117 replies to this topic

[vitruvian12]

questionmark, on 08 May 2011 - 10:45 PM, said:

relatively quantifiable please.

lol,
such a stickler for exactness

[Siddhas100]

vitruvian12, on 08 May 2011 - 10:42 PM, said:

You are correct in assuming I dont understand what the energy of unity is and how a man made digit (the number one) can store it any better than any other digit (take your pick). As far as the energy that exists in this world it can be measured and the results conveyed in a unit that is objective. Potential energy is simply the amount of energy stored in a body due to its position.

Are you assuming I do not understand objectivity on that level? I cannot exhaust all of the details about why I said what I said about the numbers because to be quite frank, you don't matter to me enough to exhaust that kind of energy trying to get a point across in that matter. Nor do you seem like someone I would interact with anyway in real life, so why would I do that now with you? Now that maybe an assumption by me...

Are you going to give me something if I do? You can take it or leave it, does not matter to me. Say what you want about me, makes no difference to me. But I am not going to attack anyone and if someone says something I can ask them about it. Just anyone can ask me. If I feel like it I will respond. Its simple But anyone with eyes to see will, and those who do not don't. Ok and? I am still waiting on you to prove that potential energy does not exist?

Edited by Siddhas100, 08 May 2011 - 10:51 PM.

[The_Spartan]

questionmark, on 08 May 2011 - 10:45 PM, said:

relatively quantifiable please.

oops...yes...relatively quantifiable!

[Siddhas100]

The Spartan, on 08 May 2011 - 10:44 PM, said:

As virtuvian was pointing out, your concept of energy is flawed.

An Unit of Energy is not same as the Energy of Unity.
An Unit of Energy is joule!
Please tell me ..what is the "Unit" of this "Energy of Unity"

Lol. What does that have to do with what I am saying? It's potential energy. That is what I mean by unity of energy. That is it. And it is everywhere. Can you prove that it is not?

Edited by Siddhas100, 08 May 2011 - 10:49 PM.

[vitruvian12]

Siddhas100, on 08 May 2011 - 10:47 PM, said:

Are you assuming I do not understand objectivity on that level? I cannot exhaust all of the details about why I said what I said about the numbers because to be quite frank, you don't matter to me enough to exhaust that kind of energy trying to get a point across in that matter. Nor do you seem like someone I would interact with anyway in real life, so why would I do that now with you?

Are you going to give me something if I do? You can take it or leave it, does not matter to me. Say what you want about me, makes no difference to me. But I am not going to attack anyone and if someone says something I can ask them about it. Just anyone can ask me. If I feel like it I will respond. Its simple But anyone with eyes to see will, and those who do not don't. Ok and? I am still waiting on you to prove that potential energy does not exist?

Do you even read what anyone else has been posting? No one here has denied the existence of potential energy, its one of the first things that's taught in high school physics. What I doubt is that you know what it means in anything other than your non scientific belief. I think you not wanting to discuss it is based more on inability than unwillingness

[Siddhas100]

vitruvian12, on 08 May 2011 - 10:53 PM, said:

Do you even read what anyone else has been posting? No one here has denied the existence of potential energy, its one of the first things that's taught in high school physics. What I doubt is that you know what it means in anything other than your non scientific belief. I think you not wanting to discuss it is based more on inability than unwillingness

There you go again. How do you know what is in my mind? You telepathic? You have no idea what I know about science or if I am scientific or unscientific, because fact of the matter is I have not said either way. How is it that you not liking my use of an adjective is conclusive irrefutable proof that I do not know science?

[vitruvian12]

Siddhas100, on 08 May 2011 - 10:57 PM, said:

There you go again. How do you know what is in my mind? You telepathic? You have no idea what I know about science or if I am scientific or unscientific, because fact of the matter is I have not said either way. How is it that you not liking my use of an adjective is conclusive irrefutable proof that I do not know science?

It doesnt matter to me what adjectives you use. Its your inability to give a real definition of a term that you have used and your quick defensiveness that make me think you dont know "science". Whatever that means.

[amazingmrx]

Thanks vitruvian12 and Siddhas100 for successfully hijacking what was originally a very interesting and thought provoking thread. Please take your bickering and opinionated attacks somewhere else next time. You're not even on topic at this point.

Seriously, I appreciate all the people who contributed meaningful and on-topic posts.

I was surprised to find that no one mentioned Jon DePew's work or website. Whether he's on to something or not is up for you to decide, but his postulations are interesting none-the-less.

http://coralcastlecode.com/

Edited by amazingmrx, 31 May 2011 - 10:29 AM.

[aquatus1]

Welcome to the forum, Amazingmrx.  I think you will find admonitions to other posters will be generally pointless if no one has posted in almost 3 weeks.  If you run into an issue that you feel needs addressing, please use the Report function to bring it to the attention of the moderators.  Enjoy your stay.

[Rastaman]

ROFL.

I'll ask the question a third time now, how do they do the finger thing ! !

[third_eye]

amazingmrx, on 31 May 2011 - 10:26 AM, said:

Thanks vitruvian12 and Siddhas100 for successfully hijacking what was originally a very interesting and thought provoking thread. Please take your bickering and opinionated attacks somewhere else next time. You're not even on topic at this point.

Seriously, I appreciate all the people who contributed meaningful and on-topic posts.

I was surprised to find that no one mentioned Jon DePew's work or website. Whether he's on to something or not is up for you to decide, but his postulations are interesting none-the-less.

http://coralcastlecode.com/

I like his experiments with those spinning thingies
Though since I have not seen any other successful instances nor where there verified independently (not to my knowledge, it was a long time ago, at least in internet years) I kinda lost interest

[Blackwhite]

Roj47, on 01 June 2006 - 09:59 AM, said:

Being very much English I would agree the secret to the universe is a good cuppa tea

I agree.  Drinking tea helped us to be the world's dominant power not long ago.

Anyway, I don't expect you to reply to this post because you are from 2006 and I'm from your future so you may not be posting on this dicussion forum in my time.

Edited by Blackwhite, 01 June 2011 - 06:05 PM.

[Abramelin]

Blackwhite, on 01 June 2011 - 06:04 PM, said:

I agree.  Drinking tea helped us to be the world's dominant power not long ago.

Anyway, I don't expect you to reply to this post because you are from 2006 and I'm from your future so you may not be posting on this dicussion forum in my time.

Heh, I think having all those tea-breaks is what eventually made you English loose your empire.

[thewatchman7]

Abramelin, on 01 June 2011 - 06:10 PM, said:

Heh, I think having all those tea-breaks is what eventually made you English loose your empire.

nope it was the visits to the dentist
the time drinking tea was made up by not bathing.

[Abramelin]

thewatchman7, on 01 June 2011 - 06:18 PM, said:

nope it was the visits to the dentist
the time drinking tea was made up by not bathing.

Something makes me feel that you are not an Englishman.

But I do like the idea that at some moments in history some Brittish commanders said, "Fk off, I am having tea now. Come back later".

Edited by Abramelin, 01 June 2011 - 06:35 PM.