The first experimental measurement of God; to a 2-decimal point accuracy

Morgan 3 wheeler - a classic. It has a V twin motorbike engine on the front. You've have to work very hard to roll a machine like that.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

[GE Hammond MS physics said:]
Well obviously you have to actually read and 800 word
PAPER before you can criticize it.

[Slideshowbob said in post #573:]
No. If you want to discuss it here, you need to present the argument that it makes.

[GE Hammond MS physics said:]
...Look ssbob, the title of this thread is:

The first experimental measurement of God;
to a 2 decimal point accuracy

And that IS "the argument that it makes." – – So,obviously you have to actually read the 800 word PAPER presented in post #1 before you can criticize it.

[ssbob said:]
Summarize it.

[GE Hammond MS physics:]
I just did summarize it:

It is: – –
​

The first experimental measurement of God;
to a 2 decimal point accuracy

And I'm telling you, that is "summarized"
and you cannot refute it without actually
reading post #1 of this thread

PUT UP OR SHUT UP

George

​

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I want one

Just watched whole video having breakfast

Brilliant

Thanks

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

[GE Hammond MS physics]
... Na, one wheel in back, is nearly as dangerous as one wheel in front! In any kind of a turn the rotational momentum can cause the rear end to drift around to the front, and in the process, a 3 wheeler will flip over right on your head, every time!

... Like I said, the Einsteinian metric of space is a quadratic equation, and this is why all higher animals are quadrupeds – – which includes automobiles!

No thanks

George

 

Like I remarked before goes down swinging

Forgetting the section of the thread about CARS NEEDING 4 WHEELS (not about stability)

Stability brought in when needing 4 wheels proved incorrect

Posters all - Johnny Cash with Swing Low Sweet 3 Wheeled Chariot (close enough)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

It is......

Those words take me back to the days of Jan and his God is

What would he make of a person who claims to have found a 7 foot god?

How would debate go between them?

How stable would you be with 7 foot?

Swing (not quite so low) to carry me home (MY real home)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

[[GE Hammond MS physics]
... Look, slideshowbob, you said

"the brain is not a cube".

Congratulations – – that is scientific
statement worthy of a "Scientific Forum".

I think you have something to say! Please press the
"page #1" button at the bottom of this post and
read the 800-word founding post of this thread!
800-words only takes 5 minutes.

Say anything scientific about it, and you will put
yourself in the history books. I guarantee it.
I will reply immediately!

This is a scientific forum, let's talk science
for for a change !

George

 

That formula is ordinary Euclidean geometry.

Exchemist, MA Oxon (chemistry).

 

Pricey though, for what they are. And a long waiting list to get one. But could be fun to drive around in Bali, so long as you have a spare wheel and a couple of tyres in case of a puncture.

I gather from one of the videos that production for the US has the headlights mounted close together, enabling it to be classed as a motorcycle under some arcane US import regulation. However when a US customer takes delivery, he or she can detach and re-mount them as designed, with the aid of a screwdriver!

 

So true. Will only occur in my dreams

Bali, so long as you have a spare wheel and a couple of tyres in case of a puncture

Bali ingenuity would fix those problems. Five in the family, only have a motorbike, scooter style, no problem

Dad the rider, mum behind, oldest kid standard Infront dad hold onto handle bar 2nd oldest sit between dad and mum, baby carry in a bucket carried by mum

Bali - whole different world

Nice one. When watching the video for some reason he seemed unprotected without a helmet
No different than a open top sports car
Perhaps because it has motorbike engine
Strange

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

sideshowbob

My Knickers in a Twist detector is going off big time

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Bilaterally means two, not four.

Humans on two legs are also unstable - but they exist and so do three-wheeled cars. Not to mention two-wheeled motorcycles and bicycles and one-wheeled unicycles. Not to mention six-wheeled trucks and eighteen-wheeled trucks and on and on.

So you are just flat-out wrong to claim that "a car needs 4 wheels ". It doesn't.

But we're trying to talk about experimental measurement of God - and you refuse to do that. You need to discuss, not just point to another discussion. Make your argument here. Otherwise, you're just putting on a clown show.

 

No. You have to bring the argument here. That's how the forum works.

So... "summarize" is another word that you don't understand. Allow me to demonstrate by summarizing "World War 2":

1. Hitler invaded Poland. The Allies declared war. Hitler invaded Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium and France, then Russia. Four years later, the Allies liberated western Europe while the Russians 'liberated' eastern Europe.
2. Meanwhile, Japan attacked the US and was eventually defeated.​

Summarize your argument like that, and then we can begin to discuss the details.

 

And your claim that the brain is a cube is NOT worthy of a scientific forum. It's worthy of a three-year-old or a stand-up comic.

Then you should be able to summarize it in 2 minutes.

I don't care about history books and I don't care if you reply. I just want you to make an argument.

You start. Tell us about experimental measurement of God.

(Thanks for the large-print edition, by the way. My eyesight isn't what it used to be. And neither is my hearing - if we ever meet in person, remember to yell as loudly as possible.)

 

[GE Hammond MS physics]
,,, the full (4D) Einstein metric is:

ds^2 = dx^2+dy^2+dz^2-dt^2 (4D Einstein metric)

Which is still, obviously, a quadratic equation!

if the problem is NOT time varying, then we have:

ds^2 = dx^2+dy^2+dz^2 (3D Euclidean metric)

The gross anatomy of the human brain is not "time varying". A 3D cube in ordinary space, is an Euclidean construct.

The 13 Olympian gods are a Euclidean construct. They are caused by he cubic brain.

However, the proof that 3D space is "Euclidean" ultimately comes from the fact that 4D Einsteinian "space-time" is "Euclidean" in non time varying space (low speed compared to the speed of light).

George

 

[GE Hammond MS physics]
Okay, I'll be glad to do that for you slideshowbob, if you agree to actually respond to it !
Here we go:

1. – The body is in axial quadrature, meaning that it is bilaterally symmetric, that the embryonic stage is dorso-ventrally symmetric (dorso-ventral motor-sensory plates),
while the spinal column is the "axis". Therefore the human body is an "axial quadrature" which is "transversely cleaved numerous times" causing the "vertebrae" of the body.

2 – the human brain is therefore easily seen to be a "cubic structure" which is bilaterally cleaved by the "medial fissure of the brain" and dorso ventrally cleaved by the "Central or "Rolandic" fissure, and by the top (1st) "transverse cleavage" which cleaves the limbic system from the cortex. (Especially clear in embryology).
...Moreover, embryological staining through the full cycle of growth shows that these "8 fundamental cleavage
lobes of the brain" are developmentally directly "traced" to the 8-cell "octupole cubic" stage of the first 3 cleavages of the female egg. QED, "the brain is fundamentally cubic" (stain experiments Hirose and Jacobson 1980's).

3. – It is well known from elementary geometry, that a "cube has 13 symmetry axes"– – and will now be shown that these cause the 13 eigenvectors, or 13 "personality types" discovered in the monumentally huge historical data collected by thousands of research psychologists worldwide over 50 years, using desktop computers, and peer published producing a literature large enough now to fill a major library.

4. – This immense data collected over 50 years by this army of academic psychology researchers, has actually been discovered to be CUBICALLY INTERCORRELATED, and this is shown in the diagra m below:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Notice the 7 different "cubic geometric models" that have actually been constructed by the numerical data by these 38 internationally known research scientists whose names are listed below there is models. It is well known that this mountain of worldwide data from 50 years of research actually is "CUBICALLY INTERCORRELATED" in 3-D space, and the psychologists who discovered it have absolutely NO EXPLANATION WHY

5. Okay, meanwhile Jeffrey Gray publishes his well known (indeed famous) discovery that a neurological system in the brain which causes several of these personality types (personality eigenvectors) shown in these cubic models above are caused by something called the "SHS" (septo- hippocampal system).
... And then amazingly Hammond publishes this peer reviewed paper in 1994 which he shows that there is a "DECUSSATION" (an "X") in Gray's SHS, and therefore his SHS actually explains all "13 cubic personality eigenvectors" and because the brain is cubic and neurology of personality is based on the fundamental "X" structure of the fornix (Hammond 1994) New Ideas in Psychology, Elsevier Scientific.– –... This result essentially proves that Hammond is correct, that the cubic structure of the brain is the CAUSE of the cubic structure of the eigenvectors shown in the diagram above.
... And finally, bear in mind, that the psychologists don't have THE SLIGHTEST CLUE as to where this cubic structure is coming from ! Because none of them are physicists !

6. – Okay, this is how Hammond discovered that there are "axiomatically" 13 personality types in the worldwide data from testing millions of people over 50 years with Personality
and IQ tests. Hammond posits that these 13 AXIOMATIC personality types are in fact "the 12 Olympian gods" of antiquity. And in today's world they have finally been reduced to the commonly known Disneyland personalities of "Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Porky pig, Bugs Bunny, etc., etc.".

7. – The next thing that happened is that the research psychologists have factored the 13 x 13 personality matrix and found that there was a "higher order TOP eigenvector" at the top of this "eigenvector pyramid" and they dubbed it the "GFP" which stands for (general factor of personality) or if IQ tests are also included it is known as (the general factor of psychology).
... And it turns out they (the psychologists) have no idea what this "TOP FACTOR" actually is !! And they are furiously debating the meaning of it.

8. – But it is obvious to Hammond, because he has discovered that the lower order factors (eigenvectors) are actually the "13 Olympian gods of antiquity", that it is hardly rocket science to deduce that the "top eigenvector" must be the "God of the Bible".

And there you have it, after 2000 years of controversy, the world's first scientific proof of God

and PS: there is a lot more where this came from, it can be shown that this final TOP eigenvector is actually an "Einsteinian curvature of subjective rea lity" ... Wouldn't you know it; God is explained by Einstein's theory!

George

 

You had to request didn't you? What did you get? 1 through to 8 full of blah blah blah blah blah piled onto more blah blah blah blah blah piled on to......

Happy?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

[GE Hammond MS physics]
... Dear slideshowbob, I have followed your instructions and posted a truly "summarized" Description of the theory following your instructions which you will find in my post to you #596

I hope and pray that I will NOT receive a speedy reply, because if I do, it means that you haven't seriously considered my "summarized statement".

Please think the matter over for a couple of days before your reply. It is a mighty challenge for even an experienced researcher.

George

​

 

No, you really don't. That's just the same gibberish as in Post#1. Make it short, like my summary of WW2 - two or three lines.

(It's hard to summarize gibberish, isn't it?)

 

I was hoping to get it summarized to blah blah blah.