Abramelin, on 14 December 2012 - 10:26 AM, said:
Offence is a big word, Psyche, I just said it would be offensive if *I* started translating for L himself.
Yes it is, and I used it correctly.
LINK. I did not ask for more than assistance if it was available in the interests of clarification. It might have saved what has become an uncomfortable situation.
the L, on 14 December 2012 - 11:27 AM, said:
So you see Abe he tried to offer solution. And he was right. Same as Verne predict many things. I think that I show and proove that scientists realy consider that Plasma life form is ET origin. Meaning it was not evolved on Earth. How Plasma communicate Psyche you can read in "Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, volume 18, page 335."
You provide the paper and I will read it, not only do you expect me to chase down ambiguous links and loose hints, now you want me to start buying $40.00USD papers to converse your personal interpretation of this paper, which from the abstract, it seems you have wrong also.
It is shown that the Exp-function method, with the help of symbolic computation, provides a powerful mathematical tool for solving high-dimensional nonlinear evolution equations in mathematical physics
You have interpreted these differently to I, nothing wrong with that, But I do not agree that plasma is in any way appropriately associated with the AA nonsense that this thread has been revolving around.
the L, on 14 December 2012 - 11:27 AM, said:
Plasma spontaneously organize into crystal-like structures or "plasma crystals". Exactly same as our DNA. Now if you read my posts 1835,1836,1838,1840 you would know that there is about 98% that we dont know about our DNA so how would we know how Plasma crsytals works? I ll spare you. We cant know. We can only suggets same as we are suggesting about our junk DNA.
Furthermore Tsytovich said: "they (Plasma) are autonomous, they reproduce and they evolve".
So if you dont consider that scientific papers are basis for further discussion then we dont need to discuss at all. Because it is ignorance. You cant be cherry picking as one member said. You cant pick what like to your view. Be objective and straight. Also I think is pointless to answer on your above posts because if you read my previous posts I answered on all of your questions. You are now want from me that I made conclusions for you. Which Im not gonna do. Because to tell you the truth I dont like your way of treating people. Nothing personal. Its me. I like manners.
Furthermore Plasma life forms would probably evolve in environments which would be hostile to carbon-based life forms. That itself fact lead scientists to conclude that there is more chance that plasma life form is ET then T origin. Other possobilty was that plasma life form evolve around 4 million years ago on earth about 1 million year before carbon based life appeared. That also doesnt exclude possibility that it came from other planet.
Scientists such as Tsytovich, Lozneanu and Sanduloviciu also proposed idea that plasma life form was crucial in making carbon based life forms. Last two were first who pointed out that Plasma life form is precursors to biological evolution. That plasma spheres were the first cells on Earth a prerequisite for the evolution of biological cells.
Sanduloviciu said on Plasma in space: "There could be life out there, but not as we know it"
You might check Miller-Urey experiment for futher details to see how plasma life fits into creation story. Its experiment that set up conditions like were on early Earth and done experiment in order to found chemical origins of life. They prooved that for geting life basics material one of the requirements is Plasma. And as I already pointed out we have enough evidence to conclude that plasma life form exist. Was it ET origin? Considering what I wrote here and link you to more likely yes then no.
Ofcourse many research must be done but intuition of scientists so far go into one direction. And that isnt one you like to hear obviously.
Hey L
I prefer manners too, I have seen none from yourself toward myself to date. I find you condescending, hard to understand, and when I do go to lengths to chase down the hints, accusations and musings you have set forth I have found you are promoting some personal interpretation of a long shot maybe. Look, I really do not have the time not patience for philosophical BS. This eye for an eye crap has completely drained any respect I had for you left over from other threads, it is said and promoted in a threatening fashion. I had a friend die yesterday, you are making me feel physically sick right now with your tough guy BS. And I do not find you threatening in the least, so please stop the pathetic attempts at trying to be so.
There is more difficulty in interpretation than there is ignorance here L. And your ignorance of the English language is the very cause of it all IMHO.
What I want more than anything is for science to advance, I do not think your overly enthusiastic and condescending approach is helpful nor constructive. You have completely derailed the conversation in thus instance. The worst part is it took pages to get you to just spit out what you were dancing around. If this is an insight into proto-life or something similar, I herald it, but read back through the thread before you joined, the subject was
did man have outside help constructing megalithic structures. Your interpretations of what prominent people have said are wide ranging and extremely ambiguous and only related in your own personal context.
Where has Tsytovich proven evolution?
They are at best still talking wave particle reaction - proto life at best. if that.
A new perturbation theory for solving the Vlasov equation is derived. The theory is especially designed to cope with time secularities and nonanalyticity in the expansion parameter (the field strength). The method is based on the use of a statistical set of exact particle orbits instead of the unperturbed orbits conventionally used in perturbation solutions of the Vlasov equation. A principal result of the theory is a modification of the particle‐wave interaction and a ``broadening'' of the associated resonant denominator (ω − k⋅v)−1. The nature of the time secularities associated with the streaming modes expik⋅vt is discussed. A simple application to velocity‐space diffusion and trapping and its effect on wave growth is described.
Thank you for mentioning Tsytovich, I tracked down both of his papers and have made my way through enough to understand your wild interpretations are not what is being considered. Why this is important is because it might be able to expand out understanding of life, it is not a beeline to another world. I do not share not agree with your rather wild personal interpretations. Let me know when the MU experiment is proven to have definitely sparked life OK. For all you and I know an important element that can only be delivered via Panspermia might be the "spark so to speak. It is interesting, it is a real break through, that is why we gave the fellas a prize for it. Don't promote it for more than what it is, because that tends to lead to disappointments.
the L, on 14 December 2012 - 11:50 AM, said:
You see on this question I answered you more then once and you still ask it.
I do not appreciate your long winded BS round about interpretations. If you have something to say, in future I would suggest you just spit it out man. And no, I still do not consider myself as having received a straight answer from yourself on this subject, this sort of beating around the bush is what you do instead of just saying what you mean. I do not have the time nor patience for someone who cannot just speak straight. It might be the oceans thing again, but I think this contradicts what you have said above:
Quote
You are now want from me that I made conclusions for you. Which Im not gonna do. Because to tell you the truth I dont like your way of treating people.
So you already said you will not give me the answer the the questions I ask, yet you claim to have given me these very answers. I find you tiring and I have to admit, rather annoying. I do not like the way you treat people either L. I think you should get a better grasp in the English language of you are going to enter an English speaking forum. I think the way you have barged in, and made demands with your pidgin English is one of the rudest things I have seen in a while. In fact, I hope you and I do not speak again.
the L, on 14 December 2012 - 11:27 AM, said:
And dont pretend that you didnt understand me. It reminds me on day 25.10.62. on UN security council durin Cuba Crysis Stevenson clash with Zorin.
Stevenson asked:
Do you denied that Soviets put rockets in Cuba? Yes or No? Dont wait for translation.
Go to 4:02.
This is exactly the reason why I do not like you, and hope this is the last time you and I ever converse. I am sorry to say I have not enjoyed the information exchange, and not because of the content. but the presentation. The oceans are too wide for you and I it would seem. Enjoy your break, and I ask please consider never replying to one of my posts again. You might think you were clever with this little quip. I have a very different thought of you right now though.
Thanks for a wonderful return to UM after a bit of a break I hope the pleasantries are returned to you tenfold.
Edited by psyche101, 23 December 2012 - 03:15 AM.
7 votes
