What's wrong with there being ETs (smarter than us none the less)

Androcles wrote:

"Predicts" - a word used by any fortune-teller or charlatan. I'm not
interested in your ability to read horoscopes or predict the future, I'm
interested in science.

Science *is* about prediction. It's those predictions
that are what makes a theory testable -- you try to
see if the predictions actually come true.

Paul

Androcles,
We have been 100+% right as rain. Sadly, Usenet doesn't allow
deductive reasoning (period!), and otherwise there's to be no such dot
or pixel connecting allowed unless it proves nothing other than what's
already scripted within their Old Testament or whatever koran that's
edited in order to suit their Zion mindset.

However, the likes of GOOGLE/Usenet allows and even orchestrates on
behalf of Zions, including butt protecting on behalf of all that's
Einstein and of this tribe of brown-nosed minions (usually Zions
cloaked as Atheists).

Usenet rusemasters and Einstein lovers (aka Zion lovers) are many.
99.9% of Usenet is at best hocus-pocus or otherwise worthless because
as you say, they assume and/or accept upon the analogy of others that
have gotten away with having taken so much credits for the actual hard
work of those outside of their Zion O-ring cult. Ian Parker is
clearly one of them brown-nosed clowns that doesn't take kindly to
anyone that doesn't worship Einstein and doesn't otherwise reject
anything of other life that's off-world, and much less willing to
budge an inch if it's potentially intelligent.

BTW, I do believe that an established laser beam of photons that
essentially aligns atoms can help channel or transport other photons
to the head of the train, which is thereby capable of allowing those
photons to exceed the speed of light. A conduit or waveguide of FTL
moving photons has been common place for as long as such radar
waveguides have existed. Of two opposing or arriving laser beams is a
differential velocity of 2X 'c'. A quantum photon (FM photon) is
simply the holy grail of what makes us and everything we can detect
what we are. Atoms serve the needs of photons, much like batteries
and wire serves the needs of electrons. Our DNA is nnothing without
photons.

Not that all of Einstein was bad, although I agree with your Einstein
analogy:
: 1) Einstein was a liar
: 2) Einstein was not a mathematician
: 3) Einstein was a plagiarist
: 4) Einstein did not cite sources
: 5) Einstein was a bull****ter.

Some of us are just better liars and better takers than others.
-
Brad Guth

On 25 Jun, 15:24, BradGuth wrote:

BTW, I do believe that an established laser beam of photons that
essentially aligns atoms can help channel or transport other photons
to the head of the train, which is thereby capable of allowing those
photons to exceed the speed of light. A conduit or waveguide of FTL
moving photons has been common place for as long as such radar
waveguides have existed. Of two opposing or arriving laser beams is a
differential velocity of 2X 'c'. A quantum photon (FM photon) is
simply the holy grail of what makes us and everything we can detect
what we are. Atoms serve the needs of photons, much like batteries
and wire serves the needs of electrons. Our DNA is nnothing without
photons.

Do you understand the difference between phase velocity and group
velocity? The group velocity is the speed at which information
travels. In an ionized gas the phase velocicity exceeds c, the group
velocity, the velocity of information transfer, does not.


- Ian Parker

"Ian Parker" wrote in message
oups.com...
: You have got to rely on what people tell you.


HAHAHA! Check this out:
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/gullible

It refers to YOU, Ian Parker.

Here's another:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=gullible



: I presume that the
: papers that are published are honest.


HAHAHA!


: It true that a Professor in
: South Korea - I forget his name falsified his results and has now been
: disgraced.

He won't be the first, or the last, Ian.


:Are you telling me that all the results in Physics have all
: been falsified. Really!

HAHAHA!
Here's something not falsified, Ian.
http://members.tripod.com/~gravitee/

Here's something that IS falsified:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
As with all cheating rogues, the liar tells half-truths.


:
: The attidude in Science contrasts sharply with what is practiced in
: Government.



:
:
http://www.democracynow.org/article....=thread&tid=25
:
: John Rendon has been rumbled but he is still held in high esteem. What
: a contrast!
:
: BTW - You have not answered my questions.
:
: 1) How does the mu meson last so long?
: 2) What powers quasars?
:
: I want answers.
:
:
: - Ian Parker

Then research, you ****in' idiot!

On Jun 25, 8:33 am, Ian Parker wrote:
On 25 Jun, 15:24, BradGuth wrote:

BTW, I do believe that an established laser beam of photons that
essentially aligns atoms can help channel or transport other photons
to the head of the train, which is thereby capable of allowing those
photons to exceed the speed of light. A conduit or waveguide of FTL
moving photons has been common place for as long as such radar
waveguides have existed. Of two opposing or arriving laser beams is a
differential velocity of 2X 'c'. A quantum photon (FM photon) is
simply the holy grail of what makes us and everything we can detect
what we are. Atoms serve the needs of photons, much like batteries
and wire serves the needs of electrons. Our DNA is nnothing without
photons.

Do you understand the difference between phase velocity and group
velocity? The group velocity is the speed at which information
travels. In an ionized gas the phase velocicity exceeds c, the group
velocity, the velocity of information transfer, does not.

- Ian Parker

If our universe is the photon waveguide, then what?

A quantum/FM photon eliminates most all forms of communication
limitations.

I believe that a set of spinning and somewhat AI photon aligned atoms
can hand off as many quantum/FM photons as necessary, thus the speed
or velocity of transfering data/packets at FTL is technically doable.

Of course, if you believe as I don't that a photon can't have or
otherwise represent any mass, then there's no limitation as to it's
velocity. However, since a photon is more than likely of something
greater than zero mass is why the speed of 'c' is about as good as it
gets.

The phase velocity depends on how large of waveguide you've got to
work with. How about a photon waveguide of one or more light years
per dimention?

Seems that anything contained within the light year waveguide is going
to benefit from the ongoing phase velocity that's taking place.

In other words, with a quantum/FM photon there's little if any need of
a group velocity, as each photon becomes worthy of hauling more binary
information than 01.

How about a packet density of 1024 bits per quantum string like
photon?
-
Brad Guth

Lets clear up a few misconceptions. If you have an ionised medium the
phase velocity is c. The group velocity is not. The result assumes an
infinite medium.

If you switch on a magnetron attached to a waveguide how long is it
before the effects are felt at the other end of the waveguide. It is
the group velocity. Same applies to an ionised medium. In an ionised
medium there is a slight difference between the "swiich on velocity"
shock speed and the group speed. It is small, both are well below c.
The difference is in fact a second order effect.

The form of modulation makes absolutely no difference. When I first
met the topic as an undergraduate, we were taught to visualize a
"group" and group velocity in terms of the Fourier Transform of the
waveform. Each Fourier component travels at a different wave vecocity.

You have not answered my two question, one on the mu meson, the other
on quasars. To me a failure to answer these removes your arguments and
that of Androcles from the scientific sphere. If you do not accept
thhe explanations offered in terms of Relativity Special and General
respectively you wiill have to furnish another explanation that we can
all look at and study.

To say all the scientists whose results back up Relativity are all
frauds is just too far fetched for serious comment. In fact I could
probably claim, with a lot more justification, that psychology was a
load of bunkum and all the results were rigged.

Certainly the field results are extremely disappointing. The Cubans at
the Bay of Pigs hated Battista and the CIA more than they hated Castro
(despite psy ops). There is a civil war going on in Iraq, despite all
the nonsense we were told about democracy (and the psy ops).

As there are no alternative scientific explanation I can only conclude
that there is an ulterior explanation. Einstein was a jew. That is why
you are arguing against it.


- Ian Parker

"Ian Parker" wrote in message
oups.com...
: Lets clear up a few misconceptions. If you have an ionised medium the
: phase velocity is c. The group velocity is not. The result assumes an
: infinite medium.


Let's clear up a few misconceptions.
1) Media of any kind plays no part in it.
2) You are full of ****.

Odd, it seems this one didn't take, even though I was given the usual
GOOGLE/Usenet message that it was taken into the usenet collective.

On Jun 26, 3:14 am, Ian Parker wrote:
Lets clear up a few misconceptions. If you have an ionised medium the
phase velocity is c. The group velocity is not. The result assumes an
infinite medium.

Your God (Einstein) took from others and proceeded to assume all sorts
of things. So, what's your point?

I assume that photons can ride the phase velocity backs of those
carrier waveguide FTL moving photons, but instead of their going back
and forth (side to side or around and around within the photon
waveguide) these secondary photons would simply go directly towards
the target they're pointed at, jumping off each aligned atom that's
spinning and aligned on behalf of the established waveguide.

Once my quantum/FM photons start arriving at the intended target, as
such the amount of data or quantum binary packets of data throughput
is nearly unliminted, except by the available receiving technology.


If you switch on a magnetron attached to a waveguide how long is it
before the effects are felt at the other end of the waveguide. It is
the group velocity. Same applies to an ionised medium. In an ionised
medium there is a slight difference between the "swiich on velocity"
shock speed and the group speed. It is small, both are well below c.
The difference is in fact a second order effect.

Those are merely the carrier photons, and not the intended
communication photons. I agree that the carrier wave or given laser
beam of photons will be arriving at not greater than c, which btw is
still a good thousand fold faster than any physical probe.


The form of modulation makes absolutely no difference. When I first
met the topic as an undergraduate, we were taught to visualize a
"group" and group velocity in terms of the Fourier Transform of the
waveform. Each Fourier component travels at a different wave vecocity.

Box status quo thinking has been one of your pesky faults, isn't it.
You have absolutely no idea what a quantum/FM binary photon is, do
you. Each individual quantum string like photon can easly represent a
1024 bit word, as limited only by our existing technology.


You have not answered my two question, one on the mu meson, the other
on quasars. To me a failure to answer these removes your arguments and
that of Androcles from the scientific sphere. If you do not accept
thhe explanations offered in terms of Relativity Special and General
respectively you wiill have to furnish another explanation that we can
all look at and study.

mu meson?
quasars?
These items have what to do with ETs being smarter than us, and
especially a whole lot smarter than yourself?

I'll try to share my dyslexic thoughts in a way that's more
entertaining to the naysay collective, although I'll keep insisting
that FTL communications (similar to phase velocity) is doable once the
laser conduit or photon waveguide is established (somewhat how those
FM waves of phonons are speeded up once the telephone line is
established, or terribly slowed down if there's a diamond obstructed
pathway).


To say all the scientists whose results back up Relativity are all
frauds is just too far fetched for serious comment. In fact I could
probably claim, with a lot more justification, that psychology was a
load of bunkum and all the results were rigged.

A well proven naysayer is not a fraud, as such mainstream box limited
naysayers do in fact exist (yourself being a perfectly good example).


Certainly the field results are extremely disappointing. The Cubans at
the Bay of Pigs hated Battista and the CIA more than they hated Castro
(despite psy ops). There is a civil war going on in Iraq, despite all
the nonsense we were told about democracy (and the psy ops).

What exactly doesn't our faith-based government of Zion puppets lie to
us about?


As there are no alternative scientific explanation I can only conclude
that there is an ulterior explanation. Einstein was a jew. That is why
you are arguing against it.

- Ian Parker

But you silly folks don't seem to like any such "ulterior
explanation".

Apparently Einstein wasn't even a very good Jew, certainly not nearly
as good of a Zion bigot and a rusemaster of a naysayer like yourself.
Thinking outside the box (as long as it was kept terrestrial) was a
good part of what made Einstein worth keeping.

Much like Van Allen was created out of thin air, sort of speak,
whereas the likes of Einstein was allowed to take the lead point
because, at the time those Zions had none better. In many ways, even
Hitler got as far as he did because of smart Jews. (Jews have never
been totally dumb and dumber, have they, although they do have a
tendency of putting their own kind on a stick in order to prove a
point).

However, your Einstein also never agreed to the BB fiasco. At least
I'll accept the mother of all black holes doing it's imploding thing,
as having created at least two opposing universes. Of course that
original black hole had to exist/coexist within something much larger
and much older. I too (like Einstein) don't believe in God farts.
-
Brad Guth

On Jun 26, 4:51 am, "Androcles" wrote:
"Ian Parker" wrote in message

oups.com...
: Lets clear up a few misconceptions. If you have an ionised medium the
: phase velocity is c. The group velocity is not. The result assumes an
: infinite medium.

Let's clear up a few misconceptions.
1) Media of any kind plays no part in it.
2) You are full of ****.

Zion rusemasters are by heart liars, as it's what they and other brown-
nosed naysayers do best. So, there's actually nothing of such
misconceptions to clear up. But thanks anyway.
-
Brad Guth

On 26 Jun, 12:51, "Androcles" wrote:
"Ian Parker" wrote in message

oups.com...
: Lets clear up a few misconceptions. If you have an ionised medium the
: phase velocity is c. The group velocity is not. The result assumes an
: infinite medium.

Let's clear up a few misconceptions.
1) Media of any kind plays no part in it.
2) You are full of ****.

El barco attravesto una cerradura. La estacion fué resorte.

I used to think it was only Google Translate that produced things like
that, where the contectural meaning of the word was not understood.

The MEDIUM is the substance though which light is passing. In this
case it is tenuous ionized gas. The system, as is every system, is
invariant under SU2. If the ionosphere were to suddenly move at half
the speed of light, the result would be exactly the same referred to
that frame. That is what invariance under SU2 means effectively.

The remarkable step which Dirac took was to say OK Schroedinger's
equation is not relativistically invariant. I am going to construct
one that is. Antimatter thus arises directly from SU2. Everything has
been verified. Of course Neil Armstrong may not have landed on the
Moon and all the people at CERN etc, be part of some gigantic
conspiracy.


- Ian Parker