Tweet
Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy
Hi Techdread,
It seems to be very difficult to get across why I have reached my decisions. All I can say is that a lifetime of working within this particular working environment has taught me that conventional science has no intention of accepting anything I have written; none! Yet, at one and the same time, many little things have equally convinced me that they all know full well what I have written and the implications for their own work.
A Cambridge scientist that had a web page with an illustration, beside which he had written that no one knew why we see what he had illustrated. When I tried to debate with him, while at the same time explaining my new theories, brought silence and the web page disappeared.
Scientific American no less, right after my earlier edition, The Universe is a Cloud, some raw food for thought, was published, with an image of a Planetary Nebula by Prof. Bruce Balick; published The Extraordinary Deaths of Ordinary Stars, by Bruce Balick and Adam Frank, 10 pages of it, the authors ending with this statement:
"New information ultimately upends the best of theories in every field of research. That is the nature of progress. Discovery is often disruptive. It clears out old niches and prepares the way for big (and often disorienting) leaps forward. Scientific theories are built to be used, but they must be mistrusted, tested and improved."
As my first work already has a detailed description of what causes the likes of a planetary nebula to occur, where their article makes it clear they do not have a detailed explanation, that they only understand certain aspects of the interaction of another object in close orbit. So, as I had already received permission from Balick to use his image and thus had already communicated with him, I emailed him to ask for the chance to talk to him. His answer; No time, too busy, good luck.
Scientific American must have known about my work, to have permitted that statement to be included. Total silence. Draft of a later edition delivered, total silence again.
Len Sugerman, a Past President of the US Institute of Navigation, at the time a revered member of the staff of New Mexico State University, took my earlier book to a senior cosmologist in NMSU, and later went back with a local radio reporter. The cosmologist stated: "Would you give publicity to someone that claimed to have created a cure for cancer, that is all I am going to say."
I got thrown off the web site Universe Today where "Big Bang is a done deal. Period!
I spent 3 months sleeping on the sofa of Donald L. Birx apartment while he was searching for a home for his family in Houston, (he had just been appointed President of research for the Houston University System, and I had just arrived there with a 1 Ton steel bar to try and carry out some related experiments). The physics department would not let me work and I discovered that I was being treated as though a mad man. Yes, in the last ten days I was given an area in the basement of the Mechanical Engineering Department by Prof. Mathew Franchek, the dept head, but did not have time to finish. Though I did confirm that there is an observable effect when you pass a light beam under a large mass object. As far as I know, the steel bar is still there. I did try and persuade some of the students to carry on but nothing.
It has become very clear to me that conventional science today absolutely refuses to look at new thinking. That a scientist that tries to support you places their whole career in absolute danger. Again and Again, I have had my attempt to open a conversation dead ended by people that see me as a danger to themselves. I have no intention of trying to damage anyone by asking them for support.
Conventional science simply does not want to know about any new thinking. Most are clearly afraid of damaging their careers. Those that have helped, Donald L. Birx is a good example, and for whom I am deeply grateful, yet even he has been unable to find support for me amongst others surrounding him , and like most, he has his own family responsibilities, and thus cannot stick his neck out. He is now President of Plymouth State University. if it were so easy to set such research into motion, you tell me why he has not done so; I can tell you; he would risk his career. Period!
Last September I set out to sort out all the many copyright requests for short passages by others, that I have presented in my book to support my theories. By early November, while still in conversation with several, (it takes at least 8 weeks to gain such approval), someone got into my PC and deliberately damaged the reproducibility of the images in the book file. The book has 216 illustrations, it was quite amazing what happened, all sorts of degradation occurred, then the software started to give me repeated blue screen crashes. My entire system became unstable. So it became clear that someone was doing their best to prevent me publishing the book. It has taken me 4 months to sort it out.
I have no funding, no facilities, no prospect of gaining any access to any support here in the UK. All I can do is encourage others to read the book and try and make their own way forward. Here it is too easy to treat new thinking as a joke, as though made by an idiot. And in which case, it does explain why, after all, I have reached the point where I myself lash out with derision towards a group who refuse any new thinking. So in truth, I am deeply unhappy with my own reaction to all the derisive refusals to help from conventional science. Not the very best place to be I fully admit.
And I am reminded to also tell you about another example. Professor Eric Laithwaite was the inventor of the linear motor; one the the UK's greatest scientists. Asked to present the Royal Institution Christmas Lectures to children over the Christmas holidays. He decided to devote them to asking questions about the actions of gyroscopes that he did not understand, and where he openly debated that science did not know what was going on. That destroyed his career. His are the only lectures never published. They cut him dead.
There are, to this day, web pages dedicated to him http://rense.com/general42/genius.htm
There are many potential experiments in my book, it is for others to carry them forward. My role was to set out the detail, but in so doing, I too, just like Laithwaite, am seen as a crank. Thus there is no prospect of anything I do being seen as acceptable. No one ever funds a crank.
Originally posted by Techdread
View Post
It seems to be very difficult to get across why I have reached my decisions. All I can say is that a lifetime of working within this particular working environment has taught me that conventional science has no intention of accepting anything I have written; none! Yet, at one and the same time, many little things have equally convinced me that they all know full well what I have written and the implications for their own work.
A Cambridge scientist that had a web page with an illustration, beside which he had written that no one knew why we see what he had illustrated. When I tried to debate with him, while at the same time explaining my new theories, brought silence and the web page disappeared.
Scientific American no less, right after my earlier edition, The Universe is a Cloud, some raw food for thought, was published, with an image of a Planetary Nebula by Prof. Bruce Balick; published The Extraordinary Deaths of Ordinary Stars, by Bruce Balick and Adam Frank, 10 pages of it, the authors ending with this statement:
"New information ultimately upends the best of theories in every field of research. That is the nature of progress. Discovery is often disruptive. It clears out old niches and prepares the way for big (and often disorienting) leaps forward. Scientific theories are built to be used, but they must be mistrusted, tested and improved."
As my first work already has a detailed description of what causes the likes of a planetary nebula to occur, where their article makes it clear they do not have a detailed explanation, that they only understand certain aspects of the interaction of another object in close orbit. So, as I had already received permission from Balick to use his image and thus had already communicated with him, I emailed him to ask for the chance to talk to him. His answer; No time, too busy, good luck.
Scientific American must have known about my work, to have permitted that statement to be included. Total silence. Draft of a later edition delivered, total silence again.
Len Sugerman, a Past President of the US Institute of Navigation, at the time a revered member of the staff of New Mexico State University, took my earlier book to a senior cosmologist in NMSU, and later went back with a local radio reporter. The cosmologist stated: "Would you give publicity to someone that claimed to have created a cure for cancer, that is all I am going to say."
I got thrown off the web site Universe Today where "Big Bang is a done deal. Period!
I spent 3 months sleeping on the sofa of Donald L. Birx apartment while he was searching for a home for his family in Houston, (he had just been appointed President of research for the Houston University System, and I had just arrived there with a 1 Ton steel bar to try and carry out some related experiments). The physics department would not let me work and I discovered that I was being treated as though a mad man. Yes, in the last ten days I was given an area in the basement of the Mechanical Engineering Department by Prof. Mathew Franchek, the dept head, but did not have time to finish. Though I did confirm that there is an observable effect when you pass a light beam under a large mass object. As far as I know, the steel bar is still there. I did try and persuade some of the students to carry on but nothing.
It has become very clear to me that conventional science today absolutely refuses to look at new thinking. That a scientist that tries to support you places their whole career in absolute danger. Again and Again, I have had my attempt to open a conversation dead ended by people that see me as a danger to themselves. I have no intention of trying to damage anyone by asking them for support.
Conventional science simply does not want to know about any new thinking. Most are clearly afraid of damaging their careers. Those that have helped, Donald L. Birx is a good example, and for whom I am deeply grateful, yet even he has been unable to find support for me amongst others surrounding him , and like most, he has his own family responsibilities, and thus cannot stick his neck out. He is now President of Plymouth State University. if it were so easy to set such research into motion, you tell me why he has not done so; I can tell you; he would risk his career. Period!
Last September I set out to sort out all the many copyright requests for short passages by others, that I have presented in my book to support my theories. By early November, while still in conversation with several, (it takes at least 8 weeks to gain such approval), someone got into my PC and deliberately damaged the reproducibility of the images in the book file. The book has 216 illustrations, it was quite amazing what happened, all sorts of degradation occurred, then the software started to give me repeated blue screen crashes. My entire system became unstable. So it became clear that someone was doing their best to prevent me publishing the book. It has taken me 4 months to sort it out.
I have no funding, no facilities, no prospect of gaining any access to any support here in the UK. All I can do is encourage others to read the book and try and make their own way forward. Here it is too easy to treat new thinking as a joke, as though made by an idiot. And in which case, it does explain why, after all, I have reached the point where I myself lash out with derision towards a group who refuse any new thinking. So in truth, I am deeply unhappy with my own reaction to all the derisive refusals to help from conventional science. Not the very best place to be I fully admit.
And I am reminded to also tell you about another example. Professor Eric Laithwaite was the inventor of the linear motor; one the the UK's greatest scientists. Asked to present the Royal Institution Christmas Lectures to children over the Christmas holidays. He decided to devote them to asking questions about the actions of gyroscopes that he did not understand, and where he openly debated that science did not know what was going on. That destroyed his career. His are the only lectures never published. They cut him dead.
There are, to this day, web pages dedicated to him http://rense.com/general42/genius.htm
There are many potential experiments in my book, it is for others to carry them forward. My role was to set out the detail, but in so doing, I too, just like Laithwaite, am seen as a crank. Thus there is no prospect of anything I do being seen as acceptable. No one ever funds a crank.
.
Comment