My dear friends, Now I want to tell you what I gain in this Forum. It is not as much personal, as it is a social phenomenon. That is why I dare to start this thread. I always thought that Internet gives us a unique possibility – to multiply our intellectual ability, to concentrate people all over Globe to solve any intellectual problem… Yes, we still live in very mercantile, very dangerous, very dishonest World and many of open discussions can be and perhaps will be damaging for participants. But we should try to start using those phenomenal capabilities of Internet. At least in pure Science, Literature, Philosophy and so on. We can establish and accumulate at least the principles of such globalization of human intellectuality… My dream was to create some poll of professionals and enthusiasts, set up some very needed, but not solved yet scientific problem and try to solve it …on the screens of whole World. Not only to achieve the results, but to show how people create intellectual assets; through what kind discussions, argumentation, misleading, errors and intuitive findings… And what format will be the best than the public Forum as our?! I tried to do that in Physlink-Forum: we even already formed pool of three very brave people, we found very good and actually needed problem (of set theory that is directly connected with QFT), we started our first steps and even get some results… But, unfortunately, the moderator (or even the owner?) of this Forum, being upset that I correct some wrong posts of his specialists from “Ask the expert” section, sent e-mail to me, where he accused me that I am using his Forum to … promote my web sites in commercial sense! (Unfortunately, at that time one of my site indeed had some products for sale) It was abuse of my dignity, which I could not afford… and I sent to all members my sorrow-letters (without any explanation I just gave you for the first time, at all) and left that Forum forever… (As you know, MacM promised to publish here answers on his question about me from old members of that Forum. I really will enjoy their answers… if somebody there will speak with MacM, at all) Many of my friends are amazed why I spend so much time in this Forum. I’m answering them with a piece of poetry of one very good Russian poetess: If only would you know from what kind trash the Poetry arrives not knowing any shame! As dandelion near by fences, as burdock, goose-foot, or plantain… (Don’t judge text severely– the translation is mine, not her). And what is most important, I already get feeling that we can realize my dream in this Forum, no matter what some of you thinks about that right now… There is some evidence, that even not very professional, but really enthusiastic people here can generate amazingly good thoughts. 2inquisite had shown it to us recently… I know already one such problem (thanks to QQ!) that will be interesting and simple for the majority of our members with the different levels of professionalism. So that, many of us will be able to contribute… If you are agree with me tell us about that…
Bravo ...Yuiry...bravo.....I knew there was a potential leader under all that BS...[chuckle]..You have more or less expressed what I have thought about the potential of the internet for so long. [not wanting to divert from your lead BTW] You are absolutely right, the globalisation of intellectual abilities has the potential to change the world if only it would move from dream to reality. However it is worth keeping in mind the huge task in creating such and making such a productive experience. A while ago I posted a thread that asked for persons to form debating teams on the subject of SRT and try to rationalise the large amount of arguement that was flyng about at the time. JamesR can be quoted as saying that he thought the idea had significant probems but would not disagree to it's inception.[it failed to get off the ground BTW] So whilst I don't want to speak for him I would anticipate some enthuisiasm from his position as moderator. Possibly you should approach him to see if a "Think Tank" sub-forum could be established in an experimental fashion to allow such discussions to go on with out too much diversion from it's goals and ambitions. How this Think tank would be moderated fairly is going to be it's first really big challenge I would suspect. But I reckon it's worth a try.....
Guys, There are some ideas for the stage of “establishing” of Team. 1. Forum is not our ownership. The right of ownership is divine, and first of all we ought to ask owner. But we can not bother him with “raw” proposals – we should prepare our ask well. 2. There is a definite system of management of this Forum, and we have to take it into account: we will be in a grate need for help of this management: for providing accessibility to site, capability of posts, security of information, protection from BS interruptions, special Logo for easily identification of possible auxiliary threads, etc, etc… Here we also should prepare our suggestions that should be compatible with existing Rules and Regulations… 3. Of course we need some assurance that we will have a certain amount of time to work. It is fool to start such a project not founded some guaranties that we will be able to finish it. There are a lot external conditions: like financial (may be it will be needed some our financial contribution to maintain this Forum), technical (may be there will be a need to provide site with additional programs, or special software), copyrights, etc.etc… We should discuss all that stuff… 4. Of course, we want to work in friendly and bright atmosphere without such BS as we have with SRT in our Forum: “ I do not know Math, do not know even a basics of SRT, but have a feelings and believing that it is wrong”. For such people we have our Forum outside Teal’s threads. 5. But no rules should limit any possible discussion. Therefore, nobody knows where the needed idea will come from! Therefore, we have to discuss some additional Rules of involvement in Team and discussions there… 6. And do not forget that the natural rights of the “founders” is very tough and takes a lot of responsibility: establishing Rules should be mandatory for all of us and changing of them should be tough. 7. And we need some Schedule: we can not discuss Rules, prepare our "ask to owner" … forever. Any development? Any suggestions? Any ideas?
Let me start by saying I applaude your intentions. I even did so in Physlink. But there were problems there and so far apear to be the same here, that if you do not recognize and deal with effectively will destroy your goal once more. Here in lies part of your problem. I am now content in that you have publically acknowledged that you infact resigned from Phylink as a measure of precluding being canned yourself for your conduct. Further that your conduct does not just apply toward persons such as myself but to other professionals. Alas the circumstance of your resignation were not based on one simple conflict but a series of such conflicts with others including professionals. I saw that first hand as you recall in the "Particle Collisions Arguements" between yourself, a physicist from the UK and myself, where you attacked the physicist with the same zeal you attacked me. I'll address these issues more fully in reply to your second post here. In hopes of making a useful contribution to this thread. Correct but what until now you have failed to recognize is that you are far to selective as to what thoughts YOU think are good. And your rejection of thoughts are not made in a proper manner which curtails contributions of thoughts. Good, you seem to be learning from this experience.
Fair point. I think however, that James R acts in his behalf and he probably expects as any CEO that his stafff bring to him proposals which they find worthy of consideration. That is you need to look to conviencing James R as to the merits of any proposals and let him make the pitch to Purfriy. Your rules should concentrate on control and how to deal with proposals or thoughts contributed. It should not be a matter of taboo topics or a selective "Few" members decide what is germain but perhaps use my polling technique, which you seem to oppose, in a more demoncratic way to decide if something merits further discussion or be moved, etc. Inclusion of such thoughts in current literature is not a useful standard. Only violation of known and accepted principles is a fair standard, otherwise you are chasing your tail simply attempting to further enhance validation of CURRENT theory and understanding. Done properly, this concept could achieve absolutely amazing things but you have to be willing to pull together a group sufficiently excited about what is being done that you might actually act upon and conduct proposed and accepted tests, meaning actual collection of funds to build and operate tests of certain qualifying and accepted ideas for test. Herein lies your problem and it was the problem in Physlink which also ultimately caused your failure. In Physlink you were even more direct in establishing the fact that you were the leader and contributors would in affect receive honorable mention in any publications of findings. You on the other hand seem to want choose what thoughts and contributions will be considered valid and worthy. Basically it turns into a staff working for Yuriy to be the publisher of new physics findings. An unpaid staff to do your leg work. I know you probably do not mean for it to be that way but that is how it evolved on Physlink and I see the same horns growing in this effort. You have to be able to step back and assume the postion of a founder, a higly appreciated member but not the controlling member of this group. What if anything that gets published must be done collectively and not just at the whim of Yuriy "The leader" of this group. Such decisions should be made collectively by those members qualified in physics to judge the merits of any papers and or testing done. I think this is intended well but works totally to the opposition of the plan. Anonomous contribution would not be acceptable (at least that is my opinion). You instead must learn to step away from personalities and deal with contributions in a professional and dignified manner. Here is where you must coordinate with James R on your thoughts. Same as 6 above. Finally. You may not appreciate me or my opinions or views but that is irrelevant. That fact is I have organized, operated and managed research corporations and I have people skills which you clearly lack. I am not soliciting any position (other than as a contributor) to your group but I hope you recognize the veracity of my experience in putting together and having a functional group. If followed this can yield many simple and profound tests of a variety or questionable current physics concepts with little cost. That has been my forte doing things cheaper than the competion. An improved "Pasta Pot" test of gravity is one prime example.
Fair point. I think however, that James R acts in his behalf and he probably expects as any CEO that his stafff bring to him proposals which they find worthy of consideration. That is you need to look to conviencing James R as to the merits of any proposals and let him make the pitch to Purfriy. Your rules should concentrate on control and how to deal with proposals or thoughts contributed. It should not be a matter of taboo topics or a selective "Few" members decide what is germain but perhaps use my polling technique, which you seem to oppose, in a more demoncratic way to decide if something merits further discussion or be moved, etc. Inclusion of lsuch thoughts in current literature is not a useful standard. Only violation of know and accepted principles is a fair standard, otherwise you are chasing your tail simply attempting to further enhance validation of CURRENT theory and understanding. Done properly, this concept could achieve absolutely amazing things but you have to be willing to pull together a group sufficiently excited about what is being done that you might actually act upon and conduct proposed and accepted tests, meaning actual collection of funds to build and operate tests of certain qualifying and accepted ideas for test. Herein lies your problem and it was the problem in Physlink which also ultimately caused your failure. In Physlink you were even more direct in establishing the fact that you were the leader and contributors would in affect receive honorable mention in any publications of findings. You on the other hand seem to want choose what thoughts and contributions will be considered valid and worthy. Basically it turns into a staff working for Yuriy to be the publisher of new physics findings. An unpaid staff to do your leg work. I know you probably do not mean for it to be that way but that is how it evolved on Physlink and I see the say horns growing in this effort. You have to be able to step back and assume the postion of a founder, a higly appreciated memember but not the controlling member of this group. What if anything that gets published must be done collectively and not just at the whim of Yuriy "The leader" of this group. Such decisions should be made collectively by those members qualified in physics to judge the merits of any papers and or testing done. I think this is intended well but works totally to the opposition of the plan. Anonomous contribution would not be acceptable (at least that is my opinion). You instead must learn to step away from personalities and deal with contributions in a professional and dignified manner. Here is where you must coordinate with James R on your thoughts. Same as 6 above. Finally. You may not appreciate me or my opinions or views but that is irrelevant. That fact is I have organized, operated and managed research corporations and I have people skills which you clearly lack. I am not soliciting any position (other than as a contributor) to your group but I hope you recognize the veracity of my experience in putting together and having a functional group. This idea could indeed produce many useful advancement and do so quickly and inexpensively if done properly.
James R, Please replace MacM's post elswere, let say in thread "MacM about me" that I just created specially for his insinuations. It will be a huge hurm for whole idea of Team if MacM will be allowed to make his posts just like he did right now. Please, do not kill a good project from the beginning only because of one man's feature to bring on a durt in any discussion...
one_raven, geodesic, of course, I will reveal my proposals of problems we can develope. But right now we should, I guess, discuss in general the idea of our workshop. There will be, for instance, a lot problems of communications, interruptions, and may be worse - deliberated attempts to destroy our work. How we can organize our work, prevent it of negative intentions? And so on... For example, I think we should have at least three people in three different countries who will be responsible for making copies of all posts in our threads. It will provide Team with independent secure Archive. God knows what results we will achieve and how different people can use them... We are intend to start something absolutely new, on the eyes of whole world, and we should not discredit this idea from the beginning...
I don't know if you've noticed this, but that revisionist censor crackpot-apologist that we call a moderator, JamesR, hasn't been on sciforums for a month (except for 3 posts on the 16th). Good luck waiting for him to delete El Cracko's posts above. I propose we make Mac the interim moderator.
Hi, lethe, Please, tell me what you think about idea to create Team and will you participate? Any of your suggestions, thoughts about it...
FYI. I have been in contact with James R and he is still very much here. He has however been involved in the moving of household and quite busy temporarily. As to the tone and balance of the rest of our post I choose to simply ignore the falicy it represents.
As to this post the following: Your assertion above (false innuendo) that others do not and will not talk with me is outlandish. While I suspected that you were canned at Physlink your version seems correct. You have withdrawn but your decision to do so is being sugar coated. You did not withdraw due to a one time indignity imposed upon your innocent person but as a result of numerous and continuous indignities you imposed on other members and that site. The fact is you withdrew because of intense problems in dealing with people there including even other professionsals. I indeed am in contact with others and they indeed send me e-mails and PM's, more often than not supporting my general view, even if not in specific detail. They respect my ability to converse at least in general in a logical manner complex things. But this post is not about me. It is about you and your effort here to again form a "Think Tank Group". Therefore I find the responses I am getting regarding your status at Physlink most appropriate to post here in regard to formation of such a group. ********** Response of Member of Physlink in Good Standing ********** Yuriy is still a member of physlink, he just seems to be tired of posting. Screen Name: Yuriy Full Name: [deleted etc.] If Lacu, after all what was said, can not answer on his last question without international help through the Internet, there is no need of any further discussion with Lacu. Yuriy * ***************************************************** Unfortunately your attitude here in this thread regards me, should be an ample red flag to anyone that now is considering joining you in any effort to advance science. You are a "User" and seek only to advance Yuriy's legacy at the expense of picking others intellect. You have no interest in actually making breaktrough advances which might unravel your currently held and cherished view of the universe. You only seek those advances which could further propagate the fraud. Until you at least acknowledge the validity of this [post=752958]Post[/post] and its implications, no actual science advancement will be made. Sorry but that is the crux of what happened on Physlink and certainly appears to be the format of your chosing here. I see no merit, nor opportunity for such a group here (based on the typical response of those members capable of actually achieving such a goal thus far) of succeeding. Bye. Call me when you need me. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I am highly dubious as to your goals, your ability to achieve those goals, and the possibility of the medium for trying to achieve those goals. For now, I'll just watch and see what happens. If I see a good opportunity to make fun of our ridiculous crackpot friend, though, I will take it.
answering PMs while not posting or moderating for a month does not count as "very much here". So? I guess we don't need a moderator this month. It seems we can get by just fine without him. I agree, the idea of making the ridiculous crackpot MacM a moderator of this board is a fallacy. However, I meant it only as a joke.
My point has now been confirmed. You are hopeless in this regard. My posts here have been polite but factual.
lethe, it is bad news for me, because I was counting on you... And, please, we all know what MacM is, but let us do not choking up this thread with his presence in any form...
