Idiotic Quote of the Day

Idiotic Quote of the Day

Anonymous said...

@Kea

Actually, people like yourself have a vested interest in selling baroque theories with no connection to physical reality. Your ideas add confusion to an existing body of hyped up speculations...


http://resonaances.blogspot.com/2011/06/more-details-about-cdf-bump.html

Not that my reply to this comment appears there- off topic and I understand the moderation for the resonances blogspot in third party conflicts (not the gracious host who welcomes such debate) that this sort of thing should not be here.

I ask the commenter, one hump or two to compute the chances of finding the globe a little cooler if we rid the antipodes of half its wild camels? Are they sure the black holes were not discovered and changed the chances of things depending on what month you start the economic trends of it all in the search for perpetual free energy and these just ate the data? It is reassuring no such holes were discovered and one blogger humorously concludes the world not sucked up into one- after the fact!

Anon, I begin to wonder if the blogs and forums and internet in general is a good place to do serious science commentary- all are full of nasty nerds in a peeing contest.

What are you telling us? I mean positively? Not that someone's theory is a throwback from some architecture of science in the cathedral of the past- saying that without on shred of why or how save what you appear to feel- everyone else just full of speculation--- she is not confused and if you had an intellect you would consider that, objectively- but if you comment here I wish you would tell us from your deep wisdom how do understand and define this physical reality you seem to know about and its connection to us.

All you Einsteins calling each other crackpots merely delays the confusion that the anomalies and lack of confirmation of your brand of snake oil that now seems to be the case.

Of course from behind the mask in anonymity we know in stealth people deliver greater shocks to others... that classic experiment!

In the war of 1882 we had to go into the canal to rescue stranded American families while the natives just rounded up the Europeans and dispatched them. Of course the warship captain who did not go there to shell the locals acted only on his own authority and did not make an international incident of it by speculating on it first and tying up channels later. When will we learn not to pick sides just for the sake of battle and demonize those different? Nothing much has changed but in the new society one should not have to sit with their back to the wall holding the four fold dimensions of aces and eights.

Doesn't sound like you said anything truly scientific to me.

Of course it is mediocre to make a fourth generation comment pointing out mediocrity which is the state of the physics today- our little gingerbread child is caught in between two cooling towers (see the illustration) as we try to see what is figure and what is ground, focus or mind's eye with its double vision and half truths and sin taxes on whiskey (hey it was proposed beer now be served here at the movies) but it is quite reassuring in the smiles a frown upside down in the cottage cheese continuum to hear from Lubos that we have not written ourselves out of the play.

Meanwhile Voyager goes on to the limits of the influence of the sun working like a clock as a lot of our older generation thinkers and tinkerers made do with their lives and work, a day and a half to get back to us with its messages and hints of magnetic bubbles and lonely voyage unlikely to find a new star or someone to read of us- long after we might go the way of the dinosaurs.

* * *

I proposed an added comment this morning- I am not trying to promote my site or concepts like many do and when you do find them you do have to learn a private language that if you can decode it does not show you the how of it, just hints. Let the promotion of such ideas be given a hearing once, and let me suggest that if the decoding at least in clear notions matches the reality we understand each other and the universal language. While the burden is not on the speaker to obtain fluency the joke is a little too long if one only knows the buzz and curse words in it. To have part of the picture is like trying to run with one leg. (yes, anon I am one that has read some of Kea'a papers since you are wondering- I've read enough to disagree that these approaches braid-wise are two different things, that is cannot be unified into a wider theory- that will be the subject of my next post- but for the first time I am a little reluctant to post this idea before I do start the art domains and dot net.) All we need in my opinion is a little tweaking of our philosophy of science.

Where I share some general patterns of concepts with conflicting theorists here; where I have committed to commenting on the truth and relevance of some of their ideas; where I am careful not to overestimate my abilities or lacks of achievements; it is not I who appears confused and conflicted here for from the binocular view of the ideal Platonic circle where all things are this essence or ideal- that to be discovered- but the cyclops of those born blind in one eye and set so as not to see in depth beyond a certain opportunity of development outside the womb of academia.

There are Theorists of Applications (a step above engineers); there are Theorists of Speculations (even then in their fantasies their inner voices may not be false to its inner logic, relevant or not, so be branded crackpots among the truly non-sane); and there are Theorists of Enquiry for Revelations (a theorist's theorist and guru's guru who perceive and look toward more, unification if any, and the future. Yet like Einstein's desk and his Revelation pipe tobacco- comes hours of comforts of contemplation and good pipe weed can exact the cost of the final curtain, his stroke).

http://resonaances.blogspot.com/2011/06/more-details-about-cdf-bump.html again this quote and see the interesting comments on the next page of this blog. In short the play or story seems to have the same few characters, regulars, and some stray guests whom after awhile one gets to distinguish the actors from the parts they play.


The problem this "experimental reality" and the theorists here are having is that they only see part of the picture while each one is comprehensive in its own right.

Let us not admit that from a higher view undertaking some projects is an act of consummate frivolity - but if the objective is fundamentally confused here why not the invisible self-subjectivity of those involved?

The PeSla