[witsend]

I've never claimed a 'theory'.  Cannot say if it's wrong or right.  The only thing I can say is that about 30 odd qualified engineers can't fault the protocol or the numbers.  I can't get it past the IET to get it reviewed.  And I can't get it onto academic desks for a demo.  But the prize would be if others would replicate.  Not exactly delighted at the prospect of 'being ridiculed' but I'd rather get to the bottom of this than not.  Perhaps a new thread and just the circuit description?  Or how about reference to the paper posted  in a separate blog site?  Is that permitted?  Trouble is that I then disclose my identity Not sure if I want that. I'll give it some more thought.  Thanks for the warning about certain attack.

[Vern]

I've never claimed a 'theory'.  Cannot say if it's wrong or right.  The only thing I can say is that about 30 odd qualified engineers can't fault the protocol or the numbers.  I can't get it past the IET to get it reviewed.

Why is it important to get it reviewed? Who is the reviewer? If you have something that has merit, we will recognize it immediately. If it has no merit, we will try and explain why it doesn't. Your reluctance to disclose what it is that you are thinking about may be an indicator of your own lack of confidence in the idea.

[witsend]

Vern - already attacking?  I've just posted it. My son is going to append the paper as a PDF file? - during the course of the day.  But you're right.  I'm nervous.  At least I'm out there.

[BenV]

Witsend - we've had some aggressive 'over unity' posters here, who refuse to listen to other people, and resultantly become very frustrating.  This just makes people weary of these sorts of ideas.

Try not to be scared off and people will quickly warm to you if you're reasonable and listen to their comments - I suspect you are not one of the frustrating ones!

[witsend]

thanks for the advice BenV.  It's posted under a new thread on overunity.  My son added a link so that you can download the actual paper.  It seemed easiest. 

[witsend]

I drink with you for my : ‘Hopelessly optimistic business’.
S.

Sorry Socratus, I missed this post.  Glad to share that toast, even if a bit belated.  What work do you do?  And try and answer this in simple english.  No obtuse references please.  Just a simple sentence.  Something like, I am a trader.  Or I am a '......'. It will be such a plesure to actually understand something you've written.
 

[socratus (OP)]

I drink with you for my : ‘Hopelessly optimistic business’.
S.

Sorry Socratus, I missed this post. 
Glad to share that toast, even if a bit belated. 
 What work do you do?  And try and answer this in simple english. 
 No obtuse references please. 
 Just a simple sentence. 
 Something like, I am a trader.  Or I am a '......'.
It will be such a plesure to actually understand something you've written.
 

======================================================================
 Albert Einstein, 1954
‘ All these fifty years of conscious brooding have brought me
 no nearer to the answer to the question, 'What are light quanta?'
Nowadays every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks he knows it,
 but he is mistaken. ‘

And I am layman Socratus say:
witsend , Bored chemist, and others can  giggling over
‘ Socratus's posts’ for a half hour, but it doesn’t mean that
 they understand what Quantum of Light/ Photon/Electron is?
================

[Chemistry4me]

but it doesn’t mean that they understand what Quantum of Light/ Photon/Electron is?

Can you tell me what it is then?  []

[witsend]

Indeed Socratus.  I personally do not understand these things.  You are right.   Your point is taken and I apologise for any hurt that you may have felt by my posting.  You have every right to express yourself in any way you wish.  That I can't follow you is probably a fault with my own understanding.  I do hope you'll forgive me. 

'from a chastened witsend'.

[socratus (OP)]

The masses in the Universe are very few.
The distances between stars are very far.
About 99% of the matter in the Universe is unseen.
Nobody knows what it is.
But God using the > 99% Hidden mass of the Universe
controls of his <  1% Visible mass of the Universe.
He is a smart physicist. He smiles and laughs when others say:
 ‘ The formulas are cleverer than men’.
============ . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.

[Chemistry4me]

Haha, I like that idea.

[Vern]

About 99% of the matter in the Universe is unseen.
Nobody knows what it is.

It may be that we are simply not accounting for the contribution to gravity made by electromagnetic phenomena in space. We can sense only of a small portion of all the possible frequencies. As far as we know the range of frequencies is infinite.

[socratus (OP)]

but it doesn’t mean that they understand what Quantum of Light/ Photon/Electron is?

Can you tell me what it is then?  []

=================================================
How can God using 99% Hidden matter take control
 over 1% of the Visible matter?
Here is scheme.

THE GENESIS. (scheme.)
1.
In the beginning was Vacuum some kind of
Infinite/ Eternal Energy Space: T = 0K.
2.
According to Quantum Theory this Infinite Energy Space create
‘ virtual energetic particles – frozen light quanta’. They are in
 ‘rest’/ potential condition and have following physical parameters:
    C/D=pi ,  E=Mc^2, R/N=k ,  h = 0 , i^2=-1 .
3.
Moving Quantum of Light is a Photon.

Planck: h =E/t      h = 1, c=1.
Einstein: h =kb    h =1,  c =1.
4.    
   Working  Quantum of Light/ Photon is an Electron.

Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck:  h(bar) = h/2pi ,    c>1.
      E = hf,   
    Sommerfeld: e^2 = hca   (Electron).
    The Lorentz   transformations.
5.
     Star formation:
e- ->  k  ->  He II -> He I -> rotating He –> plasma reaction -
- -> thermonuclear reaction:
( P. Kapitza , L. Landau, E.L. Andronikashvili  theories ),
( Theories of superconductivity and superfluidity.).
      a) hf > kT
       b) hf = kT
       c) kT > hf
6.
As result of Star formation Proton was created.
     p ( Proton)
7.
    Evolution of interaction between Electron and Proton:
      a) electromagnetic,
       b) nuclear,
       c) biological.
8.
     Laws:
    a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy.
    b) The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / law.
    c) The Pauli Exclusion Principle/ law.
9.
      Testing: 
a) Theory  - Dualism of Consciousness
              (consciousness / subconsciousness.)
b) Personal practice. – Parapsychology. (Meditation.)
============ . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
#
I want to know how God created this world.
I am not interested in this or that phenomenon,
in the spectrum of this or that element.
I want to know His thoughts; the rest are details.
/Einstein/
#

[witsend]

Yet again, I'm blown away at your knowledge.  But these equations mean nothing to me.  Is it not possible to explain the symbols?  Would it totally spoil the pleasre of writing equations to also define them?  I feel 'left out'.  I envy you guys who 'read' this as easily as a language.  What I did understand was this.
'
I want to know how God created this world.
I am not interested in this or that phenomenon,
in the spectrum of this or that element.
I want to know His thoughts; the rest are details.
/Einstein/'

Me too.  Just not quite so liberally endowed with the required IQ to even get close.  But I also want to understand.  Meanwhile I'd settle for understanding Socratus' equations. I think there should be some rule made to accommodate the less qualified readers - no equations unless their defined.   

Come on Socratus.  Is it asking too much?

Incidentally I couldn't find anything on Lao Tzu so looked him up on the web.  I'm still looking for examples of his writing.  Is he attributed with writing the Tao?

[socratus (OP)]

#
In my opinion if God exists, He/She/It would necessarily
 to work in an Absolute Reference Frame and had set of
 physical and mathematical laws to create   everything
 in the Universe.
If we find and understand this Absolute God’s House then
is possible to find and understand God’s Physics Laws, which
 Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Maxwell, Planck, Einstein and
 many others discovered.
============= . .
S.

[socratus (OP)]

More comments.

alt.philosophy.taoism

the God.  !!! 

http://groups.google.nu/group/alt.philosophy.taoism/browse_thread/thread/bf462a786c36a855/f1a9d2e2f6480ba1

157 posts  -  13 authors. 
========== .

[witsend]

Thanks Socratus - I'll check it out.

[witsend]

If we find and understand this Absolute God’s House then is possible to find and understand God’s Physics Laws, which Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Maxwell, Planck, Einstein and  many others discovered. Socratus

None of them have found God.  They only found rules that seemed to fit Nature.  Surely God is more than a mathematical equation? My own take is that He gave us natural laws to ensure that He also gave us free will.  He sort of said, OK - there's the setting, the play ground, so to speak.  Do with it what you will.  Discover what you may.  But take heed.  There are consequences if you abuse it.