments have 
 the right resolution over the necessary range of momentum transfer 
 given the low energies involved. 
-- 
 James A. Carr        |  "The half of knowledge is knowing
    http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac/       |  where to find knowledge" - Anon. 
 Supercomputer Computations Res. Inst.  |  Motto over the entrance to Dodd 
 Florida State, Tallahassee FL 32306    |  Hall, former library at FSCW. 
Return to Top
Subject: Re: freedom of privacy & thoughts
From: caesar@copland.udel.edu (Johnny Chien-Min Yu)
Date: 10 Nov 1996 21:49:34 -0500
Current mind control operators are carrying out the social 
revolution to U.S. with the communism theroy
Since US learned about the mind control technologies from Red 
Russia after the Korean War, the U.S. has developed this type of
technology and invented more advanced EMR mind machine in
this field.
 After the Soviet Union collapsed, the US also bought a lot of mind
control equipments and patents from Russia in order to increase US
mind control capability (see detail information at below). 
(attachment)
======================================================
NEW WORLD ORDER E.L.F. PSYCHOTRONIC TYRANNY
By: C.B. Baker  YOUTH ACTION NEWSLETTER  ISSUED DECEMBER 1994
The 3\1\93 issue of Time Magazine reported: "American and 
Russians are discovering common interest...MIND CONTROL TECHNOLOGY. 
The Jan. 11-17, 1993 issue of DEFENSE NEWS reported that U.S. political
and military officials are obtaining Soviet mind-control technology.
The Soviet KGB "capability, demonstrated in a series of laboratory
experiments dating back to the mid-1970's, could be used to suppress
riots, CONTROL DISSIDENTS, demoralize or disable opposing forces and
enhance the performance of friendly special operations teams, sources
say."
"Pioneered by the government-funded Department of Psycho-Correction at
the Moscow Medical Academy, acoustic psycho-correction involves the
transmission of specific commands via static or white noise bands into
the human subconscious without upsetting other intellectual functions.
Experts said laboratory demonstrations have shown encouraging results
after exposure of less than one minute. Moreover, decades of KGB research
and investment of untold millions of rubles in the process has produced
THE ABILITY TO ALTER BEHAVIOR ON WILLING AND UNWILLING SUBJECTS, the
experts add."
One of the KGB's psychotronic systems was being sold for as little as $
80,000. A scientific analysis published by an affiliate of the
Department of Psycho-Correction at Moscow Medical Academy stated: "...It
has become possible to probe and correct psychic contents of human beings
DESPITE THEIR WILL AND CONSCIOUSNESS, by instrumental means...Results
having been achieved...can be used with inhumane purposes of manipulating
psyche."
Janet Morris of the Global Strategy Council, a Washington "think-tank"
tied to the CIA and Federal Government, "is a key U.S. liaison between
Russian and U.S. officials." Morris is a long time close associate of
Col. John B. Alexander, a leading U.S. expert on psychotronics.
               ELECTROMAGNETIC TOTALITARIAN CONTROL OVER AMERICA       
The 4\94 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN reported that Janet E. Morris and her
husband Christopher C. Morris "have been involved in promoting a
'psycho-correction' technology, developed by a Russian scientist, that is
INTENDED TO INFLUENCE BY MEANS OF SUBLIMINAL MESSAGES EMBEDDED IN SOUND
OR VISUAL IMAGES"(infrasound mind machine--Alan Yu note). 
In 1993, "the Morrises organized a meeting in which the technology was
demonstrated for U.S. scientists and officials by its Russian inventor."
Defense news reported that on Dec. 15, 1992, Janet Morris stated that she
and the Richmond, Virginia-based International Health-line Corporation
"have briefed senior U.S. intelligence and Army officials about the
Russian capabilities, which Morris said could include hand-held devices
for purposes of special operations, crowd control and anti-personal
actions" (infrasound weapon--Alan Yu note).
Morris reported that this particular weapon creates "BONE-CONDUCTING
SOUND WAVES that cannot be offset by protective gear These devices appear
to work at the Very Low Frequency (VLF) spectrum, the same frequency
range as generated by the sinister U.S. Gwen (Ground Wave Emergency
Network) system of transmitters.
DEFENSE ELECTRONICS reported that a Richmond, Virginia firm,
Psychotechnologies (believed to be closely tied to the CIA and the FBI)
has purchased the American rights to the Soviet mind-control devices.
DEFENSE ELECTRONICS described a spring, 1993 meeting between Clinton
Administration officials and Soviets psychotronics experts, including
Dr. Igor Smirnov. Amongst the U.S. agencies represented at the meetings
with Smirnov were the FBI, the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and
the Advance Research Projects Research Agency (ARPA). Clinton
Adiministration officials wanted "to determine whether
psycho-correction...programs COULD BE UNDERTAKEN BY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT.
These devices could be used to AFFECT JUDGMENT OR OPINION OF
DECISION-makers, KEY PERSONAL OR POPULACES."
Also meeting with the Soviet psychotronic experts, were officials from
the giant Trilateral-allied international corporations, such as General
Motors and researchers from the National Institute of Mental Health. 
The 8\22\94 NEWSWEEK MAGAZINE reported on a secret Arlington, Virginia
meeting between experts from the FBI's  Counter-Terrorism Center and Dr.
Smirnov, whose work was described in the publication: "...Using
electroencephalographs, Smirnov measures brain waves, then uses computers
to CREATE A MAP OF THE SUBCONSCIOUS AND VARIOUS HUMAN IMPULSES, such as
anger or the sex drive. Then through taped SUBLIMINAL MESSAGES, he claims
to physically alter the landscape with the power of suggestion."
The 3\23\94 WASHINGTON POST reported: "The Pentagon and the Justice
Department have agreed to share state-of-the-art military technology with
civilian law enforcement agencies, including exotic 'non-lethal'
weapons."
The 4\94 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN reported: "Federal researchers 
are now investigating a broad array of non-lethal devices
including...LOW-FREQUENCY 'INFRASOUND' GENERATORS POWERFUL ENOUGH TO
TRIGGER NAUSEA OR DIARRHEA,...electronics-disrupting pulses of
electromagnetic radiation..and biological agents that can chew up crops."
In November, 1993, a three day top-secret non-lethal weapons conference 
took place in the Applied Physics Laboratory at Johns Hopkins University 
in Maryland. The meeting was attended by Attorney General Janet Reno, 
numerous scientist, military weapons experts, intelligence officials from 
state and local police departments. The main purposes of the meeting was 
to prepare leading law enforcement officials for the use of psychotronic
mind-control weapons.
Amongst the subjects covered at the conference were "RADIO-FREQUENCY
WEAPONS, HIGH POWERED MICROWAVE TECHNOLOGY, ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY" (used to
transmit subliminal voices into a victims head), VOICE SYNTHESIS, and
APPLICATION OF EXTREME FREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS TO NON-LETHAL
WEAPONS." Col. John B. Alexander, Program Manager for Non-Lethal
(psychotronic) Defense, Los Alamos National Laboratory, served as
conference chairman.
In 1989, FULL DISCLOSURE MAGAZINE published the article, "REMOTE MIND
CONTROL TECHNOLOGY." The magazine reported that Los Alamos National
Laboratory "prepared a report for Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) setting forth that use of microwave radiation on 'terrorist' could
kill them, stun them, or at least modify their behavior by changing their
perceptions."
NEXUS reported on the U.S. development of "High Powered Microwave (HPM)
Projectiles." The U.S. Government has already obtained "a portable
microwave weapon."
Several U.S. high tech laboratories, with the help of Soviet scientist,
are working on very low frequency (VLF) weapons. NEXUS reported that
these U.S. high labs, including Col. Alexander Los Alamos Laboratory,
are working on "developing high power, VERY LOW FREQUENCY acoustic beam
weapons. They are also looking into methods of projecting high frequency
acoustic bullets."
"Very Low Frequency (VLF) sound, or low-frequency radio-frequency 
modulation CAN CAUSE NAUSEA, VOMITING, AND ABDOMINAL PAINS. Some 
Very Low Frequency sound generators, in certain frequency ranges,
CAN CAUSE DISRUPTION OF HUMAN ORGANS, and at high power levels CAN
CRUMBLE MASONARY." 
NEWSWEEK described how these psychotronics non-lethal weapons will be
used: "The United States needs new options to control "rogue" 
governments and insurrectionaries without resorting to total war. 
New-wave military thinkers say that the list of exotic technologies that 
could be harnessed for non-lethal technologies is already large and 
growing. It includes lasers, MICROWAVES, SOUND WAVES, STROBE LIGHTS 
(already used for psychotronic entrainment during the Waco siege), 
ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSES and Microbes (GERM WARFARE)."
In March, 1993, the National Institute of Justice [NIJ]--(an office of
Janet Reno's Justice Department), issued a report titled: "NIJ Initiative
On Less-Than-Lethal Weapons." The Department is now encouraging local
and state police organizations to utilize Soviet-KGB psychotronic,
electromagnetic and mind control weapons against their local citizenry.
Targets for these KGB weapons include "domestic disturbances" meaning
that mind-control devices are even to be utilized against family
arguments.
The reports stated: "Short-term research will be completed TO ADOPT
MILITARY TECHNOLOGIES TO USE BY DOMESTIC LAW ENFORCEMENT...including
LASER, MICROWAVE, AND ELECTROMAGNETIC" WEAPONS.
======================================================== 
So today's mind control technologies of US is the most advanced in the
world. 
What is the real meanning of mind control?
We can simply say that it uses the scientific technologies (mind 
machine) to handle human thoughts and use the psychological theories to 
produce pressure to human in order to forcibly change human behaviors.
However, it can also be said that it is a revolution to our originally 
free & democratic society.
Why?
We know that besides the law, religions (such as Christianity, Islam, 
Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, etc.) have also shaped human behavior in 
society.  These religions use morals to teach people and lead them into 
a state of benevolenceand it has become the most important source of ethics.
However, since the mind machine has been invented and used by many 
countries after the mid 1970s (according to news reports & military 
classified documents of Taiwan), it has been used to change human 
behaviors in stead of the original religion and the society morals
copcept.
How could the mind control technology can be allowed to use in U.S.
and replace the function of orginal religion and society morals concept?
It can be used in U.S. because the technology (to spy entire
nation) are available and the political concept of the government
officers has changed.
First, during the Vietnan war of 1960s, there were lots of people 
opposing the foreign policy of federal government and making protests,
causing many confrontations in the streets.
So the security officers started to think that people need to be
controlled and educated to accept the governmental policy.
They start to believe the real meaning of people's freedom and 
democracy is that people are not awared of being spied or controlled by
the state opf art national security surveiliance system.
Second, since CIA started the electromagnetic mind control research 
in 1960, it has made the remarkable progress in this technology in 1970.
Therefore, the related technology of mind machine already can be used
in surveilliance system.  
Furthermore, the general efficiency of our surveilliance system made it
possible to shelve a program to wire every house, car, boat in America
(See page 181 on 1978 book _Uncloaking The CIA_).
Therefore, the security officers have this idea to use the mind 
control technology to keep people under closely surveilliance and 
to control people's behavior.
As early as 1970, Zbigniew Brzezinski, later National Security Advisor
to President Jimmy Carter, predicated a "more  controlled and directed 
society" would gradually appear, linked the technology.  This society
would be dominated by an elite group which impresses voters by allegedly
superior scientific know-how.
Unhindered by the restraints of traditional liberal values, this elite
would not hesitate to achieve its political ends by using the latest
modern techniques for influencing public behavior and keeping society
under close surveillance and control.  Technical and scientific momentum
would then feed on the situation it exploits.  Brzezinski predicted 
(see page 200 on _Angels Don't Play This HARRP_).
In August 1971, there is a entire nation surveillance security 
system program proposal submitted to the President Nixon.  It 
proposed to "wire" every "house", "car", and "boat" in America.  
The plan included a blueprint for a government- operated propaganda
system via a TV network that would have linked every state, city, and
home.  (See page 181 on the 1978 book _Uncloaking the CIA_)
Although this program wasn't accepted at that time.  It did
prove that US government did have this plan and have the 
technology to accomplish it since 1971.
How could they propose to "wire" every "house", "car" and "boat" 
in American?  It must use the radio wave or low radiation wave to 
network these objects (house, car, boat, etc.), otherwise, they 
cannot achieve this goal.  
This program has proven that the US governmental officers has the
technology and the plan to keep our society under close surveilliance
and control ( they even can "wire" the house, car, boat, etc. and via a
TV network that would have linked every city, state, home) in order to
control people's behavior as the predicion of Brzezinski in 1970 (one 
year before).
The above information of news report also prove that the so called 
elite group who will lead our society (as the Brzezinski predicted) 
is the local law enforcement.
Since the mind control equipments are intentionaly used in our 
society, the local law enforcement have recruited the local business
owners (and managers) as their first cooperaters (and offer these mind
control equipments to them).
These equipments has been proven to help business owners and
managers to easily manage their employees and reduce theft from their
stores.
Thus, the concept of using the mind control equipments to manage
employees and reduce theft from stores have been accepted by these 
local business owners and managers.
From the early 1980s, mind control (machine) technologies has been 
slowly used in commercial chain stores, business stores, and expanded to  
the entire society in order to spy and control people behaviors (According 
to the House of Representative Hearing in 1984).
Above situation causes the local business owners and managers to support
the using of mind control equipments in our society.
Thus, instead of using religious beliefs and law to regulate the 
public, these career officers (and under-cover operators) try to use the
mind control technologies to keep people under close surveilliance and
control.
However, although the business owners and managers are comfortable with 
the use of the mind control equipments, it doesn't mean that these mind
control equipments suit the needs of our whole society.
Why?
That's because current mind cotrol equipments are only used to protect
the interests of the business owners or managers but does not consider
the interests of the employees.
After the employers can use the mind control equipments, the employees
will be treated unfairly and keep the disadvantage position forever.
That's why the influence of American Labor Unions (ALU) have weakened 
over time and you will never see the strong influence to our society as
they (ALU) had before (in 1960).
What is worse is that since the so called "nonlethal weapon" has been
transferred to the local law enforcement, the mind control operators 
have started to use this equipment to make a society revolution to our
entire nation openly.
Furthermore, this time the object of revolution are the law 
abiding citizens who are legally working or living in our society.
Why?
That's because these law abiding citizens have deep beliefs
of religious and moral concepts and do not believe that the mind 
control equipments can replace them to control our society. 
Therefore, they try to destory these law abiding citizens with the 
invisible wave weapon because the operators dislike them and afraid
these people to become the opponents of mind control in the near furture.
How?
Their proposal of using non-lethal weapon technologies against terrorists
and drug traffickers as the excuse and request our Congress to allow them
to transfer the invisible wave weapon (so called "nonlethal weapon" or
soft killing weapon) from military to local law enforcement.
I would show readers this kind of information below.
There is a report on nonlethal technologies, issued by the 
Council on Foreign Relations.
(attachmrent)
----------------------------------------------
This report points out that , "The Nairobiv Convention, to which
the United States is a signastory, prohiibits the broadcast of
electronic signals into a sovereign state without its consent in
peacetime.
This report opens discussion of use of these weapons against 
"terrorists" and "drug traffickers".  The CFR report recommends 
that this be done secretly so that the victims do not know where the 
attack is from, or if there even is an attack!  There is a problem
with this approach. The use of these weapons, even against these kinds
of individuals, may be in violation of United States law in that it
presume guilt rather than innocence.  In other words,  the POLICE,
CIA, DEA, OR OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT ORGANIZATION become THE JUDGE, JURY 
AND EXCECUTIONER. (See page 180 on _ANGELS DON'T PLAY THE HAARP_1995 by
Jeane Manning & Dr. Nick Begich)
-------------------------------------------------
Comparing with the facts, the above information has made a very
accurate deduction on these nonlethal weapon abusers.
Currently, the mind control operators have become the judge, jury, 
and executioner while they investigate or control the mind of any person.
It means that these career officers' powers have been over authorized.
Therefore, the real power of these career officers (or operators) are the
same as a king, who owns the executive rights (as the President), judical
rights (as Supreme Court), and legislative rights (as Congress) at the
same time.
Since such kind of unlimited power is handled by the local law 
enforcement officers, it has made the U.S. to fast move toward a
police state and mind control society.
Causeing by the over authorized, the seriousness of these operators'
abuse of victims have now surfaced.
Beside the report of "Microwave Harassment & Mind Control
Experimentation" has been published by Julliane McKinney on December
1992, another very famouse tradegy happened in the Waco, Taxas.
According to some news report, the officers use the mind control
equipments to confuse David Koresh's followers in order to avoid some
of them fleeing from the burning building.
I would show readers such kind of information below.
The below report shows that FBI has used the mind control weapon at Waco.
=======================================================
NEXUS MAGAZINE stated: "Reports recently appeared that the FBI deployed
the weapon against David Koresh" during the siege at Waco. This type of
psychotronic weapon was able to confuse and plant false messages into the
targeted victims. Videos of the Branch Dividian compound, made during the
siege, showed a small microwave dish (used for TRANSMISSION) setting atop
a portable pole, POINTED DIRECTLY TOWARDS THE MAIN BUILDING IN THE
COMPOUND.
The 7\93 issue of DEFENSE ELECTRONICS discussed the FBI's use of Soviet
KGB psychotronic devices against the Branch Dividians at Waco, Texas.
There is strong evidence that such weapons were used. After the Feds
launched their mass-murdering, flame-throwing attack, some members of
David Koresh's church attempted to flee the burning building, but soon as
they got outside, they suddenly turned around and ran back INTO the
fire--which demonstrated an extreme mental disorientation of the type
created by psychotronic mind control weapons. The few victims who
survived the fire were visibly confused and unable to talk coherently or
move.
Prior to the massacre, the Feds targeted the church building with a night
and day acoustical barrage (that included the sounds of dying animals and
low frequency sound devices). The Feds also utilized a super-strobe light
show (pulsed at ELF frequencies).
===============================================
I don't believe the David Koresh is the Jesus Christ and don't agree 
with him.  However, I also do believe that David Koresh and his church's
members should be protected by US constitution because they are the US
citizens.
The members of David Koresh are most law abiding citizens because they
didn't commit crime or violate US law. The only mistake of these members 
might pay their full trust on David Koresh.  However, these members and 
their children are full burned to death in the event. 
Why?
According to the above DEFENSE ELECTRONIC reported, the
officers use the mind control equipment to cofuse the members of David
Koresh' chruch in order to avoid some of them fleeing the burning
building.  If theis information is correct, it only shows that this
officer was intentionally trying to kill the all members of David
Koresh's chruch.
In the mind control surveiliance system, the goal of mind control is 
that everyone must be mind controlled or cooperate with the operators.
Based on this mind control rule, the mind control operators will rather
kill anyone if anyone cannot be controlled or cooperate with them
(operators).
In the report of "Microwave Harassment & Mind Control harassment" by
Julliane Mckinney, readers can find that some law abiding citizens 
become the mind control victims only because these people refuse to be
controlled or to cooperat with mind control operators.
Comparing with mind control's evil goal, these career officers in 
the Waco should intentionally kill whole members of the David Koresh
chruch after the building was burning. 
That's because the mind control operastors dislike the very religiouse
people because these religiouse people are hardly to be mind controllled.
Therefore, from the view point of mind control operators, the operators
would rather kill these people than waste time to control them.
So, although our government policy point out that these invisible wave
weapon (nonlethal wepon) will be used to against the terrorist or
drug-trafficker, hoever, the operators never hesitate to use these
invisible wave weapon on the law abiding citizens whom the operators
dislike.
To gurantee the operators can control everyone in our society,  
mind control operators are carrying out the soicial revolution 
in our country and would supress our law abiding citizens (whom the
operastors dislike) with the invisible wave weapon. 
Furthermore, the operators are using the philosophy of Communism
(materialism, atheism, etc) to erode people's belief in law,
moral values, and God.  
How?
I will clearify my words below.
The victims of mind control are tortured by the operators and cannot get 
any protection from the law.
Such kind of situation will erode people's belief in law or even
US Constitution.
The operators use the invisible wave weapon to injure or kill the
victims without being punished. These kinds of situation will erode the
victims'(and their family's members') belief in their God (or religion).
The operators can manipulate people's lives with the invisible wave
weapon and induce the illness (such as heart disease, liver disease,
lung disease, kidney failure, etc.) on victims.
Not only the career operators will not feel sorry for such kind of
injuries but also enjoy their crimes. 
This kind of situation will erode the victims' belief in mankind's 
morality.  It has proven that these operators are only cruel criminals
and not part the elite group.  Furthermore, not only will the people who
are aware of this situation distrust the law enforcement officers, but it
will erode their confidence in our Constitution.
Therefore, current mind control in U.S. are very similar to the
social cultural revolution of Mao (Red China) in 1970s.
It means that these carrer officers are revolting against our 
original society. They don't believe in the legal powers of the law or
the spiritual powers of religion, but only trust the technologies and
tactics of mind game (built from the psychological theroies).   
They are the materialism and believe that using the scientific methods 
can more effectively control people in a short time.  However, this idea
come from Communism (Stalin's atheism and materialism) and only treat
humans as animals (without soul).
Their idea also inherit the evil belief of Stalin and Mao:  the 
regime's power come from the nozzle of the gun.  
That's why the operators always use their invisible wave weapon to 
injure or even kill people while these career officers prusue the
interests of mind (machine) control system and thsee operators 
their own.
The operators will also use the invisible wave weapon to secretly
eliminate their opponents in order to keep the mind control system 
as a secret and mantain the career officers (operators') privileges
forever.
Sometime, the operators will get rid of innocents because they try to 
keep their illegal crimes in secret.
What is the worse is that these operators learn everything from
the communists but their basic idea is worse than communists.
Why?
The Communism's basic idea suppose to be nice to society because it was
trying to creat a equal society which people can do one's best for the
society and everyone can also get what he need.
Although, the communism economic has failed because communist economic 
system didn't consider the human natural.  That's because human natural
is always  to pursue the interests of his own first.
Therefore, even the communism's method has been proven as a mistake but
these comunists's dream are not completely wrong in the very begining.
That's because their original idea was trying to creat a equal society.
Their murder actions to the capital persons are inhumane but the mind
control operators' murder action to law abiding citizens are also inhumane
as the communists.
What is the funny thing is that the communists make mistake because they
believe that their theroy is nice for the society.  But the mind control
operastors know their theroy is wrong but still continuously make the
mistakes on our society.
It means that the communists make the mistake is not intentionaly (because
they believe their theroy is correct and nice to the society), however, 
the mind control operators are intentionaly to make mistakes and crimes on
us.
How could I criticize this words on mind control operators?
That's because our government officers and their cooperators of society
almost all deny such kind of cruel actions of mind control exist in our
society and deny such kind of evil actions could be made by the mind
control operators.  Also they deny such kind of thing involve the
govrernmental officers.
Such kind of reactions only prove that these operators either cannot 
face the truth (because they do not legally existance and are the  
criminals), or the government officers agree with that mind control
operators are the infasmous courier (because the operators frequently
vilolate law).
It means that these career officers (and under-cover operators) 
know that the mind control is a illegal and infamous thing.  The
operators use the inhumane actions on victims are crimes.
We can always find that the career officers and their cooperators 
openly deny the existance of mind control equipments in the society.
However, on the other hand, the operators never stop to use the mind
control equipments on our people.  Therefore, the victims of mind control
continuously careat in the society. 
This only prove that these operators are intentionaly making the mistakes
and crimes on our society.  And that is why we cannot forgive them.
Comparing with the communists, the communists make mistake only because
they falsely beliive their theroy is correct, but the mind control
operators already know their theroy and methods are wrong, illegal
but still intentionally make the mistakes and crimes on our law
abiding citizens.
Comparing with the communists, the mind control operators are more 
evil and more need be corrected.
If such kinds of operators are the elite group in our society then the
communists are more qualify for the elite group than them because the
operators fully imitate the communism phylosophy.
Furthermore, these career officers used the local law enforcement 
as the basic mind control unit to control the local area people and 
then extend to the entire nation.  
What's worse is that they hire more undercover female operators to 
cooperate with law enforcement officers to spy on & manipulate 
people's live.  These unawared victims are the opponents of mind 
control operators or whom these operators personally dislike (such 
as the religiose people). 
They manipulate these people's live (without victims' knowledge) in 
order to secretly eliminate them from society.
When these career officers (and under-cover operators) use mind 
control technologies to spy & manipulate people's live, they have
totally forgotten the law, human rights, and Constitution of our 
society.
With their vast power of determining people's live with their weapons, 
the operators' position have been elevated to those of kings who are the
judge, jury, and executioner at the same time.
Dear American citizens, do you agree with their criminal activities, if
the operators use the invisible wave weapon on the law abiding citizens
or on you?
Since the operators can use the invisible wave weapon to secretly 
manipulate people's live without victims' knowledge, do you believe 
that they have created fears to our society?
If we disgree with their crimes, why we don't stop them?!
Furthermore, they have openly tortured the people who know their 
secrets with their invisible wave weapon in order to build the fear in
the society and threaten these victims in order to surpress or silence
them.
Under such kind of situation, no wonder the operators have eroded 
victims' confidence in law and Constitution.
These kinds of victims has been reported in "Microwave Harassment 
& Mind Control Experimentation" by Julianne McKinney on December 
1992.  I would remind you one more time.
(attachment)
 ===========================================================
   One dividual (driven to extremes of stress by ongoing electronic 
harassment focusing on her children) killed one child in an effort to 
protect her from further pain.
   Another individual, during a telephone conversation, was told by an 
employee of a local power company that , if she value the lives of her 
children, she would  drop the her opposition to the company's installation 
of high power lines.  Since receiving that threat, the individual 
11-year-old daughter has been reduced to extrrement of illness which cannot 
be diagnosed.  It's now also apparent to this invidual that her 
three-year-old son is on the receiving end of externally induced 
auditory input. (DoE figures prominently in this case.)
=================================================================
I would like to emphasize some important points for those readers who think 
that the above examples are unusual cases and other people would not be 
subjected to similar harassment.
The two families in this example are average law abiding citizens and 
living in their own home.  Even under such kind circumstances, these 
members of these two families cannot avoid of being spied on.  So, the 
children of these two families cannot avoid being attacked and harm by 
remotely controlled invisible wave weapons (even in the security of 
their own home or staying at hospitals). 
It proves the invisible wave weapon has been used in conjuction with 
the surveilliance system.  Also, both systems can track or attack any of 
the member of these two families with incredible accuracy.  From these 
cases, we know that anyone of us can be also injured or examined in our 
own home or any public building (including cars -- I would emphsize it).
The above information (two cases) also proves that no place is safe for 
anyone when you live under the surveilliance & manipulation lives system of 
mind control.
Dear citizens, the mind control operators are revolting against our free
& democratic country.  They are revolting against the social culture,
beliefs (religion), law, and the Constitution of United States.
Since they can use the electromagnetic pulse weapon to stop my car's
engine on the road or even stop my car from starting
(they also can make the signal lights of a car malfuction with 
remote control), it has proven to me that they can totaly control the 
transportation system.  Since their conspiracy is so deep, it has caused 
me to suspect that they might also be able to remote control an airplane's 
engine while it is flying (by remote control plane's computer system).  
That's because  US is a big nation and the airplane is a common 
transportation of American people.  If these corrupted officers really 
try to totally control our people's transportation, they probably have 
developed the ability to remote control some important parts of the 
planes.
If my deduction is correct, then currently lots of airplane crashes 
should be re-investigated.   
Why?
If the operators remotely control a car's computer system to stop car's 
engine, the awared driver can still use the emergency brakes to stop the 
car on the road.
However, if they can remotely control the computer system of an airplane 
to stop the engine, this airplane will only drop down to the ground and 
crash (The pilot can do nothing even he is aware of this unresonable 
situation).   For example:
The commerce secretory of US died in an airplane crash a few months ago.
This kind situation wouldn't have happened in a small or poor country, 
but it happened in our highly technical country-- US.
Also, currently the airplanes crash seem to happpen frequently.
If the mind control operators really can remotely control an airplane's 
computer system, I hope that the family's members of these airplane crash
victims can find the truth.
Even if the above airplane crashes were not caused by these operators,
the reported cases of mind control (such as the cases was reported by
Julianne Mckinny) have made our citizens fear our government.
These corrupted officers' crimes must be stoped by our law
abiding citizens, responsible Congress members, and our President.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
  Alan Yu
  The first objective of mind control organization is to manipulate 
  people's health condition and lives in order to eliminate their 
  opponents or enemies secretly (die as natural cause).  
  This objective has been secretly carried out since the late of 1970s 
  in Taiwan (At that time they simply use the microwave beam or low 
  radio frequency modulation).
  The mind (machine) control system is the national security system of 
  Taiwan from late of 1970s and should be the same in US or lots free 
  countries.
  Accusing other as insane is the "trademark" of mind control organization.
  The shorter the lie is, the better it is.  So, the liar can avoid
  inconsistency and mistakes that other people can catch.
  Only the truth will triumph over deception and last forever.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Our current education system (was Re: How Much Math? (not enough))
From: nanken@tiac.net (Ken MacIver)
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 06:00:23 GMT
"Jonathan W. Hendry"  wrote:
>Ken MacIver wrote:
>> This is both true and false.  It is true that Americans as a group
>> devalue in particular humanities, art, philosophy, and the like and
>> often place on mindless pedestal science and other things that promise
>> *answers*.  I have a pretty good imagination, yet I'd find it hard to
>> imagine an American scence such as that in one of Zola's novel where a
>> working class wedding party takes a tour of the Louvre.
>scence? This isn't clear. Do you mean science? Or scene?
>I'm not entirely sure what you're driving at here.
I mean that a reader would disbelieve a scene in a novel which
depicted an American working class (or any other class, for that
matter) wedding party  taking a tour of an art museum whereas the same
reader would believe Zola that such a thing might happen in Paris.
>Science may be put on a pedestal,
I agree; that's what I said.
Ken
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Ground
From: Tommy E.
Date: 11 Nov 1996 03:18:31 GMT
>From: DC, 75277.3335@CompuServe.COM
>>What completes the grounding circuit in an electrical system?
>Let's say a refrigerator shorts and the current goes to ground (thus
>protecting anyone touching the refrigerator).
>The current goes through a wire down to metal pipe down to the earth
>itself, but how does it come back from the soil in the back or front
>yard to complete the circuit to the refrigerator in the house?
>Thanks for help and info.
In theory, the current diverted to the ground of the refrigerator will be
sufficient to blow the fuse or trip the circuit breaker in the hot leg of
the circuit, thus 'protecting' the user from electrical shock.  In this
example, the ground current would re-enter the house neutral at the main
circuit-breaker panel.  This is where (at least in U.S. systems), the
neutral bussbar of a 3-wire system is electrically bonded to the grounded
conductors of the individual circuits.  These grounds take the form of a
third conductor in the case of non-metallic cable or the conductive
surface of the electrical conduit itself (depending on your code
requirments).  The main-circuit breaker panel is often where the system
ground is electrically connected to an external grounding rod, or a
cold-water pipe.
The problem, as you might imagine, is when for some reason, say defective
wiring, you have a high resistance ground connection.   In this case, the
protective overcurrent device will not trip, leaving the circuit hot and
the frame of the device at an energized, possibly dangerous potential. 
If you suspect that you have a high resistance ground, your installation
should be immediately checked by a qualified electrician.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation?
From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:26:35 GMT
briank@ibm.net (Brian Kennelly) wrote[in part]:
>>The invariant interval is not proper time -- but the square of the
>>difference of the squares of both time and distance values combined --
>>which obviously has no physical meaning.  The proper time is simply
>>the time as recorded by a single clock.  This obviously does have a
>>physical meaning.
>>
>How is it obvious that the interval has no physical meaning?  For time-like 
>separation it is the proper time, the time recorded by a clock that passes 
>both events in uniform translation.  The definition of the invariant interval
>allows us to determine the coordinate time between the events for a moving
>observer, for whom the space separation is not zero.
The Invariant Interval (II) has a totally different definition (given
above), but does happen to match the proper time for a "timelike" II.
I didn't say that the numerical results didn't match, but that the II
has no physical meaning, being a messed-up combination of false clock
readings (even if absolute, the II would still be meaningless) and
false distance readings (even if absolute, the II would still be
meaningless).  The proper time is a perfectly meaningful actual single
time reading per a single clock.
>Denying the interval is equivalent to denying the validity of the Lorentz
>transformations.
They, too, yield meaningless results.  And worse.  Worse because they
(the LTE in SRT) go to the trouble to translate one observer's junk
(false time and distance measurements) into another's.  What's the
point?
Return to Top
Subject: Re: freedom of privacy & thoughts
From: caesar@copland.udel.edu (Johnny Chien-Min Yu)
Date: 10 Nov 1996 23:28:37 -0500
From mrrose@netvigator.com Sun Nov 10 22:37:59 1996
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 00:56:22 +0800
From: mrrose 
Subject: Re: freedom of privacy & thoughts
>Transmitting TO sombody/somthing via microwaves is possible.
>BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN A HUMAN BRAIN CAN BE READ VIA MICROWAVEs
>e.g. if I throw a brick, that does not mean the brick can come back in 
>the same way, unless we have time reversal, which according to Stphen 
>Hawking, which is not possible.
>SO EXPLAIN your statment the can read a human brain pattern via 
>microwaves.
Reading people's mind has been achieved for a long time.
That's because I have handled the Taiwan' military classified 
documrent which had pointed that Taiwan purchased the mind machine
from US (it was called the psychological language machine in Taiwan.
It means the machine can read people's mind) in 1984.
Although US never openly declare that the mind machine can 
read human mind, but we still can find few proof from old style 
mind machine.
There is another source of information to further proved that the 
technologies to read thoughts has existed for a long time.  Dr. Josh 
Backon of Israel, and his account deals with the invention of mind 
machine by Russian. He states:
=================================================================
    "This brain reading device" was originally developed by a 
mathematician (now in Israel) working with Professor Bechtereva at the  
Military Medical Institute in leningrad (Russia) in the 1970's.
    The mathematician decoded MUA's (multiple unit activity) of certain
brain wave patterns and got the phonemic representation of the word- the 
subject was thinking on a computer screen.    If I were thinking
the word CAT, this word would appear.
==============================================================
Please read the above statmenet carefully.  In Russia, they developed a
way to decode different brain wave patterns to the corresponding meaning 
in words.  So, all the Russians had to do was to develop a large reference
database of what some common basic brain patterns means, then the Russian 
could read the humans' thoughts with their machine without problems.
Science information from US:  ( Walter  Bowart:  Operation Mind  Control. 
1978 p. 268.)
==============================================================
      In 1975 a primitive mind reading machine was tested at the 
Stanford Research Institute.  The machine used a computer which   
recognizes a limited amount of words by monitoring a person's silent 
thoughts.  This technique relies upon the discovery that brain wave 
tracings (EEG) show distinctive patterns that correlate with individual 
words - whether the words are spoken aloud or merely subvocalized 
(thought of).
=========================================================
The above experiments proves the US and Russia were using the same basic
approach to develop methods to read the human minds.  Also the US civilian
research have already proven that if they have enough time to collect 
enough brain waves patterns (to create a database to translate brain wave 
patterns to words), then reading human minds is absolutely possible.
Then, do you believe the CIA had the chance to collect the brain waves 
patterns that were needed?!
Yes, I do think so.  According to articles from the Washington Post, 
80 research institutes (include universities) had worked with CIA in the 
mind control program "MKULTRA".
Also 20 years ago, the scientists found that they can use the very 
accuracy rada to beam the radio waves (electromagnetic waves) to imitate 
the brain waves pattern, then they should can use the electromagnetic 
waves (microwaves) to replace wire (without physical contact) to read human 
mind.
When should they have this kind technique that to use microwaves 
(electromagnetic waves) to imitate the brain waves?
In my own opinion, it should be 1973.
Why?  
    In 1973, Dr. Sharp serving as a test subject himself, heard and  
understood spoken words delivered to him in a echo free chamber via 
a pulsed-microwave audiogram (an analog of the word's sound vibrations) 
beamed into his brain.  This did proved that the device mind machine-"TRM" 
indeed succeeded.   
Thoughts are just the voice-less (unspoken words) "language" inside the 
brains.   Language express thoughts with voices.     When a person think 
or speak the same phrase (like "How are you?"), the electrical representation
(electrical impulse) of the thoughts or the speech inside the brain should be 
the same.    In 1975, the Standford University tested the Mind reading 
machine had proven the same logical idea. (see above)
The above experiments of Dr. Sharp proved that they could use the 
microwaves to deliver message (spoken words) to human brains  (the 
electrical impulses which represent the voices).  
Based on the above evidences and logic, then they should also be able to do 
the reverse (read a person's thoughts by decoding the electrical impulses 
[brain waves] inside the person's brain into language).
This is because to deliever a message using microwaves, they must 
translate spoken words ("How are you?") into electrical impulses (brain 
waves) which can be interpreted as voices by the brain (like "How are you?).
If they use microwaves to deliver the message to you, then you can hear 
the voice in your mind (brain).
The only difference will be that the voices is not "your voices", but 
it is as if someone else is speaking (whispering) in your mind ---Other 
person's thoughts is delivered to your mind in as speech, but it is not 
heard through the ears. [because it's not sound waves]. 
Then they certainly can (read) interpret the same electric impulses 
patterns (brain waves pattern such as the phrase "how are you?") from human 
brain waves into language (words as "How are you?").  However at this time, 
your thoughts will show up on computer screen as words (voice-less language) 
if the collected brain waves is sent to CPU, or if they send your brain 
waves (through the use of microwave radiation electronics devices) 
directly into another person's brain, then you might whisper to the other 
person's mind (without "normal voice").  In other words, the other is 
sharing your thoughts.
So based on the same logics, if they can use microwaves to imitate 
the electric impulse which describe the language & deliver to human brain, 
then on the other hand, they also can interpret the same electric impulse
back to the same language.   It must be the same thing.
Furthermore,  In June 22,1776,  The National Enquirer reported an
insider information:  
It said that Since 1973 the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) had 
been sponsoring a program to develop a machine that could "read minds from a 
distance" by deciphering the brain's magnetic waves. 
A scientist involved in the program had declared that the ultimate goal 
of his work was to exercise control over the brain. 
   ( See the book "Zapping of America" By Paul Brodeur)
   The above report mentioned that in 1973, they developed a Machine 
which could read minds from a distance by  deceiphering the brain's  
electromagentic waves. This report proved the EMR mind machine of
CIA have been invented in 1973 and then under the support of the
budgets of ARPA for further research and development.
Furthermore, the _RADIO FREQUENCY DOSIMETRY HANDBOOK_ published 
by U.S. Air Force in 1986 has proven that reading human mind is not
the problem and they just want to increase the speed of mind reading
in order to know a target's reaction while this target is being
input with subliminal message (see detail on page 189, _ANGELS
DON'T PLAY THIS HAARP_ by Jeane Manning & Dr. Nick Begich).
We know that military eduction and trainning must base on the facts,
if not, they will lose the war in the battle field.
Therefore, the Air-force handbook has proven that mind reading is 
not a problem.
In January 1991 the University of Arizona, the civilian
scientist, Dr. Stuart Hameroff, also point out that" the seat of
consciousness may be located in "computer-like cytoskeletal
polymers within living cells. " Phrased more simply; an individual's
consciousness may be located whin microscopic structures appear to
communicate via "coherent nanosecond excitations", that is, some form
of ultra-short wavelengh energy coupling. Hameroff goes to say,
"An idea expresssed relevant to life "beyond 2000", was that the brain
cytoskeletal proteins could be prepared in an artificial enviorment 
which may be capable of vcontaining congnitive function."
"An individual may be able to transfer his own consciousness to an
artificial enviorment when their body approached expiration."
( "MIND CONTROL TECHNIQUES AND TACTICS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER" by 
Glenn Krawczyk-- see NEXUS new times on January 93 on page 26-27 )
The above words tell us that civilian scientist also prove human 
thoughts (consciousness) can be used the technique to remove or
store in an artificial enviiormnent ( and can transfer to another body).
The classified research of mind control in CIA has been over 30 years.
We believe that the CIA should have achieved the goal which using VLF
(VERY LOW FREQUENCY) to creat the artificial enviorment (such as focus 
a small VLF field on target or even creat a big artificial enviorment 
for people) to remove (detect) people's thoughts and use the collected 
brain wave pattern program ( as microwace frequency) to read any
target's mind for a long time.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
  Alan Yu
  The first objective of mind control organization is to manipulate 
  people's health condition and lives in order to eliminate their 
  opponents or enemies secretly (die as natural cause).  
  This objective has been secretly carried out since the late of 1970s 
  in Taiwan (At that time they simply use the microwave beam or low 
  radio frequency modulation).
  The mind (machine) control system is the national security system of 
  Taiwan from late of 1970s and should be the same in US or lots free 
  countries.
  Accusing other as insane is the "trademark" of mind control organization.
  The shorter the lie is, the better it is.  So, the liar can avoid
  inconsistency and mistakes that other people can catch.
  Only the truth will triumph over deception and last forever.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Our current education system (was Re: How Much Math? (not enough))
From: coolhand@Glue.umd.edu (Kevin Anthony Scaldeferri)
Date: 10 Nov 1996 22:11:18 -0500
In article ,
John McCarthy  wrote:
>My opinion is that the public is quite respectful of science. 
Only in the sense that they tend to think that scientists are really
smart. 
> Popular
>science magazines typically have circulations in the hundreds of
>thousands.  
This of course means nothing.  What's Playboy's circulation?
>All kinds of swindlers, e.g. Rifkin, appeal to scientific
>concepts when they can.
This sort of respect I can do without.
-- 
======================================================================
Kevin Scaldeferri				University of Maryland
"The trouble is, each of them is plausible without being instictive"
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...)
From: cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter)
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:35:03 GMT
dcs2e@darwin.clas.virginia.edu (David Swanson) wrote:
>In article 
>meron@cars3.uchicago.edu writes:
>> Would I have the ability of hearing the music in my 
>> mind just by reading the notes (Some people do, so it is not 
>> impossible) then plying it wouldn't be necessery.
>But playing it would.  Hearing it in your head is not the same thing.
>David
It would in my head - it's a nice empty resonant cavity.  I keep a
miniturized copy of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir there for the odd
moment when I thirst for music.
Richard Harter, cri@tiac.net, The Concord Research Institute
URL = http://www.tiac.net/users/cri, phone = 1-508-369-3911
Life is tough. The other day I was pulled over for doing trochee's
in an iambic pentameter zone and they revoked my poetic license.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...)
From: meron@cars3.uchicago.edu
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:39:17 GMT
In article <5663cv$mr@ssbunews.ih.lucent.com>, lew@ihgp167e.ih.att.com (-Mammel,L.H.) writes:
	... snip ...
>----------------
>Mati:
>
>Actually, the aether got into physics as an attempt to solve the 
>crisis brought up by the electromagnetic theory.
>
>Me:
>
>>Actually, no. It was the wave theory of light which required
>>an ether, E&M; or not. Huygens discussed the ether and its properties
>>before 1700. After 1800, many including Fresnel worked on it.
>
>Mati:
>
>Possible.  As I mentioned before, once you've a wave theory, within 
>classical mechanics, it requires a medium since the wave speed is 
>imbedded in the equation.
>
>Mati, (one day later):
>
>Definitely.  Just as a reminder (I hope you didn't waste your time 
>following this thread) the above was a short piece in an argument 
>about absolute frames in physics, when what I said was:
>
>1)  Newtonian physics had no absolute frame.
>2)  EM seemed, for a while, to suggest an absolute frame.
>3)  SR returned matters to where Newton left them, i.e. no absolute 
>frame.
>---------------------------
>
>There is the, "Bah Dow! Bah Dow! Bah Dow!", and perhaps I am
>not so very remiss in thinking myself justified in perceiving
>a certain rigidity of mind in evidence here. I seems to me that
>having budged from his "E&M; introduced absolutism" doctrine just a
>little, he snapped back to it like a double thick rubberband. THWAAAP!
>
Oh, I didn't realize that something in the above bothered you.  Would 
you just mention it before, I would explain it.
You see, when Huygens and, later, Fresnel talked about ether (and the 
"possible" which offended you means simply that I didn't check when I 
responded, so I couldn't say for sure what it was they talked about) 
it simply implied a medium to conduct light.  Which by itself doesn't 
carry too many implications.  We do have after all a wave equation for 
sound and nobody will say that this introduces an absolute frame into 
physics.  Speed of sound is its speed relative to the medium and 
that's all.
With EM on the scene, and with light being recognized as an EM 
phenomenon, the situation was different.  Maxwell's equations have the 
speed of light imbedded in them.  So if the speed of light is 
established relative to ether, same goes for the validity of Maxwell's 
equations.  In other words, the implication was that Maxwell's 
equations, as they stand, are valid only when you're at rest relative 
to the ether, and in any other case should contain correction terms.  
This still didn't necesserily imply an absolute frame though, it was 
just one of the possibilities, incurring if there is a frame where all 
the ether in the universe is at rest.  Other possibility was "ether 
drag" i.e. that the ether is being locally dragged along material 
bodies.  This eventuality, though, would have some measurable 
consequences which didn't seem to meterialize, that's when the notion 
of a universal ether frame started being taken seriously.
Mati Meron			| "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu		|  chances are he is doing just the same"
Return to Top
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation?
From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:43:15 GMT
odessey2@ix.netcom.com(Allen Meisner) wrote[in part]:
>    Yes, but as I have explained, if light is inertialess then it
>cannot have a component of velocity in any direction other than its
>direction of propagation. If you are in a spaceship traveling at .5c
>and shine a light perpendicular to your direction of travel you will
>not see the light go straight up, if light is inertialess. You would
>see it go diagonally back toward the rear of the ship.
>                        __d__
>                        \   |
>                  light  \  |d'
>                          \ |
>___________________________\|_______________________>velocity of ship 
>    If you saw the light go straight up, that would mean that the light
>was moving with you in your direction of motion. If this is so, the
>light has a component of velocity in the direction of the ship's
>motion. Now, you shined a light perpendicular to your direction of
>motion. We know that light propagates at c. So according to the
>observer in the ship the light has a vertical component c and a
>horizontal component, the velocity of the ship. The vector sum of these
>two velocities, the sqrt(c^2+v^2), exceeds c. Now I, and most
>experiments bear me out, assume this to be impossible. You will
>therefore see the light go diagonally back, as in the diagram. Since
>light is absolutely motionless in your direction of travel, you can
>therefore calculate your absolute velocity. Refer to the above diagram.
>Light moving vertically at c will reach the ceiling in d'/c. Call this
>time t. The distance between the point where you emitted the light and
>the point where the light hit the ceiling is d. Your absolute velocity
>is therefore d/t. This is really your absolute velocity because light
>is at absolute rest in the direction you are traveling. Please tell me
>what you think, or if you have any objections.
>Regards,
>Edward Meisner
If I read all the above correctly, you are saying that light's motion
direction (thru space) is source independent because otherwise it
would take longer than it does to cross the room (aimed
perpendicularly to the wall).  The catch is, clock's slow
(intrinsically), and so the travel time per our clock is a bit less
than the absolute time T, and this matches the fact that light's
motion direction is NOT source independent, but is instead source
dependent, just as is a bullet's.  You never notice that light takes
the hypotenuse path (above) because of clock slowing.
But you are absolutely  correct in saying that IF light's motion
direction were NOT source affected, then we could easily determin e
our absolute velocity. (In fact, this would have been noticed long ago
by merely shining a light thru a long tube -- it wouldn't come out the
other end if it were source-affected direction-wise).
Return to Top
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation?
From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:45:02 GMT
Cees Roos  wrote[in part]:
[bjon]
>> Apparent contradictions.
>Not apparent to me at all. Could you try to point out the error
>in my reasoning?
>-- 
>Regards, Cees Roos.
>I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than
>to have answers which might be wrong.  Richard Feynman 1981
If my latest posts have not anwered you, then please repost the 
contradictions.  (I have lost track).
Return to Top
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation?
From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:50:28 GMT
Cees Roos  wrote[in part]:
>On the contrary. Design an experiment which shows absolutes, and you
>have falsified SRT. That is Popper's 'Criterion of demarcation' for
>scientific theories.
>-- 
>Regards, Cees Roos.
>I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than
>to have answers which might be wrong.  Richard Feynman 1981
You have missed the point.  If there's  no such thing as absolute
motion (no existence of it), then it becomes impossible for any
possible experiment to ever detect, even in principle, and yet this
must be the case for SRT to be testable.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: David Hudson's monatomic element/white gold claims
From: jac@ibms46.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
Date: 11 Nov 1996 03:50:06 GMT
In article <327D0465.877@coax.net> king@coax.net writes:
>
>I would like some scientific feedback on David Hudson's claims.  There's
>a fair amount of material on the web 
 Thanks for the pointer.  Always fun to read stuff like this. 
>His subjects range from 'white gold' and platinum-element powders, in a
>monatomic state which slips through standard analytical chemical
>techniques, 'high spin' states, 'distorted nuclei', kundalini
>orgasmic-like states, ....
 I am quite knowledgable about several of those subjects.  
 I found one part of his stuff quoted on that web site quite amusing: 
  "Okay now this is new stuff people. You're not going to find it in 
   universities, you're not going to find it, you know, being taught, 
   because it's new. It's just 1985-86 when it was first discovered." 
 I will simply observe that most of the people making those discoveries 
 are at universities and that I have heard many seminars and lectures 
 on the subject of high spin states and superdeformed nuclei.  One of 
 the world's experts is at Florda State. 
  "It's in the published literature up to 1990-91, and that's what you're 
   going to see today. It's probably, 50-60% of the physics papers in 
   Physical Review C are on this area right now. It is a hot topic. But 
   very few college professors ever heard of it because it wasn't in 
   their curriculum when they studied." 
 Half the papers in Phys. Rev. C is an exaggeration.  Again, this 
 guy is glib and perhaps accurate when he says "college" here since 
 you are more likely to find "university" professors who are aware 
 of current research than "college" professors.  I will again note 
 that university professors discover new knowledge as well as teach 
 old knowledge.  Many of the papers in the Physical Review are by 
 faculty members at universities or colleges or their students.  
  "Okay, here is 'Collective and single particle structure of 103 Rh 
   [Physical Review C Volume 37, Number 2, February 1988, pp. 621-635]'. 
 Right up there on my shelf.  Interesting that he chose an article by 
 three people at Texas A&M; University after claiming that you won't 
 find this stuff at universities...
  "Rhodium 103 is the stable isotope of Rhodium. It's just like gold, it 
   only has one isotope that's stable. This is it. Key words that were 
   developed when they begin to make these discoveries, were "high-spin" 
   Rhodium 103. When the nucleus becomes deformed in a ratio of 2 to 1, 
 Pretty normal stuff in that article.  I wonder if he was confused by 
 the graphs showing *relative* excitation energies (relative to the 
 bandhead) into thinking those high spin states were not up at 
 several MeV excitation. 
>I don't have the patience to wade through all his stuff, but I'm hoping
>some of you can isolate and debunk some of his specific claims.  
 I had trouble finding any specific claims, although if he claims 
 that deformation of nuclei manifest at high excitation and angular 
 momentum have any effect on ground state properties, or on atomic 
 properties outside of the well-known hyperfine effects from 
 magnetic interactions with the nuclear spin, he is way off the mark. 
>He talks of 'nuclear physicists around the world' agreeing with him, 
 I have never heard of him before, and I bet he would be hard pressed 
 to find anyone mentioning his work by name in the literature. 
>                  ...                 then moved into much more dubious
>material seemlessly, so that the listener had no clear idea which part
>of his talks the references do or do not support.  
 That would be my impression.  Quoting elementary stuff from Scientific 
 American is hardly impressive to me, and the leap from the paper 
 mentioned above to the "elements in my patent application" is quite 
 a long and unsupported one.  I also found the statement 
  "This is 'Superdeformation in Palladium 104 and 105 [Superdeformation 
   in 104, 105 Pd, Physical Review C, Volume 38, Number 2, August 1988 
   pp. 1088-1091]'. The two most stable isotopes of Palladium.  These 
   are not radioactive isotopes."  
 interesting.  Again, this work was done at the lab at the University of 
 California, at Berkeley, which was a university the last time I looked. 
 I will observe that the ground states of these nuclei are stable but 
 the superdeformed bands mentioned are at 10 to 15 MeV excitation!  It 
 takes a high energy heavy ion beam to produce them and they decay 
 promptly as soon as they are made. 
 It would seem more relevant to discuss chemical experiments if one 
 is talking about the properties of atoms. 
>   ...          and is now contemplating buying into Mr. Hudson's
>$500-per-person 'investment' plan.
 I would want to read the prospectus and talk to the SEC first. 
-- 
 James A. Carr        |  "The half of knowledge is knowing
    http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac/       |  where to find knowledge" - Anon. 
 Supercomputer Computations Res. Inst.  |  Motto over the entrance to Dodd 
 Florida State, Tallahassee FL 32306    |  Hall, former library at FSCW. 
Return to Top
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation?
From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:56:17 GMT
Peter Diehr  wrote[in part]:
>Cees Roos wrote:
>> 
>> On the contrary. Design an experiment which shows absolutes, and you
>> have falsified SRT. That is Popper's 'Criterion of demarcation' for
>> scientific theories.
>>
>On the contrary, the Special Theory of Relativity predicts many constants.
>One is the rest mass of an object. Another is the spacetime interval
>separating two events.
I hate to "bust your bubble," but the above things are not in any way
absolutes in the sense of being physical absolutes.  The "rest mass"
is merely the "mass as seen by the observer carrying the object," and
this he has no way of knowing if this mass actually and really varies.
The interval is a combination of two false measurements (distance and
time intervals made by SRT observers using relatively synch'd clocks
with both pretending they are at absolute rest in space).
But they are "constants," so I guess your form of the argument holds.
>Best Regards, Peter
Return to Top
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation?
From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:58:46 GMT
Simon Read  wrote[in part]:
>bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones) wrote:
>> [ a whole load of stuff, so much stuff in so many postings that
>>   I suspect he has nothing to do all day but sit at his terminal
>>   posting to usenet. ]
>Keep up the good work, Brian! The Internet needs you!
>Simon
Thanks, I think, but ---
I'm confused.  Who posted the above about "....usenet"?
(Wasn't me or I)
Return to Top
Subject: Re: What is the Cause of Time Dilation?
From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 04:08:14 GMT
briank@ibm.net (Brian Kennelly) wrote[in part]:
>The internal beat of a clock has nothing to do with absolute time.  You have
>already made an exception for motion, what is next?
>The regularity of a clock does not tell us how it will compare with other,
>non-local clocks.  This was recognized by Poincare in 1898, and developed by
>Einstein in 1905 into SR.
There's more to absolute time than mere clock synch. (In fact, clock
synch has nothing to do with absolute time -- it is merely a matter of
defintion, as Einstein has pointed out.)
And there's no "exception made for motion."  A clock has an absolute
rhythm, independent of any observer.  This is a simple fact about the
clock's absolute time.  Another fact is that this absolute rhythm
changes with the clock's absolute speed. (Proved by the KTX).
Now, if you want to restrict "absolute time" to "all observer's
knowing what all clocks actually read at any univeral instant," then
we have not got to this yet, and the only way to get to it is by
somehow detecting our absolute motion (which is another absolute that
does exist, but has eluded detection thus far).
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Hermeneutics and the difficulty to count to three...
From: jac@ibms46.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
Date: 11 Nov 1996 04:09:22 GMT
moggin@nando.net (moggin) writes:
}
}     The problem is that you have two different models.  In what I've
}been calling the ordinary sense of "generalize," generalizing Newton
}would mean applying his theories to new regions, e.g., high velocities,
}and discovering that they still worked great.  Instead, we've got a
}different situation -- when  applied over broader conditions, his laws
}turn out to be false (given later findings).
 Which one(s)? 
-- 
 James A. Carr        |  "The half of knowledge is knowing
    http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac/       |  where to find knowledge" - Anon. 
 Supercomputer Computations Res. Inst.  |  Motto over the entrance to Dodd 
 Florida State, Tallahassee FL 32306    |  Hall, former library at FSCW. 
Return to Top
Subject: Re: How Much Math? (Was: Re: How much to invest in such a writer?)
From: jac@ibms46.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
Date: 11 Nov 1996 04:07:41 GMT
jac@ibms46.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr):
|[much deleted]
 I will observe that the deleted material concerning what Newton 
 actually wrote was particularly relevant to this thread.  
|  Thus it is a rather imprecise application of postmodernism to 
|  analyze a specific text without identifying the source of the 
|  text "Newton is wrong" as being from some high school textbook. 
moggin@nando.net (moggin) writes:
>
>     If anybody "applied postmodernism" in this discussion, then
>I missed it.
 Perhaps you did.  It would seem you are more interested in rhetorical 
 argument than the discussion of specific texts.  Others, however, 
 were analyzing texts from various perspectives, including the 
 postmodernist one.  I was hoping to bring the discussion back to 
 what Newton wrote, which of his laws might be no longer considered 
 valid within Special Relativity, and what Einstein wrote on the 
 subject, so I was talking to them.  
-- 
 James A. Carr        |  "The half of knowledge is knowing
    http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac/       |  where to find knowledge" - Anon. 
 Supercomputer Computations Res. Inst.  |  Motto over the entrance to Dodd 
 Florida State, Tallahassee FL 32306    |  Hall, former library at FSCW. 
Return to Top

Downloaded by WWW Programs
Byron Palmer