On 9 Feb, 09:48, wrote:
On Feb 9, 10:41 am, "art" wrote:

On 9 Feb, 00:27, "Jimmie D" wrote:
The group as a whole is not ready to accept anything that is not
written in
any book. Humans by their very nature are unwilling to accept change
so the
generation that comes along to suck up all that is written is the one
that
advances in science.
Art

I could care less about books, although I do have quite a few.
I'm more convinced when I actually see something work.
If you are convinced this theory of yours has merit, why
can't you build one of the things and test it?
All this gaussian jibber jabber doesn't mean squat if you can't
build , test, and demonstrate one in the real world.
I read books, but I also usually test things in the real world to
verify the info is correct. Trust me, not much of what is in books
is wrong. Some is, but it's fairly rare overall.
If I were to come up with some new design, I would have built,
tested, and compared, before I even made any announcement
about the theory.
I get the impression that you cook up all these ideas, but
rarely actually test them in the real world.
That's no way to live, if you don't want the negative flak.
MK

It doesn't really matter what the amateur world thinks of it,
I have done my bit in sharing with the ham community
and they have shown me their level of competance and civility.
in return
So I can now move on satrsfied that I truly tried and was rejected
and present it to academia where there are many qualified who
will judge in a academic manner I think then you will regret the
position you have taken as others will.
It has already been examined by a qualified engineer in the subject
and confirmed that the underlying theme as being valid using other
measurement systems which I personaly am not privy to.
So I feel confident that when I put a page on the web next week
tho it will be in rough laymans terms of someone not skilled in the
arts there will be many that will push that sort of thing aside and
delve a bit deeper to get at the essence of what I present.
With that said I will now leave this parrticular thread as it is
now totally off topic.
Art

On Feb 9, 4:19 pm, "art" wrote:


It doesn't really matter what the amateur world thinks of it,
I have done my bit in sharing with the ham community
and they have shown me their level of competance and civility.

As far as I know, we haven't seen anything yet except a few theories.
Where's the beef?

in return
So I can now move on satrsfied that I truly tried and was rejected
and present it to academia where there are many qualified who
will judge in a academic manner I think then you will regret the
position you have taken as others will.

No, I personally could care less. I have no use for the design you
propose,
assuming a chance that it actually might work..
Academia? I hope you aren't planning on flying to the Boston area.
I bet that would hinder your case, rather than help.

It has already been examined by a qualified engineer in the subject
and confirmed that the underlying theme as being valid using other
measurement systems which I personaly am not privy to.

There are qualified engineers here. Other measurement systems?
Not privy? Hummmm....

So I feel confident that when I put a page on the web next week
tho it will be in rough laymans terms of someone not skilled in the
arts there will be many that will push that sort of thing aside and
delve a bit deeper to get at the essence of what I present.

Push what sort of thing behind? I hope it isn't too heavy..

With that said I will now leave this parrticular thread as it is
now totally off topic.

Well, ok then.
MK