X-Ftn-To: George Hammond

George Hammond wrote:
>[Hammond]
> Lets assume this is NOT a hoax. What it means is that
>at least TWO OTHER PEOPLE out there have finally seen the
>light, and realized that Hammond's Scientific Proof of
>God is a bona fide scientific discovery by a qualified
>scientist.

Actually, their article seems to be a good piece of irony, I really
like it. Especially the parts like:

"In fact, we think that the
quality of your research is flawless. So flawless, in fact,
that it is a credit to you that you do not even have to prove
your scientific laws mathematically. Surely this is of true
genius."

and:

"Post Script: By the way, did you ever receive a reply from
Roger Penrose? If not, I am sure it was because he was
dumbfounded by your genius and could not bring himself to
wasting your time in unlocking the secrets of the universe."

I mean, :)))))

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: George Hammond

George Hammond wrote:
>[Hammond]
>Thanks for rolling over and going cutsie on me moron.
>You can't post an intelligent statement if you had too...
>just OT kook one-liners.

The man is smart. I tried talking to you and look what I've got. The
only reason why you're here, and not on some mailing list of
professionals, is that you'd be immediately unsubscribed for spamming
and misbehavior. Where do you think the real experts talk, on
newsgroups where the kooks like you can go and disturb their
concentration? They have their own mailing-lists on university
servers, of course. Once they recognize you as their peer, you'll
probably get an invitation to join. I could find several lists on
google. If you join, and if you're very, very humble and unimposing
("I accidentally stumbled upon some thought-provoking data; IMHO, they
might be interesting for those who study the bio morpho-genic field
and similar effects - if any of you would be so kind, I would really
appreciate your thoughts on my findings"), some of the experts there
will give you an evaluation of your thesis, for free. It will be
negative, of course, but you'll never get anything else.

As for the Christian definitions of God, see:
http://personalwebs.myriad.net/ffwb/wgod.htm
http://home.regent.edu/rodmwil/10teach-01.htm
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c1.htm#III
http://www.soulocity.com/faq.html#WhoIsGod
http://www.greattrumpet.org/godattributesnature.htm
http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/g/god.htm

These pages contain enough theological information for you to be able
to reconsider your article; I suggest that you take an especially
close look at http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c1.htm#III , the
excerpt from the Catholic catechism, which will give you an idea how
to express and elaborate your arguments; it is an example of a
well-written and argumented article.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Paul Rubin

Paul Rubin wrote:
>> >agreement on them. In my view, "self-publishing"
>> >is the logical route for writers to take on the net.
>> >Here, "vanity press" is a print world anachronism.
>>
>> I agree. Actually, if I make my own website, and pay for the domain
>> name and the disk space, is it vanity web? :))
>
>If you make your own website and put your stuff there, that's
>self-publishing. Vanity web would be sending your raw text to some
>publisher, and paying them to would turn it into html and put it on
>-their- web site alongside the work of other publishers.

I thought so.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: George Hammond

George Hammond wrote:
>It's not quite that simple. If it was, it wouldn't have taken 4,000
>years to figure it out.
> Fact is, there is first of all a Genetic difference between
>people, and second of all, a Growth difference between people.
>this is commonly referred to as NATURE and NURTURE... perhaps
>you've heard it mentioned even out in Croatia.
> The "growth curve deficit" is simply another name for NURTURE.
>Ok, so Stephen Hawkings has Hi-Nature (genetics/class) and
>Lo-Nurture (development). This is true of all geniuses in general.
>on the other hand, Mike Tyson has Hi-Nurture and Lo-Nature, which
>is true of all Boxers in general (Lo-Class, Hi-Development). In fact,
>as a general rule, the Higher the Class, the Lower the Development,
>and the Lower the Class, the higher the Development... NATURE and
>NURTURE offset each other, and THIS is what causes "ALL MEN TO
>BE EQUAL", in case you never figured it out.

muscle*brain = const., it seems.
This says that intellectual and physical development seem to be
reverse rather than directly proportional values, which kisses your
theory bye-bye. You really do have a talent for putting a foot in your
mouth. ;) Where is your Bully God now, eh?

BTW, by we now we had two physicists with degrees, and myself, an
ex-wannabe physicist without a degree, tell you more-less the same
thing about your theories. Why don't you start printing them on toilet
paper and put them to good use, for a change?

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Bill Palmer

"Bill Palmer" wrote:
>As I said, what annoys me is that where you
>should be explaining your net-publishing terms,
>you are smugly assuming that everyone is in
>agreement on them. In my view, "self-publishing"
>is the logical route for writers to take on the net.
>Here, "vanity press" is a print world anachronism.

I agree. Actually, if I make my own website, and pay for the domain
name and the disk space, is it vanity web? :)) And what is the
difference between me putting a PDF with my book on my website, and
posting a link to an online bookstore where the physical book can be
bought? The term "vanity press" should be limited to unpublishable
authors paying for their crap to be printed in order for them to be
able to give it to people who don't want to read it.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Mark Sullivan

sulli000@hotmail.com (Mark Sullivan) wrote:
>I know there are plenty of us in the Mensa society. I was wondering, is
>there any way to find out the list of members in some of the more elite societies.
>I know that Steve S. has a site where you can get a glimpse at some of the
>more elite members. Is there a cummulative list for the members of the
>Giga and Mega society? I have check out Darryl M's links and haven't found anything.

Well, my thought is that after a certain point, you just can't measure
the IQ correctly; I'd say that this is the reason why Mensa is the 2%
club. You can say that someone is more-less above IQ 148, but which
one of them is more intelligent, well, this becomes a problem. 0.001%,
well, this would indicate that someone is very good at solving IQ
tests, but I'd say that you're more likely to find the 1/M or 1/G
folks in the Nobel prize group, not in Mensa. The IQ that big is
something that has to show in real life, so, why not just look for the
guys who displayed results?
Einstein supposedly had IQ of around 150, and so did Tesla. But, how
many Einsteins or Teslas do we get per G, eh? Per 10G? T?

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: George Hammond

George Hammond wrote:
> Let me tell you what God is. Ever see a 180 lb Bully start
>beating up on a 150 lb Nerd. Ok, these two people could be
from the same social class, even identical twins... but one of
>them has grown up lucky, and the other one grew up in desperate
>circumstances without enough to eat probably.
> The 150 lb wimp is missing 20% of his body, height, weight and
>brain power. He can't even cross the street in heavy traffic because
>he can't judge the speed. He can't hit a baseball because they're
>going to fast. This guy is only seeing 70% of reality, while the
>Bully can see 85% of Reality and can beat the piss out of him
>because of it. THE DIFFERENCE IS GOD.

I keep thinking about this, because I cannot figure out whether you're
a nazi apologist, or simply unaware of the reality.
Let me tell you a better theory, much more consistent with reality.
People have different points of focus of consciousness. Some are
focused at the physical, and their body evolves at greater speed,
compared to their intellect and spirit. The others are more
spiritually or intellectually inclined, and their consciousness dwells
not only in their physical body; they see their spirit as the greatest
part of their personality, not their body.
Nerds are the cream of the human species. They are the mind and the
soul. They are the inventors, the thinkers, geniuses. The bullies can
kick their ass, but bullies will end up serving hamburgers somewhere,
and the nerds will make the computer that you use. The bully will take
it to your home, because that's what his muscles are good for, but the
nerd with no muscles and with big ugly glasses will create that
computer and the software that runs on it, and he'll also design the
robots that assemble it. Have you seen an average programmer or a
system administrator? They're not the big bullies, they're usually the
nerdy-looking folks with strange clothing, thick glasses, fucked up
spines, green unhealthy tan, and enormous minds filled with linux
kernel source. If they had UTP connectors on their heads, you could
probably plug them into a hub and they'd increase the system
efficiency by 75% by just being there.

I was always the nerd type. While my classmates played basketball or
soccer, I thought about spatio-temporal distortions between the event
horizon and the singularity, trying to figure out whether the falling
matter crosses into this universe, at a coordinate of corresponding
"density" of the universe, in times close to big bang, or in a
parallel universe with the density higher than that of our own - I
concluded that it creates the quasars within our own space.
When they drank their beer and commented ballgames, I tried to figure
out how to break the photon into vector and scalar components, in
order to figure out how to make a velocity inductor, that could be
used for space travel; the point was to change the speed/direction
vector of an object, thus accelerating it to any speed without
acceleration, or slowing it down immediately without deceleration.
When they laughed at me for being a nerd, and threw my bag out of the
school window, I could only look at them and feel pity, because I
could understand their entire world, and they could understand nothing
of mine.
I was always lousy at soccer, because I was thinking about the best
way to engineer a hot fusion reactor - how to ignite the local spark
with a laser and pick the fusioning plasma up into the double-toroidal
8-shaped magnetic bottle that would already be filled with hot enough
plasma, that could catch the reaction and hold - this would hopefully
reduce the necessary strength of the magnets, because I figured that
less power is needed to maintain the reaction than to start it; I
could never catch the ball in time and they always thought I was
clumsy and stupid.
I programmed a Commodore 64 when there were only a handful in the
country, in 1983, when I was 10 years old; after that, when I was 13,
I bought a Sharp 1403 pocket computer with BASIC, which I could take
with me everywhere, and programmed a dozen subroutines for working
with the Mayan vigesimal system (base 20). But I was the no-good nerd
who couldn't play basketball and had no muscles. They could all beat
me up, and they sometimes did. They could all ridicule me, and they
did it all the time. But they could never understand what I was
thinking, because I was a member of Mensa at the time when they just
discovered that they have a dick to wank; what they couldn't
understand, they called stupid and they ridiculed me for stupidity.
I'm from Croatia. English isn't my first language, but I was always so
good at it, that I used to chat with the professor in it, while the
other kids could only say moooo. How did I get so good? I listened to
my Father's learning tapes, being a nerd, and I learned the basic
thoughtforms and structure of it while I was 5-6 years old; I also
read encyclopaedias for fun when I was 7, and I read a couple of books
every week.
In 1992. I entered college with hopes of figuring the world out
through physics; I intended to graduate, magistrate and doctorate,
probably win a Nobel prize or something for discovering the
fundamental structure of the Universe. But, during a lecture I
suddenly realized that this Universe's reality was secondary and that
I would never be able to understand the primary reality through
physics... so I quit the study and started studying Indian philosophy
and practicing some yogic techniques that I could find in the books -
I accepted several initiations from God himself; in 1993 I was granted
a vision, in 1994 I entered nirvikalpa samadhi. In 1997, after an
initiation into Vajra, I started accepting students and teaching the
system of yoga that I conceived through my practice, from my personal
experience. Two of my students are already enlightened and they, too,
have students. The others are on their way towards that.
My body will be 28 years old this month.

Where are all the bullies now? You'll never hear anything about any of
them, because they will probably leave little or no trace behind them,
they will move through life like a fog; they aren't creative, they
don't have "the spark" in them, they are mediocrities.
Now, I don't care for your comment, because, judging by your mental
capacity displayed so far, you are a total idiot. I'm just telling
this as an illustration of your utter stupidity, for others'
satisfaction. You are so wrong, that you should have your ass spanked
into red pulp for it.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: George Hammond

George Hammond wrote:
> The 150 lb wimp is missing 20% of his body, height, weight and
>brain power. He can't even cross the street in heavy traffic because
>he can't judge the speed. He can't hit a baseball because they're
>going to fast. This guy is only seeing 70% of reality, while the
>Bully can see 85% of Reality and can beat the piss out of him
>because of it. THE DIFFERENCE IS GOD.

Aha, so you want to say that we have Stephen Hawking (or Albert
Einstein, or Bill Gates, or...) the nerd on one hand, and Mike Tyson
the bully on other, and Iron Mike is obviously the embodiment of God,
his muscles guarantee him the brainpower and he's obviously the one
who sees more of the reality.

I mean, what's your IQ, i?

> Until you understand that, you don't know anything about God.

:)))))))))))))))
Actually, you just keep writing stuff like that, it's amusing. :))))

>Horseshit, I graduated from two accredited Universities in Massachusetts
>USA in Physics.

Your mentor deserves to be fired.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: George Hammond

George Hammond wrote:
>> >Of course not. That's why he is a crackpot.
>>
> in
>> Croatia, we have one guy who keeps stalking the maths professors at
>> the university in Zagreb and tries to tell them that he managed to
>> calculate the pi to the last decimal. He keeps complaining that they
>> are all narrow-minded and dogmatic.
>
>[Hammonhd]
>reminds me of you guys... not ONE of you with a physics degree,
>stalKing the physicist and telling him his physics discovery
>"can't be" correct. Hah hah ahah ahah .. what a bunch of crackpots.

Sweetheart, you are very confused about some important matters.
First, this is not about physics, it's about theology. This is my home
ground, and _you_ are the one without any qualifications. Judging by
your ignorance of the matter, you probably haven't read a book on
theology in your entire life, probably not even the Bible, because you
are utterly clueless regarding its content; you have no coherent
concept of God, which is the fundamental thing for any meaningful
discussion.
Second, you lack fundamental knowledge of scientific methodology, not
to mention the basics of logical thinking. This disqualifies you as a
scientist, and I guess your "degree" cost 15$. I got several spam
messages advertising BS, BA, MS or PhD degrees "based on your life
experience, for a reasonable sum"; I guess they had themselves a
sucker.
Third, I actually studied physics for a while (PMF, university of
Zagreb), but I abandoned the study when I started practicing yoga; it
was a while ago, and I didn't study for long, but I kinda know my way
around things, even though I forgot most of the maths. Yours isn't the
first article on physics that I read, but it certainly is the lousiest
of them all, below any scientific standard, and borders with mental
illness. If you show your crap to any of the professors on any decent
university, I'm sure that they'll agree with me on this. Just don't
show it to any professor of theology or philosophy, because he'll
laugh so hard that his heart might give up on him.
So, instead of trying to smear decent people, start cleaning up your
act and try to learn for a change. If you want to prove something
about God, buy several good books on the subject, or go study at some
good university. If that's beyond you, find an expert and learn from
him, ask questions and absorb. Then, when you begin to understand the
purpose of definition of the object of study, and similar basic
things, you will probably be able to see and correct your errors, and
you'll most certainly be less arrogant about your crappy
"achievements". But now, you are utterly incompetent and the most
decent thing that you could do would be to just stay quiet.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Ivica Lozic

"Ivica Lozic" wrote:
> A sto se tice izjave "Bog sve voli", mislim da je to
>>opet sistem kako si mali Ivica zamislja Boga.
>
>A dobro kaj je sad ovo, mali Ivica ovo, mali Ivica ono...;>> Adje uzmite
>mali Perica, mislim da nema nijedan na konfi :)

:))))

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org