A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Station
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Moon Laws



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old October 15th 07, 12:28 AM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space.station
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,465
Default Moon Laws

On Oct 14, 5:16 pm, Jim Davis wrote:
William Mook wrote:
I suppose when the voice of reason can't prove me wrong, they
call out the voice of unreason.


William, would you care to identify by whom you mean by "they"?

Surely you don't think there's a mysterious "they" out there trying
to make life difficult for you, do you?

I mean, that's always been *Brad's* complaint. :-)

Jim Davis


Well, if this line of reasoning causes Brad to temper his responses
does it matter?

  #92  
Old October 15th 07, 12:36 AM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space.station
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,465
Default Moon Laws

On Oct 14, 5:16 pm, Jim Davis wrote:
William Mook wrote:
I suppose when the voice of reason can't prove me wrong, they
call out the voice of unreason.


William, would you care to identify by whom you mean by "they"?

Surely you don't think there's a mysterious "they" out there trying
to make life difficult for you, do you?

I mean, that's always been *Brad's* complaint. :-)

Jim Davis


To answer your question though, the thesis is that the US takes the
threat posed by usenet seriously enough to warrant its monitoring and
shaping usenet discussion.

The same way King George monitored and shaped the fellows who
inhabited Speaker's Corner back in the day when the public turned
against him, or the way the French Postal Service monitored
international mails in its famous 'black room' without the French
people's knowledge.

All these efforts proceed, not by outright obvious ban, but by what
Nixon might call 'dirty tricks' not directly attributable to the
agency carrying it out.

So they would be any agency charged with the duty to control the range
of discourse on usenet - if such exists.


  #93  
Old October 15th 07, 01:12 AM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space.station
American
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,224
Default Moon Laws

On Oct 14, 7:36 pm, wrote:
On Oct 14, 5:16 pm, Jim Davis wrote:

William Mook wrote:
I suppose when the voice of reason can't prove me wrong, they
call out the voice of unreason.


William, would you care to identify by whom you mean by "they"?


Surely you don't think there's a mysterious "they" out there trying
to make life difficult for you, do you?


I mean, that's always been *Brad's* complaint. :-)


Jim Davis


To answer your question though, the thesis is that the US takes the
threat posed by usenet seriously enough to warrant its monitoring and
shaping usenet discussion.

The same way King George monitored and shaped the fellows who
inhabited Speaker's Corner back in the day when the public turned
against him, or the way the French Postal Service monitored
international mails in its famous 'black room' without the French
people's knowledge.

All these efforts proceed, not by outright obvious ban, but by what
Nixon might call 'dirty tricks' not directly attributable to the
agency carrying it out.

So they would be any agency charged with the duty to control the range
of discourse on usenet - if such exists.


Speaking of expanding the market 'laterally', why is it that none
of the telecoms are picking up on mass marketing the newer
g-wave technology? ... I mean, this stuff kinda obsoletes everything
up to the I-phone, IT, and EVEN electronics funds transfers...

...and yet another Soviet patent for the invention of a gravity wave
transmission device has the following abstract:

"The inventive method for generating and receiving gravity waves
in a continuous harmonic mode consists in forming longitudinal
waves in a vacuum by producing compression and decompression
zones according to harmonic law, periodically redistributing a
vacuum density inside a working medium and modifying the vector
of vacuum field deformation in the direction of gravity wave
propagation by acting on the working medium of a system of
nonhomogeneous electric and magnetic fields whose vectors are
disposed at an angle of 90° in a normal plane with respect to the
direction of the gravity wave propagation. The emission of the
gravity wave is amplified by acting on the working medium of the
system of rotatable nonhomogeneous electric and magnetic fields
and/or by rotating the working medium. Identical transmitter and
receiver of gravity waves form a communication channel by
additional pre-setting of a modulated carrier frequency in the
system of nonhomogeneous electric and magnetic fields which
affect the working medium of the gravity wave transmitter and by
successive transformation of the gravity wave signal into an
associated electromagnetic signal in the gravity waves receiver
by filtering and detecting the variable component of said signal
within the resonance frequency."

.... So when will APPLE roll out its "g-phone" transmitter, receiver,
etc., in time for the holiday?

American


  #94  
Old October 15th 07, 02:20 AM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space.station
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default Moon Laws

On Oct 14, 2:16 pm, Jim Davis wrote:
William Mook wrote:
I suppose when the voice of reason can't prove me wrong, they
call out the voice of unreason.


William, would you care to identify by whom you mean by "they"?

Surely you don't think there's a mysterious "they" out there trying
to make life difficult for you, do you?

I mean, that's always been *Brad's* complaint. :-)


They, them and those other guys are merely a borg like collective of
those silly Zion Yids, and/or of their brown-nosed minions doing their
usual damage-control thing, by covering their butts and continually
spewing infomercials while lying about their being naysayers in
denial. It's exactly what official rusemasters in charge of our
private parts do best, and don't bother pretending that you folks
don't know exactly what I'm ranting about.
- Brad Guth -

  #95  
Old October 15th 07, 02:23 AM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space.station
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default Moon Laws

On Oct 14, 4:28 pm, wrote:
On Oct 14, 5:16 pm, Jim Davis wrote:

William Mook wrote:
I suppose when the voice of reason can't prove me wrong, they
call out the voice of unreason.


William, would you care to identify by whom you mean by "they"?


Surely you don't think there's a mysterious "they" out there trying
to make life difficult for you, do you?


I mean, that's always been *Brad's* complaint. :-)


Well, if this line of reasoning causes Brad to temper his responses
does it matter?


Now that's a weird contribution, Rabbi Mook. What part of MI5/NSA did
you say you worked for?
- Brad Guth -

  #96  
Old October 15th 07, 02:43 AM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space.station
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default Moon Laws

On Oct 14, 4:36 pm, wrote:
On Oct 14, 5:16 pm, Jim Davis wrote:

William Mook wrote:
I suppose when the voice of reason can't prove me wrong, they
call out the voice of unreason.


William, would you care to identify by whom you mean by "they"?


Surely you don't think there's a mysterious "they" out there trying
to make life difficult for you, do you?


I mean, that's always been *Brad's* complaint. :-)


To answer your question though, the thesis is that the US takes the
threat posed by usenet seriously enough to warrant its monitoring and
shaping usenet discussion.

The same way King George monitored and shaped the fellows who
inhabited Speaker's Corner back in the day when the public turned
against him, or the way the French Postal Service monitored
international mails in its famous 'black room' without the French
people's knowledge.

All these efforts proceed, not by outright obvious ban, but by what
Nixon might call 'dirty tricks' not directly attributable to the
agency carrying it out.

So they would be any agency charged with the duty to control the range
of discourse on usenet - if such exists.


Such a discorse controlled usenet is obviously the case, as well as
for their spermware/****ware that gets in charge of my poor old PC
from time to time. Limiting the given topic range or scope is clearly
one of their clown like tactics, as clearly intended to keep good and/
or improved ideas from ever emerging via the usenet or via any other
internet forum. As I'd said before, that them pesky Yids and their
trusty usenet rusemasters don't give a tinkers damn about how spendy,
bloody or polluting our energy gets.

Brown-nosed rusemasters as usenet spooks, moles and clowns are the
status quo norm, and even at times Willie.Moo seems a whole lot more
rusemaster worthy than not (at least at times it has been somewhat
hard to tell the difference). Lord/wizard Jim Davis is clearly one of
them pesky MIB Yids or worse, as well as having been connected to the
very top dog, or soon to be First Bitch.

There's nothing but orchestrated Semitic clownism that's getting in
the way of the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and it's clearly
what they do best.
- Brad Guth -

  #97  
Old October 15th 07, 03:50 PM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space.station
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,465
Default Moon Laws

On Oct 14, 9:43 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Oct 14, 4:36 pm, wrote:





On Oct 14, 5:16 pm, Jim Davis wrote:


William Mook wrote:
I suppose when the voice of reason can't prove me wrong, they
call out the voice of unreason.


William, would you care to identify by whom you mean by "they"?


Surely you don't think there's a mysterious "they" out there trying
to make life difficult for you, do you?


I mean, that's always been *Brad's* complaint. :-)


To answer your question though, the thesis is that the US takes the
threat posed by usenet seriously enough to warrant its monitoring and
shaping usenet discussion.


The same way King George monitored and shaped the fellows who
inhabited Speaker's Corner back in the day when the public turned
against him, or the way the French Postal Service monitored
international mails in its famous 'black room' without the French
people's knowledge.


All these efforts proceed, not by outright obvious ban, but by what
Nixon might call 'dirty tricks' not directly attributable to the
agency carrying it out.


So they would be any agency charged with the duty to control the range
of discourse on usenet - if such exists.


Such a discorse controlled usenet is obviously the case, as well as
for their spermware/****ware that gets in charge of my poor old PC
from time to time. Limiting the given topic range or scope is clearly
one of their clown like tactics, as clearly intended to keep good and/
or improved ideas from ever emerging via the usenet or via any other
internet forum. As I'd said before, that them pesky Yids and their
trusty usenet rusemasters don't give a tinkers damn about how spendy,
bloody or polluting our energy gets.

Brown-nosed rusemasters as usenet spooks, moles and clowns are the
status quo norm, and even at times Willie.Moo seems a whole lot more
rusemaster worthy than not (at least at times it has been somewhat
hard to tell the difference). Lord/wizard Jim Davis is clearly one of
them pesky MIB Yids or worse, as well as having been connected to the
very top dog, or soon to be First Bitch.

There's nothing but orchestrated Semitic clownism that's getting in
the way of the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and it's clearly
what they do best.
- Brad Guth -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


What is obvious to you Brad isn't obvious to others, and probably
doesn't even exist in the form you imagine. These serve a bogey men
for your imagination so that you don't have to look at yourself as the
cause of all the problems in your life. This propensity to project
onto 'them' all your problems is a common failing of most people to
one degree or another, and is especially pronounced in certain mental
disorders, like schizophrenia where there is a full blown personality
split, and paranoia, where EVERYTHING is blamed on the illusory
'them'.

Jim I am sure was referring to that possibility with my last reply
where I didn't take care to speak succinctly.

Now, the success of any magic trick stems from mis-direction. And
good magicians know their audience and what they're likely to do under
most conditions. And they craft fabulous illusions based on this
knowledge.

Secret agencies exist. Secret agencies in the US government exist.
Secret agencies in the US government have likely existed which are
responsible for managing the range of political and public discourse
since the time of the Civil War. Secret agencies do not operate in
the public eye. They operate in the shadows of public life and public
thought. They are well aware of human failings. They no doubt
exploit human failings to achieve whatever ends they set for
themselves.

It is easy to believe that they recognize that the propensity to blame
others is strong in you obi-wan, and know precisely how to push your
buttons and let you go against whatever target they have set up to
marginalize or shut down in this public domain - again assuming such
a 'they' exists.

Given the sensitivity of missile and nuclear and space technologies
and the wide-open nature of usenet I believe it very likely that there
are US government agents sitting around usenet analyzing classifying
and targeting a range of issues and perhaps even individuals. This is
likely not a very glamorous or prestigious or even an important job,
likely an entry level position that one wants to move out of
relatively quickly. But it is likely that such a 'they' exists.

Now Brad, you believe 'they' are far more powerful and sinister and
all-encompassing than I have portrayed here. That's partly due to
your illness, and partly due to your pride. After all, if Brad Guth
is targeted by 'them' - well, this is a batle of titans right?
hahaha.

You gotta learn to laugh a little dude, and live life away from the
internet - then you might be more interesting when you get back.

  #98  
Old October 15th 07, 04:03 PM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space.station
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,465
Default Moon Laws

On Oct 14, 9:23 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Oct 14, 4:28 pm, wrote:

On Oct 14, 5:16 pm, Jim Davis wrote:


William Mook wrote:
I suppose when the voice of reason can't prove me wrong, they
call out the voice of unreason.


William, would you care to identify by whom you mean by "they"?


Surely you don't think there's a mysterious "they" out there trying
to make life difficult for you, do you?


I mean, that's always been *Brad's* complaint. :-)


Well, if this line of reasoning causes Brad to temper his responses
does it matter?


Now that's a weird contribution, Rabbi Mook. What part of MI5/NSA did
you say you worked for?
- Brad Guth -


Do you really expect an honest answer to that question? If not why
ask it? The fact is Brad, I work for myself and others work for me.
I'm just trying to help you see things a little differently from the
boneheaded approach you've been following since day one. You may
recall I have been nothing but consistent. I have asked you to stop
posting, failing that to stop posting to areas I post to, failing that
to be nice, failing that to temper your responses. I don't know that
this has any impact, you can be assured I will continue giving you
these consistent clear messages to shut the **** up and get out of my
damn life - until you understand. haha..

I was responding to Jim where he lives emotionally. He wanted to
imply so badly I was paranoid he forgot what it would cost him - the
possibility that you might be more temperate in your responses. Ah
well.

I will say my ex-wife got her PhD in education and she worked on using
computers to guage response latency of learners. Very interesting
topic. One interesting application was in lie-detection. If you
asked a question such as does a bird have wings a person replies yes.
does a bird have feathers yes. does a bird have skin - a pause - yes.

Now, do this enough times and you can construct a latency map between
concepts. Birds and feathers, birds and wings, are closely allied.
Bird and skin is not. In fact you can after a series of interactions
determine that there is another subject a subject not discussed at all
between bird and skin - call it animal - that you didn't talk about at
all.

Another interesting fact is that you can figure out whether or not
this item is there no matter how they answered the specific
questions!!

In a learning situation you can use this information to direct
teaching software very accurately to the needs of a learner.

In a spy situation you can use this information to figure out what two
people think about an subject neither talked about even if they were
lying through their teeth to one another.

Now, my EX- *did* get a DOD grant for her research, and they took
certain aspects of it and developed it further, but she couldn't tell
me about it.

The office of naval research I think was involved - but they may not
exist any more in the form that funded her stuff. This was back in
the day we were both young and foolish and in grad school together.
she was hot and so was i - haha..


  #99  
Old October 15th 07, 04:24 PM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space.station
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,465
Default Moon Laws

On Oct 14, 8:12 pm, American wrote:
On Oct 14, 7:36 pm, wrote:





On Oct 14, 5:16 pm, Jim Davis wrote:


William Mook wrote:
I suppose when the voice of reason can't prove me wrong, they
call out the voice of unreason.


William, would you care to identify by whom you mean by "they"?


Surely you don't think there's a mysterious "they" out there trying
to make life difficult for you, do you?


I mean, that's always been *Brad's* complaint. :-)


Jim Davis


To answer your question though, the thesis is that the US takes the
threat posed by usenet seriously enough to warrant its monitoring and
shaping usenet discussion.


The same way King George monitored and shaped the fellows who
inhabited Speaker's Corner back in the day when the public turned
against him, or the way the French Postal Service monitored
international mails in its famous 'black room' without the French
people's knowledge.


All these efforts proceed, not by outright obvious ban, but by what
Nixon might call 'dirty tricks' not directly attributable to the
agency carrying it out.


So they would be any agency charged with the duty to control the range
of discourse on usenet - if such exists.


Speaking of expanding the market 'laterally', why is it that none
of the telecoms are picking up on mass marketing the newer
g-wave technology? ... I mean, this stuff kinda obsoletes everything
up to the I-phone, IT, and EVEN electronics funds transfers...

..and yet another Soviet patent for the invention of a gravity wave
transmission device has the following abstract:

"The inventive method for generating and receiving gravity waves
in a continuous harmonic mode consists in forming longitudinal
waves in a vacuum by producing compression and decompression
zones according to harmonic law, periodically redistributing a
vacuum density inside a working medium and modifying the vector
of vacuum field deformation in the direction of gravity wave
propagation by acting on the working medium of a system of
nonhomogeneous electric and magnetic fields whose vectors are
disposed at an angle of 90° in a normal plane with respect to the
direction of the gravity wave propagation. The emission of the
gravity wave is amplified by acting on the working medium of the
system of rotatable nonhomogeneous electric and magnetic fields
and/or by rotating the working medium. Identical transmitter and
receiver of gravity waves form a communication channel by
additional pre-setting of a modulated carrier frequency in the
system of nonhomogeneous electric and magnetic fields which
affect the working medium of the gravity wave transmitter and by
successive transformation of the gravity wave signal into an
associated electromagnetic signal in the gravity waves receiver
by filtering and detecting the variable component of said signal
within the resonance frequency."

... So when will APPLE roll out its "g-phone" transmitter, receiver,
etc., in time for the holiday?

American- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


I am unaware that anyone has generated detectable gravity waves in the
laboratory. Do you hae any pointers to this nobel prize quality work?

I must admit that my knowledge of gravity waves is limited to
miserable thorn and wheeler's GRAVITATION. I'm looking now at Chapter
35 and Chapter 36 of the 1973 edition (which I keep by my desk side
since I love Dirac Notation the way others love Soduko. If you would
care to look at these chapters you would note that while there are
similarities between electromagnetic waves as well ad powerful
differences. The first is the gravitatioal constant that governs
Einstein's equations is far smaller than the comparable constants that
govern Maxwell's equations. This means that you need a helluva lot
more mass to generate a g-wave than an em-wave. How much more? Well
consider that a dime store magnet can hold itself on a refrigerator
door against the combined might of the ENTIRE EARTH's gravity.
That'll give you a clue.

Second, is the quadropole nature of gravity waves. Electromagnet
waves are dipoles. This means that gravity waves don't have a lot of
range.

Third, gravity waves self interact in non-linear ways.
Electromagnetic waves do not.

Now, the ability to generate even weak unmodulated gravity waves and
detect them would be a feat of the first order in science. It would
allow us to see how gravity waves interact and resolve many unknown
factors in the theory of matter. So, I cannot imagine that someone
did it and I didn't hear about it. But I've been busy. So, maybe I
missed it. I also can't imagine that really good people would waste
their careers on such a hopeless task, given the smallness of the
gravitational constant. But maybe someone had an idea. Who knows?
Tell me more.

  #100  
Old October 15th 07, 04:41 PM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.space.station
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,465
Default Moon Laws

On Oct 10, 9:12 pm, John Schilling wrote:
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 20:42:24 -0600, Howard Brazee
wrote:

On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:14:19 -0700, John Schilling
wrote:
If they're *not* being cooperative, dual citizenship can be an enormous
hassle. For example, and not hypothetical, you can be required to spend
the years between age 18 and 20 serving in the armies of two different
nations. Pick one, and for the rest of your life risk prison if you
ever set foot in a country that has an extradition treaty with the other.

Do you have any case examples of this?


A couple from personal experience, involving US/Polish dual citizenship
back in the Cold War. Fortunately, both have been able to revisit their
homeland since '91, but were limited in their overseas travel (not just
to Poland, but to some third-party nations as well) before that.

The only things that come up on a quick google involve hypothetical
conflicts between US selective-service laws and foreign conscription.
Possibly a foreign-language search would be more revealing; is there
anyplace left in the Anglosphere with military conscription?

--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
* for success" *
*661-951-9107 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *


I did not know the US recognized dual citizenship. Please tell me
more

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Laws of Nature G=EMC^2 Glazier Misc 0 January 2nd 07 11:31 PM
80/f5 For the In-Laws [email protected] Amateur Astronomy 0 November 3rd 05 01:55 AM
IP in china worse than no laws at all [email protected] Amateur Astronomy 1 February 24th 05 04:02 AM
Kepler's laws and trajectories tetrahedron Astronomy Misc 2 March 27th 04 06:31 AM
Kepler's laws Michael McNeil Astronomy Misc 1 January 23rd 04 05:45 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.