Scalar waves on other ways to control the weather???
- Thread starter Gravage
- Start date
Yes.
once. a person centred counsellor. they just LISTEN. i would never ever touch psychiatric meds as is i have said in these forums. te mental health business is a scam, when its main occupation is dagnosing people with phony diseases.......i have known quite few people who have been classedas mentally ill, and tey are some of te most human pople i know!phlogistician said:
Did your friends also indulge in recreational drugs use? Did they take hallocinogens ever?
Why don't you just answer?
I'll take that as a yes then.
Stryder, several times I've invited duendy back on topic to talk about scalar waves, but instead, we get tangent, rhetoric, and allegory and ego. ALL, because I suggested she go read a science book.
oh we knooow. you are a good good boy. teachers pet already...hehephlogistician said:
look, itwasn't just tangen, rhetoric...i was trying to explore your ontological presuppositionsis what i was trying to do. admittedly tho it wouold be good to explore that in anothe tread titled the woo woos vs the poo poos
as for scalar waves.........you do not in any way believe in secret advanced technology do you, and i dont mean triangular planes neither, as such in tis instance, but anti gravity and free energy?............you see phlo i cant dule with ou using scientific jargon, and allow you to blind me with science. i am coming at this issue rom other--also relevant--angles. lookin at patterns...hey, just like a scientist...!
Oli.....do you believe anti gravity and free energy is impossible and will always be because current modern physics tells you so?Oli said:Okay, put it this way. If I posted a link to a website that claimed that someone had invented a new primary colour (trying to give it from an artistic perspective for you), what would your reaction be?
Ooh, my turn to go out on a limb
Anti gravity- depends what you mean by anti-gravity. Gravity reduction/ control I think may be possible. But not for a while.
Free energy I think is a flat-out impossibility. It contradicts thermodynamics and that destroys everything we know about physics, it's hard to see how a system that works so well explaining the way things work could be so far wrong.
And you didn't answer the new colour question. (And I mean visible primary colour).
Anti gravity- depends what you mean by anti-gravity. Gravity reduction/ control I think may be possible. But not for a while.
Free energy I think is a flat-out impossibility. It contradicts thermodynamics and that destroys everything we know about physics, it's hard to see how a system that works so well explaining the way things work could be so far wrong.
And you didn't answer the new colour question. (And I mean visible primary colour).
cause it doesn't fit right for me. you are suggesting that the very idea of a new primary color is absurd right?......which it may well be. but we haven't seen any new primary colours hovering above our heads thoug have we?........orrrrr have we ?Oli said:Ooh, my turn to go out on a limb
Anti gravity- depends what you mean by anti-gravity. Gravity reduction/ control I think may be possible. But not for a while.
me:: a 'while'? how long?
Free energy I think is a flat-out impossibility. It contradicts thermodynamics and that destroys everything we know about physics, it's hard to see how a system that works so well explaining the way things work could be so far wrong.
me::when you say it would destroy everything we know about physics how do you mean that? for example, i am sure you are very aware just how shocked the eearly modern physicists were reported to be when they began finding out events which completely contradicted classical physics. They would say that rather tan destroy clasical physics the nw discovries showed up its limitations--as it still can be used in its limited domain. dont know if you agree with that. but you get my drift. so...what do you mean...totally destroy or show limitations--ie., regarding the possibility of free energy?
And you didn't answer the new colour question. (And I mean visible primary colour).
Duendy,
What Oli is saying is that "free energy" would removes conservation of energy. Without conservation of energy, systems will always run out of control, making all engineering impossible. This is why Oli says Free Energy is "impossible", because it violates fundamental laws of the universe.
Energy into a system always = energy out. The equation has to match up.
Better yet, Matter + energy into a system has to equal the energy and matter coming out (allows for matter/energy conversions).
What Oli is saying is that "free energy" would removes conservation of energy. Without conservation of energy, systems will always run out of control, making all engineering impossible. This is why Oli says Free Energy is "impossible", because it violates fundamental laws of the universe.
Energy into a system always = energy out. The equation has to match up.
Better yet, Matter + energy into a system has to equal the energy and matter coming out (allows for matter/energy conversions).
duendy said:
Where have I ever said that? Having worked in a University research department for four years, I know damned well there's secret technology being developed, but being kept secret largely for Intellectual Property concerns, before patenting, NOT to deny people access to it!
No, you wouldn't mean a proven source of secrets now would you?
Matter has mass, and a property of mass is that mass attracts mass. To get round this, we'd have to first discover exactly which property of matter it is that causes mass, and see if we can make matter without that property. Well, that is a big task, solving the gravitational riddlle, for one, and then actually custom making matter, so it won't interact in a gravitational manner with other matter. We can do something similar in biochemistry at present, and make L-type isomers of sugars and oils that people can't digest, but whether we'll ever make an non gravitional matter 'isomer' is another thing entirely. It may just be fundamentally undoable. Either way, it will be the scientists you so distrust who discover how to do it, not a bunch of acid popping whackos.
Free energy. Nope, this is the new Alchemists dream! Energy requires a potential difference, so all we could hope to achieve here is somehow to tap into energy already stored in the Universe somehow. Well, there is only matter and energy, so I think we already have our 'free' energy. It's called matter, and to get at it, we need to develop nuclear fusion. Of course, it's never actually 'free' because there's no such thing, everything has an activation energy, if it didn't, the reaction would already have taken place long ago, see, and we wouldn't have been there to harness the output.
You aren't blinded BY science duendy, but you are blind TO science. There's a big difference. You could learn enough to see your own folly if you had the inclination. I don't think there's a single physics student who hasn't had a 'fuck me' moment when they learned relativity or quantum mechanics. You think scientists aren't open minded, well we are open minded enough to get brain fucked every now and again, isn't that enough?
i understand. but we have to understand that what 'we KNOW' now would also seem totally impossible to classical scientists (even so beyond their ken as to be 'invisible' if you get me). do you agree?....forget the energy thing for a moment. do you agree wit what i just said?Squeak22 said:
duendy said:
yes, some of the theories that exist today would seem impossible. Now, I know you are trying to get me to say this to go "SEE! So FrEE eNERGY is possIBLE!"
The problem is that no matter what revelations that have overturned science's understanding of the universe, one thing has always stayed true. Conservation of Energy (and Mass) cannot be overturned, because anything that generates energy needs fuel and energy for input.