Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #659278 > unrolled thread
| Started by | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-11-30 20:23 -0500 |
| Last post | 2024-12-20 09:21 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 101 — 11 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-11-30 20:23 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-12-01 04:49 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-01 15:34 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-12-01 23:35 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-01 21:17 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-12-02 23:48 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-02 22:43 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? x <x@x.org> - 2024-12-03 19:31 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-04 09:12 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2024-12-04 18:50 +0000
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-12-05 09:23 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-05 08:43 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-05 09:18 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? x <x@x.org> - 2024-12-05 16:04 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-05 16:34 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-05 19:40 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-05 19:55 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-07 09:56 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-05 16:33 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-01 21:12 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-12-03 08:52 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-03 17:37 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-07 17:52 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-12-09 06:54 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-09 13:12 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-12-09 19:12 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-09 21:17 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-12-12 21:38 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-12 18:53 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-12-13 01:53 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-13 02:01 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-21 01:14 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> - 2024-12-13 09:28 +0100
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-12-13 12:34 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-13 11:45 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> - 2024-12-14 15:18 +0100
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-14 21:04 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertietaylor) - 2024-12-15 05:23 +0000
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-12-16 09:56 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> - 2024-12-16 17:54 +0100
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-16 13:28 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2024-12-16 22:45 +0000
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-16 22:10 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 13:03 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? Python <coin@python.invalid> - 2024-12-17 18:06 +0000
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 21:28 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 21:31 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 02:24 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 13:09 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 20:57 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 20:52 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-01-10 15:49 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-11 02:40 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-01-11 00:51 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-01-11 00:53 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-11 13:51 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-01-11 12:37 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-15 05:21 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-01-15 10:02 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-15 17:37 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-16 05:29 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-01-16 16:37 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-16 05:34 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-16 05:41 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-16 05:46 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-16 05:51 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-01-16 10:56 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? x <x@x.org> - 2025-01-16 14:40 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-17 17:05 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-01-17 14:17 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-01-17 22:44 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-01-18 13:55 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-18 18:19 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-18 18:23 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-01-19 15:21 -0600
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-19 17:28 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-18 18:51 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-01-18 16:14 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-01-19 00:58 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-01-19 17:06 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-19 15:15 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-01-19 14:42 -0600
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-01-19 16:19 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-01-19 18:57 -0600
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-01-19 17:07 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-01-19 17:45 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-01-19 22:46 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-01-20 15:58 -0600
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-21 11:55 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-01-21 12:48 -0600
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-01-19 19:01 -0600
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-01-19 19:03 -0600
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-01-19 17:05 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-01-19 17:15 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-19 15:02 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-01-11 21:18 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2025-01-15 04:50 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 12:47 -0500
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? Python <jp@python.invalid> - 2024-12-17 19:04 +0000
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 15:49 -0800
Re: IS THE AFTERLIFE RELATIVISTIC? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-20 09:21 -0800
Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-03 08:52 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <860b6c88-6e89-4437-810e-b67a8a6974e1@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #659303 |
On 12/2/2024 12:12 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 11/30/2024 5:23 PM, George Hammond wrote:
>> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
>> Research Note:
>> November 29, 2024
>> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz[...]
>
> Some say the afterlife is exactly like it was before you were born? ;^)
>
> I don't know.
Hi Chris Thomasson--
Glad to make your acquaintance.
Apparently you are a Math/Fractal enthusiast
somewhere in Nevada. I will ask if you have any
Academioc credentials? I'm an MS in physics.
You have brought up the ancient canard that: ---
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
"Life after death is the same as life before birth."
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Which has long been used as a tool by Atheists to
argue that there is no such thing as an "Afterlife".
But modern science has clearly shown that while
birth may be a well-defined point in time, death is
a more complicated timewise experience.
Generally speaking, the medical community has agreed
that the occurrence of the "depolarization wave" through
the brain is the "official moment of death" (assuming
that the person is not subsequently revived).
But closer examination of many EEG tracings of people
dying in rest homes – shows the following familiar
EEG death graph:--- See Figure 1 in the following paper
by Dr. Chawla:---
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1089/jpm.2009.0159
Notice that the EEG goes to zero for 4 or 5 minutes, and then
"amazingly" it spikes back up to normal for a few seconds,
before drops back to zero permanently.
And the question is:-- what is happening during that last minute
of this "life after death" EEG pulse? And I say that this is
precisely when the "Afterlife" occurs !
IOW, brain EEG death has actually occurred, when suddenly
an unseen, unheard, undetected and unnoticed Ultraviolet Light
Flash taking only "a fraction of a second" races through the water
filled microtubules inside the neurons of the brain, reading out the
"memory bank" of the brain (which happens to be stored in the
walls of the microtubules BTW), causing the now "dead person "
to experience a 5-year Afterlife which is "relativisticly time
compressed" by the 10^15 Hz UV light frequency relative to the
normal 1-KiloHz neuronal firing frequency of the neurons!
So "Life after Death" actually refers to the fact that the dying
person experiences the Afterlife as say 5 years, while the bedside
observer sees it take place in a fraction of a second-- and the
reason for this is that the microtubule system runs at 10^15 Hz
while the neuronal system runs at about 1-kilohz--- a "time
compression ratio" of about 10-trillion to one !
So it may appear to the bedside observer that "Life after death
is the same as life before birth" --- but to the person who just died
I appears according to this theory that life after death is much
more like life AFTER birth, that it is like life before birth !
Geo Hammond MS Physics Hyannis 12/3/24
.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-03 17:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <viobpg$ei97$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #659316 |
On 12/3/2024 5:52 AM, George Hammond wrote: > On 12/2/2024 12:12 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >> On 11/30/2024 5:23 PM, George Hammond wrote: >>> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz >>> Research Note: >>> November 29, 2024 >>> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz[...] >> >> Some say the afterlife is exactly like it was before you were born? ;^) >> >> I don't know. > Hi Chris Thomasson-- > Glad to make your acquaintance. > Apparently you are a Math/Fractal enthusiast > somewhere in Nevada. I will ask if you have any > Academioc credentials? I'm an MS in physics. Not really. I am basically self taught. Started programming early at around 5 - 6 years old in BASIC on my trusty Atari. Then moved on to an Apple IIGS, programming and learning about how to do it via assembly language. Moved onto a DOS machine. Taught myself C. Then I taught myself visual basic and started making database programs using access as a back end. Then moved onto learning about WinNT. Started programming there and learned about all of its C API's. Started making servers. Heck. I won a T2000 server from Sun in their CoolThreads programming contest. Dealing with lock-free sync and shit like that. Then I sort got out of programming servers and threads to fractals. Iirc, around 2012-2013. Just trying to create my own software and seeing if I could recreate what other fractal software was making for a given formula. Got good at it. Then I taught myself all about vector fields. Got good at them. Got into programming GLSL shaders and Modern OpenGL. Got good at it. I made the cover of the AMS calendar for math imagery: https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1218640825961580&set=pcb.1218640912628238 https://i.ibb.co/y8YfMS4/image.png I got February: https://i.ibb.co/vBKYqy7/image.png :^) I won several fractal contests, and got some neat prizes. So, I am adept at creating high performance lock/wait/obstruction-free algorithms, fractals, vector fields, ect... Here is some of my work. I also dabble in creating music, from time to time: https://youtu.be/HwIkk9zENcg I was fun creating the music. Fwiw, I posted some of my code for a special IFS algorithm of mine in the comments of: https://youtu.be/XKhS_nklCkE You should try to recreate it for fun on your end. Also, here is some more of my work: https://paulbourke.org/fractals/multijulia/ Try to recreate this as well, for fun. Well, when you get some free time to burn. ;^) > > You have brought up the ancient canard that: --- > > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz > "Life after death is the same as life before birth." > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz > > Which has long been used as a tool by Atheists to > argue that there is no such thing as an "Afterlife". > > But modern science has clearly shown that while > birth may be a well-defined point in time, death is > a more complicated timewise experience. > > Generally speaking, the medical community has agreed > that the occurrence of the "depolarization wave" through > the brain is the "official moment of death" (assuming > that the person is not subsequently revived). > > But closer examination of many EEG tracings of people > dying in rest homes – shows the following familiar > EEG death graph:--- See Figure 1 in the following paper > by Dr. Chawla:--- > > https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1089/jpm.2009.0159 > > Notice that the EEG goes to zero for 4 or 5 minutes, and then > "amazingly" it spikes back up to normal for a few seconds, > before drops back to zero permanently. > > And the question is:-- what is happening during that last minute > of this "life after death" EEG pulse? And I say that this is > precisely when the "Afterlife" occurs ! > > IOW, brain EEG death has actually occurred, when suddenly > an unseen, unheard, undetected and unnoticed Ultraviolet Light > Flash taking only "a fraction of a second" races through the water > filled microtubules inside the neurons of the brain, reading out the > "memory bank" of the brain (which happens to be stored in the > walls of the microtubules BTW), causing the now "dead person " > to experience a 5-year Afterlife which is "relativisticly time > compressed" by the 10^15 Hz UV light frequency relative to the > normal 1-KiloHz neuronal firing frequency of the neurons! > > So "Life after Death" actually refers to the fact that the dying > person experiences the Afterlife as say 5 years, while the bedside > observer sees it take place in a fraction of a second-- and the > reason for this is that the microtubule system runs at 10^15 Hz > while the neuronal system runs at about 1-kilohz--- a "time > compression ratio" of about 10-trillion to one ! > > So it may appear to the bedside observer that "Life after death > is the same as life before birth" --- but to the person who just died > I appears according to this theory that life after death is much > more like life AFTER birth, that it is like life before birth ! > > Geo Hammond MS Physics Hyannis 12/3/24 > . >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-07 17:52 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <vj2u40$3dpe1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #659321 |
On 12/3/2024 5:37 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: [...] I don't know. Some people say that after you die, you will still exist. Not sure if the point of _conception_ is a beginning, even though it seems so. So others say you were around before being conceived (result of a sort of "procreation algorithm") on Earth. I just don't know.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-09 06:54 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <e81ed6a8-d110-405e-a934-c124e1274723@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #659399 |
On 12/7/2024 8:52 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 12/3/2024 5:37 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> [...]
>
> I don't know. Some people say that after you die, you will still exist.
> Not sure if the point of _conception_ is a beginning, even though it
> seems so. So others say you were around before being conceived (result
> of a sort of "procreation algorithm") on Earth. I just don't know.
>
>
[George Hammond] MS Physics
Hi Chris M. Thomasson
I realize that you are a Fractal Artist while I am a Physicist.
However, anyone can think about Life after Death (LAD).
Around 1980 I got curious, and I immediately realized
that the only realistic PHYSICS was that LAD had to occur in
the human brain. And if so-- it had to be EXTREMELY FAST
since some forms of death (eg lightning, TNT, A-Bomb, etc.)
are very fast--- and this told me that the only possible
mechanism that could beat these kinds of speed--- would
have to entail a quantum mechanical signal in a solid-state
system somewhere in the BRAIN ! The problem was, that
in 1980, no such system was known !
However, in recent years Prof. Stuart Hameroff has
discovered that the MICROTUBULE system in the neurons,
could provide EXACTLY the system that I was looking for,
that would enable such a thing as LIFE AFTER DEATH !
- - - - An electron microscope picture of Hameroff's
- - - - microtubules is shown here:---
.
https://www.academia.edu/44527322/A_Simple_Car_Airbag_Model_of_Life_After_Death
.
The first thing that you have to know is that the actual
"memory bank" of the brain just happens to be encoded
into the molecular structure of the walls of the microtubules,
which means that memory is read out by this "UV light flash"
at the speed of light ! And this signal is what constitutes
"Life After Death", LAD so-called !
Obviously, since according to Einstein nothing cans
beat the speed of light, LAD is rendered FAILSAFE against
any and all possible events !!
.
.
Actual CALCULATIONS of the speed and frequency of these
ultraviolet UV light flash FAILSAFE signals are shown here: –
- - - -
https://www.academia.edu/35735589/Calculating_the_Duration_of_the_Afterlife
- - - -
And amazingly, even for the FASTEST and most DEADLY
situation-- a direct hit by an A-bomb, the afterlife for a human
being, even with a direct hit, is at least 8.07 hours.... And in fact
is probably longer than that because an atom bomb does not
go off in fact in "1 ns" which is what I have used--- because in
fact the RISE TIME of the gamma ray burst from the bomb is
more likely in the MICROSECOND range rather than the
NANOSECOND range as I have assumed – which would yield
an afterlife of 8000 hours rather than 8 hours which is the result
for a nanosecond explosion. 8000 hours is nearly a year, for
even for a direct hit by an A-bomb ! So that shadow of a person
on the sidewalk in Hiroshima, at Ground Zero, is a shadow of
a person that actually went to Heaven for a YEAR, rather than for
a mere 8.07 hours !
.
George E Hammond MS physics Hyannis 12/9/24
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-09 13:12 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <vj7mfn$ij5s$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #659426 |
On 12/9/2024 3:54 AM, George Hammond wrote: > On 12/7/2024 8:52 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >> On 12/3/2024 5:37 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >> [...] >> >> I don't know. Some people say that after you die, you will still >> exist. Not sure if the point of _conception_ is a beginning, even >> though it seems so. So others say you were around before being >> conceived (result of a sort of "procreation algorithm") on Earth. I >> just don't know. > > > > > [George Hammond] MS Physics > Hi Chris M. Thomasson > I realize that you are a Fractal Artist while I am a Physicist. > However, anyone can think about Life after Death (LAD). > Around 1980 I got curious, and I immediately realized > that the only realistic PHYSICS was that LAD had to occur in > the human brain. And if so-- it had to be EXTREMELY FAST > since some forms of death (eg lightning, TNT, A-Bomb, etc.) > are very fast--- and this told me that the only possible > mechanism that could beat these kinds of speed--- would > have to entail a quantum mechanical signal in a solid-state > system somewhere in the BRAIN ! The problem was, that > in 1980, no such system was known ! > However, in recent years Prof. Stuart Hameroff has > discovered that the MICROTUBULE system in the neurons, > could provide EXACTLY the system that I was looking for, > that would enable such a thing as LIFE AFTER DEATH ! > - - - - An electron microscope picture of Hameroff's > - - - - microtubules is shown here:--- > . > https://www.academia.edu/44527322/ > A_Simple_Car_Airbag_Model_of_Life_After_Death > . > The first thing that you have to know is that the actual > "memory bank" of the brain just happens to be encoded > into the molecular structure of the walls of the microtubules, > which means that memory is read out by this "UV light flash" > at the speed of light ! And this signal is what constitutes > "Life After Death", LAD so-called ! > Obviously, since according to Einstein nothing cans > beat the speed of light, LAD is rendered FAILSAFE against > any and all possible events !! > . > . > Actual CALCULATIONS of the speed and frequency of these > ultraviolet UV light flash FAILSAFE signals are shown here: – > - - - - > https://www.academia.edu/35735589/Calculating_the_Duration_of_the_Afterlife > - - - - > And amazingly, even for the FASTEST and most DEADLY > situation-- a direct hit by an A-bomb, the afterlife for a human > being, even with a direct hit, is at least 8.07 hours.... And in fact > is probably longer than that because an atom bomb does not > go off in fact in "1 ns" which is what I have used--- because in > fact the RISE TIME of the gamma ray burst from the bomb is > more likely in the MICROSECOND range rather than the > NANOSECOND range as I have assumed – which would yield > an afterlife of 8000 hours rather than 8 hours which is the result > for a nanosecond explosion. 8000 hours is nearly a year, for > even for a direct hit by an A-bomb ! So that shadow of a person > on the sidewalk in Hiroshima, at Ground Zero, is a shadow of > a person that actually went to Heaven for a YEAR, rather than for > a mere 8.07 hours ! What do you mean by went to Heaven for a YEAR? So, under that condition, you get to spend a year there then die again wrt nothingness?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-09 19:12 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <4f8aff5a-d4bc-45c2-876f-af950fc6e787@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #659439 |
On 12/9/2024 4:12 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > > What do you mean by went to Heaven for a YEAR? So, under that condition, > you get to spend a year there then die again wrt nothingness? > > [George Hammond]_ . SNIP COPY OF PREVIOUS MESSAGES ... > > Look... Chris... no one in he entire world ever reaches "FULL GROWTH", the average world adult is only around 85% fully grown. . FYI the missing 15% of our minds (consciousness) is referred to historically and universally as "GOD" !! > Okay... when you die the neuronal system shuts down, but the microtubule system is still functional and the microtubule system, unlike the neuronal system, has a MAP of the 100% fully grown body.... so in the "Afterlife" so called, you actually:---- EXPERIENCE A 100% FULLY GROWN BODY for the first, last and only time in your life..... and:----- > BECAUSE this fully grown body is 100% fully grown... it does not suffer the "slowed perception" and hence "DILATED TIME" that normal (85% grown} adults suffer... we see "for the first time true "undilated time" or TRUE TIME.... AND THIS IS REFERRED TO AS ETERNAL LIFE.... IN OTHER WORDS:-- "Eternal life, so called" actually refers to:--- . zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Eternal Life refers to ZERO time DILATION, not to INFINITE time DURATION zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz . ZERO TIME DILATION IS REFERRED TO AS "ETERNAL LIFE" even though it does not last forever, and this "zero time dilation" is only experienced by "FULL GROWTH" WHICH IS THE SOLE PURPOSE OF THE AFTERLIFE !!! . Okay Chris... try to realize that you need to have some background in PHYSICS to understand all this, which is why it has been posted to S.P.R. which in the firsst place is a "physics discussion lift". . Geo Hammond MS Physics Hyannis 12/9/24
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-09 21:17 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <vj8it7$r3hn$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #659443 |
On 12/9/2024 4:12 PM, George Hammond wrote: > On 12/9/2024 4:12 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >> >> What do you mean by went to Heaven for a YEAR? So, under that >> condition, you get to spend a year there then die again wrt nothingness? > > > > > [George Hammond]_ > . > SNIP COPY OF PREVIOUS MESSAGES ... > > > > > Look... Chris... no one in he entire world ever reaches "FULL GROWTH", > the average world adult is only around 85% fully grown. > . > FYI the missing 15% of our minds (consciousness) is referred to > historically and universally as "GOD" !! > > > Okay... when you die the neuronal system shuts down, but the > microtubule system is still functional and the microtubule system, > unlike the neuronal system, has a MAP of the 100% fully grown > body.... so in the "Afterlife" so called, you actually:---- > EXPERIENCE A 100% FULLY GROWN BODY for the first, last and only time > in your life..... and:----- > > > BECAUSE this fully grown body is 100% fully grown... it does not > suffer the "slowed perception" and hence "DILATED TIME" that normal > (85% grown} adults suffer... we see "for the first time true > "undilated time" or TRUE TIME.... AND THIS IS REFERRED TO AS > ETERNAL LIFE.... IN OTHER WORDS:-- > "Eternal life, so called" actually refers to:--- > . > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz > Eternal Life refers to ZERO time DILATION, > not to INFINITE time DURATION > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz > . > ZERO TIME DILATION IS REFERRED TO AS "ETERNAL LIFE" > even though it does not last forever, and this "zero > time dilation" is only experienced by "FULL GROWTH" > WHICH IS THE SOLE PURPOSE OF THE AFTERLIFE !!! > . > Okay Chris... try to realize that you need to have > some background in PHYSICS to understand all this, > which is why it has been posted to S.P.R. which in > the firsst place is a "physics discussion lift". > . > Geo Hammond MS Physics Hyannis 12/9/24 > You should start a new religion. Yawn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-12 21:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <16b7e1f7-87a8-4db1-a23e-53d3231f5313@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #659448 |
On 12/10/2024 12:17 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > > You should start a new religion. Yawn. . [Get real, "Mister Fractal"- - - - . I've discovered the first "scientifically acceptable" mechanism of "Life after Death" - - - - and have even discovered WHY it exists ! . We don't need a NEW religion, I've proven that the one we've got is SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE ! . George Hammond MS Physics Hyannis 12/12/24
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-12 18:53 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <vjg7k4$36g8h$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #659518 |
On 12/12/2024 6:38 PM, George Hammond wrote: > On 12/10/2024 12:17 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > >> >> You should start a new religion. Yawn. > . > [Get real, "Mister Fractal"- - - - > . > I've discovered the first "scientifically acceptable" mechanism > of "Life after Death" - - - - and have even discovered WHY it > exists ! > . > We don't need a NEW religion, I've proven that the one > we've got is SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE ! > . > George Hammond MS Physics Hyannis 12/12/24 > > Yeah. You know what happens after we die. Yawn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-13 01:53 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <3cdfecf9-810a-465a-b419-99721bcadd7a@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #659519 |
On 12/12/2024 9:53 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 12/12/2024 6:38 PM, George Hammond wrote:
>> On 12/10/2024 12:17 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> You should start a new religion. Yawn.
>> .
>> [Get real, "Mister Fractal"- - - -
>> .
>> I've discovered the first "scientifically acceptable" mechanism
>> of "Life after Death" - - - - and have even discovered WHY it
>> exists !
>> .
>> We don't need a NEW religion, I've proven that the one
>> we've got is SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE !
>> .
>> George Hammond MS Physics Hyannis 12/12/24
>>
>>
>
> Yeah. You know what happens after we die. Yawn.
>
>
[George Hammond] MS Physics
Yeah, that's right Mr. Thomasson. That's the difference between
being a career physicist, and being a career Fractal artist.
.
The only real mystery is what a Fractal artist without any credentials
in advanced physics is doing trotting around sci.physics.relativity
trying to argue with physicist who actually have academic degrees
in the subject.
Yaaawnnn !
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-13 02:01 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <vjh0m6$3bg2d$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #659520 |
On 12/12/2024 10:53 PM, George Hammond wrote: [...] Yeah. You claim to know what happens to us after we die. Kookville 101?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-21 01:14 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <vk60t3$3v2s8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #659526 |
On 12/13/2024 2:01 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > On 12/12/2024 10:53 PM, George Hammond wrote: > [...] > > Yeah. You claim to know what happens to us after we die. Kookville 101? This has more sense than a person that claims to know "exactly" what happens after we die? Right? https://youtu.be/9rT05seOdbs?t=1129
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-13 09:28 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vjgr81$3aav7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #659518 |
On 2024-12-13 02:38:40 +0000, George Hammond said: > On 12/10/2024 12:17 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > >> >> You should start a new religion. Yawn. > . > [Get real, "Mister Fractal"- - - - > . > I've discovered the first "scientifically acceptable" mechanism "scientifically acceptable"? Which reputable scientific journal has accepted it? Science? Nature? the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA? Can you give a reference? If you can't manage a reference to a journal, can you name some established scientists who have written to you congratulating you on your discovery? > of "Life after Death" - - - - and have even discovered WHY it >> exists ! > . > We don't need a NEW religion, I've proven that the one > we've got is SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE ! > . > George Hammond MS Physics Hyannis 12/12/24 You know something, George Hammond MS Physics Hyannis, real scientists don't parade their credentials at every opportunity. They let their results and ideas speak for themselves. -- Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly in England until 1987.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-13 12:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <0c312d2a-222f-4637-adbe-72934ba85941@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #659525 |
On 12/13/2024 3:28 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> can you name some established scientists who
> have written to you congratulating you on your discovery?
>
> [George Hammond] MS Physics
Yes, here's a picture of me with HANS EYSENCK the "World's
most famous living Psychologist" at the time, who invited me to
address the same audience from the same podium as him for
half an hour at the XXVI International Congress of Psychology in
Montreal in 1996 !
SEE PHOTO OF ME WITH HANS EYSENCK HERE:--
.
https://www.academia.edu/10591150/How_George_Hammond_discovered_the_worlds_first_Scientific_Proof_of_God
.
> You know something, George Hammond MS Physics Hyannis, real scientists
> don't parade their credentials at every opportunity. They let their
> results and ideas speak for themselves.
>
>
[George Hammond] MS Physics
Look Athel, YOU ARE NOT A PHYSICIST, you are a BIOCHEMIST
Sci.physics.relativity is a PHYSICS discussion list, not a biochemistry
discussion list.... If you want to parade around and tell people what to
do, I suggest you post it to a BIOCHEMISTRY discussion list !
.
George Hammond MS Physics Hyannis 12/13/24
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-13 11:45 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <vji2s7$3j24p$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #659536 |
On 12/13/2024 9:34 AM, George Hammond wrote: > On 12/13/2024 3:28 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote: >> can you name some established scientists who have written to you >> congratulating you on your discovery? >> > > [George Hammond] MS Physics > Yes, here's a picture of me with HANS EYSENCK the "World's > most famous living Psychologist" at the time, who invited me to > address the same audience from the same podium as him for > half an hour at the XXVI International Congress of Psychology in > Montreal in 1996 ! > SEE PHOTO OF ME WITH HANS EYSENCK HERE:-- > . > https://www.academia.edu/10591150/ > How_George_Hammond_discovered_the_worlds_first_Scientific_Proof_of_God > . >> You know something, George Hammond MS Physics Hyannis, real scientists >> don't parade their credentials at every opportunity. They let their >> results and ideas speak for themselves. >> >> > [George Hammond] MS Physics > Look Athel, YOU ARE NOT A PHYSICIST, you are a BIOCHEMIST > Sci.physics.relativity is a PHYSICS discussion list, not a biochemistry > discussion list.... If you want to parade around and tell people what to > do, I suggest you post it to a BIOCHEMISTRY discussion list ! > . > George Hammond MS Physics Hyannis 12/13/24 > I think you are on the verge of kook?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-14 15:18 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vjk439$1fbk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #659536 |
On 2024-12-13 17:34:44 +0000, George Hammond said: > On 12/13/2024 3:28 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote: >> can you name some established scientists who have written to you >> congratulating you on your discovery? >> > > [George Hammond] MS Physics > Yes, here's a picture of me with HANS EYSENCK the "World's > most famous living Psychologist" at the time, Big deal. I can show you a photo of me with a grandchild of Marie Curie (Hélène Langevin-Joliot). Big deal. That tells you nothing about her opinion of my science, or mine of hers. Anyway, you chose a bad example. Maybe there was a time when Hans Eysenck was the "World's most famous living Psychologist", but his reputation has take a huge dive since he died, and he's probably regarded by most experimental psychologists today as second only to Cyril Burt as a fraudulent manipulator of his incompetently executed experiments, with "fourteen retractions and seventy-one expressions of concern on papers from as far back as 1946". Not only that, but he promoted racist views of a correlation between race and intelligence. In addition, he believed in parapsychology and astrology -- possibly a reason for his favourable impresson of your presentation in Montreal. Moreover, he had no training in physics that I could discover, and was thus no more a physicist than I am -- probably less, as I had several years of physics education. > who invited me to > address the same audience from the same podium as him for > half an hour at the XXVI International Congress of Psychology in > Montreal in 1996 ! > SEE PHOTO OF ME WITH HANS EYSENCK HERE:-- > . > https://www.academia.edu/10591150/How_George_Hammond_discovered_the_worlds_first_Scientific_Proof_of_God > > . >> You know something, George Hammond MS Physics Hyannis, real scientists >> don't parade their credentials at every opportunity. They let their >> results and ideas speak for themselves. >> >> > [George Hammond] MS Physics > Look Athel, YOU ARE NOT A PHYSICIST, you are a BIOCHEMIST as I have said many times in my signature (see below). (Not always, as I often forget to set my signature according to the group I am posting to.) > Sci.physics.relativity is a PHYSICS discussion list, not a biochemistry > discussion list.... If you want to parade around and tell people what to > do, I suggest you post it to a BIOCHEMISTRY discussion list ! > . > George Hammond MS Physics Hyannis 12/13/24 -- athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-14 21:04 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <675E6357.24F1@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #659545 |
Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote: > athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots I don't understand how one can be a biochemist, 'and' not a physicist... do you do...experiments? -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertietaylor) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-15 05:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <0f8338927154be824d2a807c94d0b574@www.novabbs.com> |
| In reply to | #659549 |
On Sun, 15 Dec 2024 5:04:23 +0000, The Starmaker wrote: > Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote: > >> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots Be one to know one, what. > > > > I don't understand how one can be a biochemist, 'and' not a physicist... You don't need to know physics to plot pee graphs - for what med you pee so many times a day. That's biochemistry. > > do you do...experiments? Athel has no use for experiments that upset his belief systems. > > > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-16 09:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <f2e88311-a234-4434-b6ae-1589e325fe93@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #659545 |
On 12/14/2024 9:18 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote: > > Anyway, you chose a bad example. Maybe there was a time when Hans > Eysenck was the "World's most famous living Psychologist", but his > reputation has take a huge dive since he died, and he's probably > regarded by most experimental psychologists today as second only to > Cyril Burt as a fraudulent manipulator of his incompetently executed > experiments, with "fourteen retractions and seventy-one expressions of > concern on papers from as far back as 1946". Not only that, but he > promoted racist views of a correlation between race and intelligence. In > addition, he believed in parapsychology and astrology -- possibly a > reason for his favourable impresson of your presentation in Montreal. > > [GEORGE HAMMOND] MS Physics You've quoted "Publicity press" items about Hans Eysenck which are par for any WORLD FAMOUS PERSON! . What you HAVE NOT MENTIONED is the HISTORIC scientific discovery which Hans Eysenck is ACTUALLY FAMOUS FOR ----- namely THIS:------ . ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzz 400 years ago DESCARTES invented the "3D-XYZ" coordinate system to described REAL SPACE ! 75 years ago HANS EYSENCK discovered the "3D-ENP" coordinate system which describes HUMAN PSYCHOLOGY SPACE! . AND THIS IS WHY HANS EYSENCK IS A WORLD-FAMOUS SCIENTIST ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzz . OKAY--- EYSENCK proved that ENP-space ACTUALLY EXISTED.... by running millions of psychology tests thru a Linear Algebra "Factor Analysis" computers... HE PROVED IT EXISTED... BUT ..... HE STILL DID NOT KNOW WHAT CAUSED IT !!!! . But in 1994 HAMMOND PUBLISHED a scientific explanation of the CAULSE and ORIGIN of Hans Eysenck's famous "ENP–space" . ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ HAMMOND PROVED EYSENCK'S ENP WAS CAUSED BY THE 3-AXIS CUBIC CLEAVAGE OF THE HUMAN BRAIN !! ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ . and a copy of Hammond's paper which was published BY ME in NEW IDEAS IN PSYCHOLOGY may be seen posted on my academia.edu website here:--- Note: This paper was published in 1994 in New Ideas In Psychology Vol. 12(2), pp. 153-167, Pergamon Press ...THE CARTESIAN THEORY: ...Unification of Eysenck and Gray ...GEORGE HAMMOND . A FACSIMILE COPY OF THE HAMMOND PAPER POSTED HERE:--- . https://www.academia.edu/33773402/The_Cartesian_theory_Unification_of_Eysenck_and_Gray . zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz So please take notice Dr. ATHEL CORNIH BOWDEN; you have asked reviously: "scientifically acceptable"? Which reputable scientific journal has accepted it?" and there you have your answer......New Ideas In Psychology. Vol. 12(2), 1994 pp. 153-167, Pergamon Press unamously accepted and published the paper ! zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz . George E Hammond MS Physics Hyannis MA USA 12/16/24 .
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-16 17:54 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vjpm0f$17cu4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #659579 |
On 2024-12-16 14:56:39 +0000, George Hammond said: > . > A FACSIMILE COPY OF THE HAMMOND PAPER POSTED HERE:--- > . > https://www.academia.edu/33773402/The_Cartesian_theory_Unification_of_Eysenck_and_Gray > > . > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz > > So please take notice Dr. ATHEL CORNIH BOWDEN; you have asked reviously: > "scientifically acceptable"? Which reputable scientific journal has > accepted it?" and there you have your answer......New Ideas In > Psychology. Vol. 12(2), 1994 pp. 153-167, Pergamon Press unamously > accepted and published the paper ! > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Hmm. "In addition the author has researched the notion that the Four Gospel Canon of the Bible is in fact the theological identification of the Structural Model. Indeed, the Cross of Christianity itself is quite likely the symbolic representation of the Cartesian structure of the mind (Hammond, 1988, 1989). The effects of this discovery on science, religion and government can be expected to be far reaching." No comment -- athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web