| N-set wrote:|
|Unlike transmission line reflections which are a REAL effects, torsion gravity has been|
a nice theoretical concept, existing on paper, but not a proven reality, mind you.
This is a huge difference and I guess you are one of those rare people who should
get this difference immediately. The state of mind or consciousness of not confusing models about reality with the reality itself
applies equally well in science as in audio.
Connecting torsions to thelepathy or child masturbation or anything like that is below anything worth
commenting. There are 7365874658 idiots per minute reading Scientific American or
popular science books and thinking they've grasped the basics of physics and they can "do
science" on their own, based on what they've read. Unfortunately those poor types
are very fucking wrong, and in the most extreme cases on a way to schisophrenia (I'm not kidding!),
since understanding things like einstein-cartan model or quantum jumps takes +/- 5 years of
a solid academic education.
First of all do not type-cast schizophrenia as some kind of intellectual leprosy. You will be surprise to learn that quite many greatest discoveries of mankind, not to mention artistic impressions, were made by individuals who slide into schizophrenic state of mind.
Again, I do not advocate Einstein-Cartan model, I know or care very little about it. I have no idea why you need to crusade against it and I have no idea why you feel that you are in position to judge that they are “150% fucking wrong”, particularly when we are taking about virtualized subjects that have no verifiable rendition.
Still, if you read the link that I posted then it said: “Currently there are rumors that spin waves have real physical consequences, and that useful technology can be based on such things.” You need to calm from down your overconfident fury and to HEAR what I am saying: I do not insist that Torsion Fields or any other specific BS semi- schizophrenic or semi-crackpot fields are the source or the answer to anything. However, in my experience I know that in addition to measurable with oscilloscope reality there is “something else” let say in audio. This lack of your familiarity “something else” and our disability to manage that “something else” open a gage to all possible ideas and hypothesis. Remind you that the definition of hypothesis is the PROPOSED explanation for a phenomenon.
It is interesting to see the violent criticism of Torsion approach from a person who invests a lot of efforts into design and building a powerful SET that agreeably has no use. You would argue that your ULF SET allow to have a tangible demonstration how high power ULF sound produced by SET in A1. So, the guys in Russia who experimented with the X-channels do built devises that demonstrate very tangible characteristic of changing sound perception. What is the difference to you if they use Einstein-Cartan theory or any other hypothetic theory? I know that they do not know exactly what they use, they do not deny it but as long it has results that might be experience, who care how it is being called!
BTW, I do have my own view what kind processes are involved into this “something else” and into what those Russians do. To me it is not a hypothesis but a firm believe as I had all necessary to me evidences. So, from what I know I would advise to be subside skepticisms and just to take a deep breathe. No one obliges you to believe you into anything and no one sends to you the working prototypes of Macondo X-channels. So you are out of your schizophrenic danger. Rejoice!
Rgs, The Cat
"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche