Is it a psychologically balanced effort?

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI

Is it a psychologically balanced effort to try to get credit for your World Class work when you won't sign your name to it?

Or is it really an opportunity to act Imperialistically and Obstinently Noxiously (Persistently verbally Poisoning >> Shortened to 'Obnoxious') because what you claim to be Presenting you are hiding from presenting, ergo it really doesn't even have enough meaning to you the presenter that you will afford your own name to it, thereby affording you the Oportunity to act Imperialistically by Narcisitically playing both the defender of your position and the critic of it as to appear as 'open-minded' about it, yet to play the reader as a Fool who cannot figure out just what it is that is wrong, as NO world class anything has ever defined anything that is definable such that whenever defintion is given it is always challenged as to impose the imposture into the drivers seat and thereby to Imperialistically drive the poster to corners of Nonsensical elevations of Posed Posturing that belies the realities self evident truth of the fact of Deception & Lie?

What do YOU! the Casual reader think? Does it show balance in thought? or deliberate attempt at persistent Imbalance as to position the responder at the feet of the Imperious Persister of Obnoxities?

Please ....tell us all.

[Epsilon=One]

Is it a psychologically balanced effort to try to get credit for your World Class work when you won't sign your name to it?Good question. I wonder what Voltaire, Mark Twain, Georges Sand . . . or Brunardot would have to say?

I wonder if Salman Rushdie would now reconsider.

Does it show balance in thought? or deliberate attempt at persistent Imbalance as to position the responder at the feet of the Imperious Persister of Obnoxities?Wow! What a strong bias.

I would think that a person's words would be much more important than the possibility of their being overshadowed by a person's "limelighted" ego . . . which might then tend towards unwarrented histrionics.

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

(SNIP) Wow! What a strong bias. (SNoP)

(SNIP) Brunardot (SNoP)

(SNIP) which might then tend towards unwarrented histrionics. (SNoP)

.................................................. .................................

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI

So when dealing with a Morally 'Black' practising Sophist (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sophist) is it good to know beforehand just what some of the 'Ones' that the Rule of return begats as a knowable/predicitable reality?

As it has been prior experience for me that that has transpired such that (I) had the chance to know it is the Utmost difficult thing to do, getting them to recognize the rule of returns having operated upon them as, usually (in proper respect of that rule) it has been embeded within them (Pssst. by them) in such a manner as they truly believe it .....themselves ....hence my previous experience at both finding it/them and demonstrating to the Practitioner of said Morally Black Art(s) that they had successfully accomplished it upon themselves, easier to get them to willingly let you pull their teeth with pliers and NO anesthetic then to get them to see that light of day ....(I) would suppose, but anyways....

What do you, the casual reader think of the prospects of Pursuit of such a character? and the plausibility/possibility of arriving at 'conclusion' with (of course) the Proper set of understanding(s) established....?

Tell me ...Please.....

Then again is it possible for a practitioner of such (Vile) crafts to be Psychologically balanced? ....or is it simply a well constructed appearance of it?

..as, after all, they too must include the side of (moral) light as to get anyone to follow them .......therefter into the/their darkness.....soooooooo

Anyone?

[Epsilon=One]

...to recognize the rule of returns having operated upon them as, usually (in proper respect of that rule) it has been embeded within them (Pssst. by them) in such a manner as they truly believe it .....themselves ....hence my previous experience at both finding it/them and demonstrating to the Practitioner of said Morally Black Art(s) that they had successfully accomplished it upon themselves...

What do you, the casual reader think of the prospects of Pursuit of such a character? and the plausibility/possibility of arriving at 'conclusion' with (of course) the Proper set of understanding(s) established....?

Tell me ...Please.....

Then again is it possible for a practitioner of such (Vile) crafts to be Psychologically balanced? ....or is it simply a well constructed appearance of it?

...

Anyone?There is a fine line between genius and sanity. Who among us is equipped to draw that line; for it is that person who should be judged most critically?

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI

There is a fine line between genius and sanity. Who among us is equipped to draw that line; for it is that person who should be judged most critically?

Originally posted Here (http://physicsmathforums.com/showthread.php?t=942&page=2
) By No one

When you quote and edit/distort those quotes as above in your post #15, your "Q:" & "A:" herein, should attribute said quotes to the author and note the changes that you made. Anything less is less than honest.

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI

Ah yes that 'fine line' between "Genius and Insanity" ....if you are not equipped to draw it, then you have (or will) probably crossed it thereby proving that you are certainly NOT (Still) on the "Genius" side of things .......

How the 'whatever' (Un-named > Hidden > ashamed > shameful) reveal themselves in/with their thoughts.

[Epsilon=One]

A "Fine line" that a 'Child' (Of God > like me!) Could draw ....easilyWell then, I repeat:There is a fine line between genius and sanity. Who among us is equipped to draw that line; for it is that person who should be judged most critically?How the 'whatever' (Un-named > Hidden > ashamed > shameful) reveal themselves in/with their thoughts.Yes. I do agree.

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI

When someone cannot tell that they have crossed that line, nevermind where it is, should they be told?

[Epsilon=One]

When someone cannot tell that they have crossed that line, nevermind where it is, should they be told?Without being concerned where it is; there would be no telling if it were crossed; thus, there would be nothing to tell.

However, to ask such a question would seem to imply an answer requiring the raising of questions concerning the state of mind of the poser.

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI
Without being concerned where it is; there would be no telling if it were crossed; thus, there would be nothing to tell. However, to ask such a question would seem to imply an answer requiring the raising of questions concerning the state of mind of the poser.Good effort at 'reversal' turning it 'back at me' but (I) can see through it and NOTE clearly that you have NO concern for where that line is ergo cannot tell (and don't care) if you yourself have crossed it....

Doesn't surprise me ........NOT at all.

As for the Mind of the Poser of the Question? (moi?) Living in-sanity ....You.....?

Don't bother answering ....please....Gods' Grace (I) already know how empty you really are iNside of you Infinitesimaly small - wee - tiny - little stone of a lone/single/singular (Ergo {the 'why' he is so} lonely) Heart. (and a Long Wordy sheet for a Brain)

[Epsilon=One]

...(I)...NOTE clearly that you have NO concern for where that line is ergo cannot tell (and don't care) if you yourself have crossed it....There you go again. You can't speak of my "concern"; and you are wrong in the conclusions you have setup.

Getting back to the Thread topic:
Is it a psychologically balanced effort to try to get credit for your World Class work when you won't sign your name to it?I replied:"Good question. I wonder what Voltaire, Mark Twain, Georges Sand . . . or Brunardot would have to say?

I wonder if Salman Rushdie would now reconsider."Would you care to comment on-topic by addressing my question with anything but "ignore"-ance; or, can this thread just be suspended until some on-topic thoughts can move the dialogue along?

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI


Please take note: the "YUTZ" Immediately above is on My "Ignore list" so if anything is being stated in reference to me or any of my previous postings, (I) have "not a clue" (can not see it, other then, it lists his name as "there"/{here} ) and (I) DO NOT WANT TO RESPOND OR ENCOURAGE TO SUCH AN ARROGANT INVASIONARY HIDDEN PEACOCK

(Watch out for his FALSE information too)

[Epsilon=One]

Please take note: the "YUTZ" Immediately above is on My "Ignore list" so if anything is being stated in reference to me or any of my previous postings, (I) have "not a clue" (can not see it, other then, it lists his name as "there"/{here} ) and (I) DO NOT WANT TO RESPOND OR ENCOURAGE TO SUCH AN ARROGANT INVASIONARY HIDDEN PEACOCKI believe that I would rather be a “PEACOCK” than an ostrich with its head in the sand.

Hopefully, your above statement can be construed as meaning you no longer will waste my time with your distortions.

Your continuing behavior is beyond the norm for civilized dialogue. Though you don’t seem to understand the Renaissance spirit of this forum, I hope you appreciate that spirit; as nowhere else would such personal, off-topic attacks and diatribe be tolerated.

(Watch out for his FALSE information too)Ad hominem argument is weak; if you are going to make spurious charges, you should be able to back them up. Exactly what statement of mine that I have made concerning physics, math, or philosophy do you find “FALSE”? If such is the case, I would very much like to correct it.

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI

Me and EP1.....

Well if you haven't read all of the historical interactions betwixt us two, then you won't necessarily understand why (I) desire that he no longer respond to me.

Some simple history, he has been removed from previous forums apparently (According to him) as Have (I)...but unlike him (I) was Banished for reasons of personality differences, he more for what he says (I) suspect as it is quite clear that his works has been checked out by experts (he admits that) and they probably come to the same conclusions that (I) can find, he refuses to acknowledge his errors as he has a 'stable' of well groomed responses towards anyone who shows him the errors that are there, followed by a self defense mechanism wherein he turns quite insulting when proven wrong, followed by a self defense mechanism of obfuscating truths when they do not serve his purpose, followed by a persistence that is only available form someone who has nothing but (otherwise) 'lonely time' on their hands,
followed by an insistent/persistent nature that surely deceives many a less
time endowed educated persons as the Younger posters would follow him thinking he knows what he is talking about, especially when he jumps backwards in to the self defense position 'No World {SPAM}ssalc{X} has ever of defined....' as philosophically no one can absolutely define anything so he at least appears right, yet he is simply attempting to debase any real effort at conclusive answers....

He dismisses the POMO (post Modernist) Elite trivially yet, in truth his efforts would require that (if he were right then) He would be Leading them so no wonder why he dismisses and seemingly despises them, same with Academe, same with "Peer Review" yet he tells of wanting to build Consensus.....Something that Peer Review does, and Does according to the Scientific Method....Somewhat BLINDLY testing/examining theory/theories ....so most of what he claims is sorta Self defeating when viewed in any realistic light.

Follow all of that with, well, he is older, so Nothing to lose, not willing to give up on his life’s work even thought he may know it is wrong...(hence his pleas for someone to read it and tell him where it is wrong) but it is evident enough to me that he fails at it because he refuses severally to acknowledge several phenomenon that ARE very well proven....he completely denies them such as Actions at a Distance to which he agreed with another posters comment on why it couldn't work in that manner, that poster explaining why he believed that, and that belief is as False as you can get (The whole Universe proves that one, but (I) digress) so for someone like myself to continue to allow someone like him to attempt to torture the rest of My answer out of me when (I) have stated it as clearly as (I) can and waaaaay More then once NOT ON THE NET! well, leave me NO room for anything ...hence my expressed desire to have him stay away from me in these forums, something that (I) don't believe he can actually do cause he simply isn't strong enough inside of himself.

There is also the reality of myself wanting for him to STAY OUT of the inside of myself, but most of you know of none of that, so we will keep it that way.

As for geometry, you mean like the geometry of a diesel engine? of do you mean the reality that NO geometer has ever been able to prove the existence of a straight line due to the FACT of it's definition being "a series of points" Like this ............ as that is what a/any Straight line truly is as all Material/substance/matter/{SPAM}ssam{X} in the Universe is (Basically) Spherical in nature as the Atoms that comprise them are Spherical in Nature (Oblate or football shaped when moving at near light speed speeds) hence everything is actually made up of Little tiny Balls, and they are little tiny Balls of Light....So...

So any geometry of the universe would, of consequence of natures assemblage, be Circular and/or spherical in origin....

His is Triangular, Linear, and constructs the ellipse from that, rather then the other way round, which would probably be natures way....

My most pressing thought though is that he does present a Sort of "danger" inasmuch as he is like the one who would sincerely teach you that a Porcupine can throw it's quills, after all HE believes in what he is teaching and some of it is Patently WRONG and Grossly misleading....

No Anthropic Qualities to God ...the "Perfect Man" syndromes’' God

So (I)'ll be clear he is ON my Ignore list, (I) cannot see whatever he types, and (I) do not want to.

Would be real nice if he would simply stop but as (I) said (I) don't think he can cause he is simply to weak a person.

And he is old...nothing to lose....and lonely ...as a result of his manner(isms)


Please tell me how in a Physics forums the word {SPAM}ssam{X} is SPAM? or the word {SPAM}ssalc{X} Can you figure out that it is an IDIOT playing an IDIOTS GAME!

[Epsilon=One]

Me and EP1.....

Well if you haven't read all of the historical interactions betwixt us two, then you won't necessarily understand why (I) desire that he no longer respond to me.A man can truly be judged by his words.

Any argument/tirade that is ad hominem is an argument of weakness.

Critique is something to be welcomed; not often does one have critics that make an effort to improve one's wisdom, which is the consequence whether the criticism is accepted or not. Thus, if my thoughts are so faulty, please point out exactly where the logic fails. If your logic is better, I will thank you; and, most likely, make every effort to change my way.

It is spheroids; not spheres and "Little tiny Balls"; that are oblate or "football shaped." And, Natural spheroids are ellipsoids. And, fundamental ellipsoidal quanta are created by the confluence of seminal motion (http://www.CQthus.com/PT/SM) without curvature . . . or conventional dimensions.

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI

Only A WORLD {SPAM}SSALC{X} TWIT would respond when they know that the other person will never see it...

TWIT! you are PROOF!

[Epsilon=One]

Only A WORLD {SPAM}SSALC{X} TWIT would respond when they know that the other person will never see it...

TWIT! you are PROOF!If I responded for you alone, there would be nary a response. There's a world of Viewers that note your comments; hopefully, a few will note the responses that they garner.

For one that professes to "never see it"; there seems to come a plethora of irksome responses.

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI

Only A WORLD {SPAM}SSALC{X} TWIT would respond when they know that the other person will never see it...

TWIT! you are PROOF!

[Epsilon=One]

Only A WORLD {SPAM}SSALC{X} TWIT would respond when they know that the other person will never see it...

TWIT! you are PROOF!See above post, #18.

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI


Repeat post # 19 over and over and over till the whatever gets it....

More then most of you might realize it is because of the inner affectation of being me that this is transpiring, His peristence at trying to make me look bad (Now behind my back as it is out of my sight) and get my inner attention ....once again, BUT my responce is Clearly NO


He has NO respect for that....or me....

[Epsilon=One]

His peristence at trying to make me look bad (Now behind my back as it is out of my sight) and get my inner attention ....once again, BUT my responce is Clearly NOBeing in plain view, is hardly "behind (your)...back"; you, to this point, have missed nothing that I post.

I do not enjoy the time wasted in attempting to keep your outrages "in line." I'm sure you would agree that it is better than your being censored.

Please try to stay "on topic" in the other threads and lower the level of your histrionics.

Your social and political posts are good. Don't negate their impact with your other posts.

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI


oh Yes! a P.S. Please don't get me wrong about geometry, it is important, if you want to build a house (Especially a staircase = Pythagorean Geometry) or would like to align the front wheels of a Car or would like to Build just about anything YOU NEED GEOMETRY and Linear Geometry too....

[Epsilon=One]

oh Yes! a P.S. Please don't get me wrong about geometry, it is important, if you want to build a house (Especially a staircase = Pythagorean Geometry) or would like to align the front wheels of a Car or would like to Build just about anything YOU NEED GEOMETRY and Linear Geometry too....When you comment, "...to Build just about anything YOU NEED GEOMETRY..." I assume you are also including the Universe; as, its definition depends upon geometry before any other descriptive tool.

I’m not certain what geometry comment you’re concerned about being misinterpreted. I’ll assume it is the following that you posted in another thread:

As for geometry, you mean like the geometry of a diesel engine? of do you mean the reality that NO geometer has ever been able to prove the existence of a straight line due to the FACT of it's definition being "a series of points" Like this ............ as that is what a/any Straight line truly is as all Material/substance/matter/{SPAM}ssam{X} in the Universe is (Basically) Spherical in nature as the Atoms that comprise them are Spherical in Nature (Oblate or football shaped when moving at near light speed speeds) hence everything is actually made up of Little tiny Balls, and they are little tiny Balls of Light....So...

So any geometry of the universe would, of consequence of natures assemblage, be Circular and/or spherical in origin....

His is Triangular, Linear, and constructs the ellipse from that, rather then the other way round, which would probably be natures way....I wasn't going to bother to correct your conflicting comments concerning geometry; as, I knew that the minds that mattered understand that all fundamental phenomena and mathematics, including numbers, are based upon geometric constructs.

For some reason you move from a somewhat fuzzily correct observation of “…the Universe is (Basically) Spherical in nature as the Atoms that comprise them are Spherical in Nature (Oblate or football shaped when moving at near light speed speeds)…” to what is incorrect, “So any geometry of the universe would, of consequence of natures assemblage, be Circular and/or spherical in origin....”

Fundamentally, that which comprises the Universe is “moving at near light speed speeds” and that which is “Oblate or football shaped” is ideally spheroidal or ellipsoidal; not "Circular and/or spherical in origin."

Nature creates the ellipsoid from the peculiar, singular phenomenon referred to as Triquametric motion (http://www.CQthus.com/PT/TM) that manifests from the dynamic separation (http://www.CQthus.com/PT/DS) of a dimensionless point within a dimensionless sphere. The salient structural components of an ellipsoid are described by straight lines. Thus, Nature creates the ellipsoid and man creates the straight lines to describe the ellipsoid.

As for your comment about the existence of straight lines, it can also be extended to the existence of spheres (circles): all relativistic motion fundamentally begins as elliptical motion; and, when the separation of the elliptical foci approach the infinite or the infinitesimal, the ellipse approaches a straight line or circle, respectively. Thus, with every straight line or circle there is an element of Infinity (http://www.CQthus.com/PT/I) . . . as there is with all emergent phenomena that comprises Reality (http://www.CQthus.com/PT/R).

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI

Clearly (I) am NOT!!

Why does this person keep responding to someone who cannot see their responces? How TRULY strange they must be....

Does Anyone else Care?

[Epsilon=One]

Clearly (I) am NOT!!

Why does this person keep responding to someone who cannot see their responces?If "Clearly" you are "NOT!!" reading my "Commentary" and you do not "Care", then, why are you responding and wasting my time?

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI

BTW now that you are a "Super Moderator" (I) would certainly hope that you have learned to refrain from your Histrionics and you Imperious Person Seeding/Sowing Obnoxiousness style, (IPSO) the one where you, from "out of the Blue" (Make it up) accuse others of the "decipt and deceptions" that are Normally YOUR style....

Moderators NEED Maintain a More disciplined Decoreous Style then you have ever demonstrated as well, Having.....

O.K.? (A redundant Question as (I) will NEVER! see the Answer!)

[OfficeShredder]

As for geometry, you mean like the geometry of a diesel engine? of do you mean the reality that NO geometer has ever been able to prove the existence of a straight line due to the FACT of it's definition being "a series of points" Like this ............

Considering all of geometry assumes the existence of a straight line (you have to assume something exists to be able to do any work in a field), it would be impossible to prove straight lines exist.

If you're talking about a straight line existing in the universe, that wouldn't be a geometer's job, but a physicists. And we don't even know if the universe is structured so as to permit straight lines, so it's kind of a moot point at the moment.
as that is what a/any Straight line truly is as all Material/substance/matter/{SPAM}ssam{X} in the Universe is (Basically) Spherical in nature as the Atoms that comprise them are Spherical in Nature (Oblate or football shaped when moving at near light speed speeds) hence everything is actually made up of Little tiny Balls, and they are little tiny Balls of Light....So...

Do you have a particular reason for thinking this? Although there is strong evidence for solid nuclei, I haven't seen anything suggesting that thing such as electrons, or indivdual protons or neutrons are spherical (although I could have just never heard of it).

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

Considering all of geometry assumes the existence of a straight line (you have to assume something exists to be able to do any work in a field), it would be impossible to prove straight lines exist.Cause they don't actually exist, but they are really useful to us....the rest is a scale thing

If you're talking about a straight line existing in the universe, that wouldn't be a geometer's job, but a physicists. And we don't even know if the universe is structured so as to permit straight lines, so it's kind of a moot point at the moment.Whomever, given that it is Mathematically defined as "a series of points" ( like this ........... ) (I) don't believe either of them can accomplish that task


Do you have a particular reason for thinking this? Although there is strong evidence for solid nuclei, I haven't seen anything suggesting that thing such as electrons, or indivdual protons or neutrons are spherical (although I could have just never heard of it).Uhmm (I) had sorta focused on the Atoms as being spherical, not so much the rest of the 'stuff' there, get down to that and we might just be talking Rings (0's) Only.......soooooo00000000

Gotta go! my times up!

[Epsilon=One]

... (I) had sorta focused on the Atoms as being spherical, not so much the rest of the 'stuff' there, get down to that and we might just be talking Rings...Spheres are special ellipsoids and circles are special ellipses (as are straight lines). Thus, even when the dynamics of compression and reaction morph ellipsoids to spheroids, atom and subatomic manifestations, including their motions, are fundamentally ellipsoidal.

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

Officeshredder, (I) have done carpentry (sorta) (I) have used Provably straight (enough) lines well, Probably more then you in your life....

Used the Knowlege of them in Construct/Deconstruction of Mechanical Machines & Driving too, and Snow Plowing 'Parking Lots' and High speed Highways, and cross country skiing (sorta) and Snowmobiling, and Motorcycles, the principals of going in a Straight line, (I0 do know what they are and accept them for what they are....

Just that the Foundation of Math is Philosophy (it is a Language after all) and it is in that, that we find the Other things we need......

Does that help?

[Epsilon=One]

...the Foundation of Math is Philosophy (it is a Language after all) and it is in that, that we find the Other things we need......"the Foundation of Math is" Nature. Symbolism and logic are tools of Mathematics, which is a branch of Philosophy.

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI


It is one of Ep's Lines, "No World Cla ss Academic Has ever Defined (insert Scientific Word)" as the Defintion of the Definer must define the Definition that is being 'Defined' by said Definitioner as to have been seen as effectively Defining the Definition of Definition and Defined by the Use of Definition to Define its'elf....But back in the real world the main reason no "World Cla ss Academic" has ever defined X is basically because it (Definitions) is/are Based upon a Group Agreement and/or Consensus, Consensus of educated 'opinion(s)'

At the Limits of Philosophical thought you have two sides, you can admit that it is only your Opinon, or you can claim otherwise...

....Or, like some people, you can do Both.

Well, actually that is what all of us do, it is simply a matter of how you do that...

Seen examples of Ep doing that to a New poster, Questioning them as to their definition of Magnetism and other Idealistic Descritors/Words/Scientific Words, and in other places/threads too...

Histrionics (I) am 'playing' (His {posting} History? ....Yes) according to him, as opposed to "Wow Bud! (I) can feeel you too....But you won't admit to it...Lord Knows what you Might be/could be/are telling anyone/everyone else about your experience of me....cause (I) don't Know.

(I)'ve not a Clue and (I) don't think/Believe (I) can trust you to/with that... therefore/ergo (in my life, as it must be) neither have (I) the time to Talk/Discourse to/with you.

No Need=Can't Fix

O.K.?

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

© Mr. Robin Parsons :cool: Kingston Ontario Canada MMVI

if (I) recall what (I) saw at this thread, a long time past, this is just one of those "Define" attacks...DEFINE (http://physicsmathforums.com/showthread.php?t=45)....

There are others, threads and posts....

[neuznana]

i guess he likes bikes

the program isnt interested in showing a well balanced view of the countries they are travelling in,just getting from a to b.