Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [usa-tesla] Digest Number 390

Expand Messages
  • Herzog
    It was this Microsoft Outlook 5, whose format you were crediting or knocking, I too liked Netscape better, but I use this so can help direct/teach my wife.
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 20, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      It was this Microsoft Outlook 5, whose format you were crediting or
      knocking,
      I too liked Netscape better, but I use this so can help direct/teach my
      wife.
      Her JAWS' tutorials are Microsoft, just like her computer.
      I still like Netscape better.

      > From: Wallace Edward Brand <webrand@...>
      > Subject: Re: Radio, history; and neat free site
      >
      > Marconi's initial patent for a two circuit system was no different
      than
      > Hertz's experimental apparatus except for a coherer instead of a spark
      > gap. The coherer had been invented by someone else. The device was
      > inadequate as a radio system. The distance it covered was only a few
      miles
      > and there was too much interference with other transmitters. An
      earlier
      > patent for basically the same apparatus had been filed by a Virginia
      > dentist named Mahlon Lewis.
      >
      > It was the four circuit system (two circuits in the transmitter and
      two in
      > the receiver) that ultimately became the basis for radio and TV as we
      know
      > it. This was invented and patented by Tesla. Marconi's patent of
      this
      > system was invalidated by the courts because of Tesla's prior art.
      The
      > initial decision in which all the facts are discussed was in an
      opinion of
      > the US Court of Claims on a claim by Marconi that his intellectual
      property
      > had been taken by the US for use in World War I. The Court of Claims
      > decision was affirmed by the US Supreme Court in 1943 just about the
      time
      > of the Battle of the Solomon Islands so it got very little press
      coverage.
      > Wallace Edward Brand

      Good points!


      > > Summary & Notes by SCIENCE-WEEK
      > > [http://scienceweek.com] 10Dec99
      > <SNIP>
      > However, this URL doesn't exist... what's the correct one??
      > -- Bert --

      It worked for me when I clicked on it in your above reference.
      Try again. I get a lot of those false no-goods from my provider.
      ------------

      > =====>> Tom Beardon doesn't mean a physical 'vacuum
      > battery.'
      > The vacuum referred to is the 'quantum vacuum,' simply
      > totallly empty space. Even thjough empty, there exists
      > the so-called quamtum vacuum virtual partical flux.

      I love this Aether, ie the stuff that works thru vacuums and space.
      If the photon vs Electromagnetic wave is ever reconsiled, Aether will be
      the crux of the answer, and thus defined,; better than just being the
      thing that makes stuff work.

      -----


      Lord
      > > knows...
      > > mankind needs a better battery of some type, or all
      > > types, soon.
      > > http://www.cseti.org/position/addition/bedini.htm
      > > JPM

      Needs, or just wants. I keep asking my kids to note the difference.
      ---------
      > Sorry to not answer your questions yet; I'm recovering
      > from the Tax Byte.
      > Jim Farrer

      Cute, I'll have to steal that.!
      --------------> > > >Please, some scientist out there, do me a little
      > > > >computation. With what angular degree of
      > > precision
      > > > >must a golf ball be hit for a hole-in-1? Ditto
      > > > >required angular precision for a perfect 300.
      If I said .00003 radians would that have any more meaning than if I just
      said 2 inches out of (100 yards* 3 feet * 12 inches)
      or 1/1500 or a circle.

      If 300 is bowling (at least I hope my golf's 18 hole score is better
      than that)
      How so we defing the radians as repetetive things. I guess it is how
      your mind is trained.
      --------
      > > > >Edgar Cayce's 15,000 or so documented "Readings"
      > > are
      > > > >enough to convince me that SCIENCE does not yet
      > > know
      > > > >all the capabilities of mankind, let alone God.
      > >
      > > First, a pet peeve of mine, 'science' is methodical,
      > > experimental investigation; 'science' is not
      > > something
      > > that can know anything, or tell us anything. It is a
      > > tool that allows us to systematically draw
      > > conclusions
      > > about the world around us.

      It is something that leads to a theory that fits the known facts; and is
      continually revised to fit new facts, or muddy the works.
      ..........
      > > Many people seem to think that what is taught as
      > > science fact is the unequivocal Truth, as Science
      > > has determined. This is not the case at all, what
      > > is taught is theories that describe very well (some
      > > better than others) what we have observed. We aren't
      > > saying that Einstein was absolutely correct, just
      > > that
      > > his equations and theories agree with observed events
      > > better than everything prior.
      > >
      > > New theories have displaced old theories so many
      > > times
      > > that only a fool or the old lady at the bank* would
      > > say that the current theory is the Right One.
      > >
      > > DK

      A very good version of the sure-thing bet; or loss leader philosophy!

      --------
      ...> > The president, standing uncomfortably, notices
      > > the lawyer, who is banging his forehead against
      > > the wall.
      > >
      > > "What's the matter with him?" He asks.
      > >
      > > "Oh, don't mind him," the lady says, "he's just
      > > realized that he's lost a $12,000 bet that I'd
      > > have the Bank of America's balls in the palm
      > > of my hand by 9:30 this morning."
      ---------------
      > Yes, I'm lazy. This job pays so well; I don't know why I bother.
      > Quote:
      > Am I the only one who received this disjointed email ?
      > What the hell did you or M$ do with the formatting of it ?
      > 72 or 80 characters per line , please :)
      > Or was it a lazy cut & paste off an HTML page.

      See, the Netscape allows one to paste as a quote, while Outlook doen't.

      > HMMMMMNNNnn Sounds kinda like JB! (But hope JBs life
      > is
      > long; has lots to offer us.
      > Jim Farrer

      Yeah, he has to get lots of respect to live long. "There are old
      pilots, and bold pilots, but there are no old and bold pilots."

      ---------
      > but I do believe that our Science (of a paltry 400
      > years)
      > has not yet learned *EVERYTHING*, and so do not scoff
      > at
      > those who try to push forward. Really *strange* things
      > are
      > happening out there, and I want to be a part of this
      > new discovery.

      My notion of heaven consists of finally having the answers to all these
      puzzling things in the world and the universe. I have often wondered if
      we (our world or earth) coud be just another electron in someone else's
      system. Just like we are big to the baccteria's, etc. Consider the mites
      that live in our hair, and bodies, and think that is their world.
      ----------------

      > I began to scoff mentally, about Beardon's idea that
      > the
      > very heavy ions moved much more slowly than the
      > electrons,

      Gee, I took that as a given, that the big stuff moved slower than the
      little stuff; so always swallowed the stuff about ion's being slower.
      Do positive or negative ions move at the same speeds?
      -----
      > I see a GREAT deal more than 'a battery charger' here.

      It is infered as more, but too clouded in the "snow job".

      ------
      > C'mon, guys!!!!
      > I try hard. I always use the spell checker, try to
      > use good grammar, format my lines into 60 or less
      > characters, and laboriously re-format anything I
      > pass on. BUT IT SEEMS THAT *SELDOM* WORKS. This
      > Netscape Email program surely sucks. It's dumb, it
      > has mistakes, often the ">" bytes at the left end of
      > the line get all confused to the point that one can't
      > attribute a paragraph to a person.

      I think I am like the farmer who said he doesn't have to learn more.
      That he isn't applying half of what he knows already.
      -------------
      > > What the hell did you or M$ do with the formatting of
      > > it ?
      > > 72 or 80 characters per line , please :)
      > > Or was it a lazy cut & paste off an HTML page.

      Be flexible and tolerant. Skip it if not worth the effort to read.
      After all, if it's neat, it must be accurate in premise, and other
      details; if it's hard, maybe I didn't consider it worth a rewrite
      either.

      I see how hard the blind struggle with screen readers, and just have
      little sympathy for us sighted guys to cry about formats..
      They have to shut off the greater-than's; because the quotes drive them
      nuts: and guess what's a quote. E-mail is still a system in
      development.
      --------
      > > > Obfuscate by big terms; B.S.
      > > > quote:The Bedini Over-Unity Battery Explained

      I didn't learn much from the explanation. It was humbling.
      -----

      > Why don't you get a good browser... Internet Explorer 5.0. Of
      course, if
      > you have a MAC, then you are stuck with Netscape. MS Explorer is
      FREE!!!
      > Just go to www.microsoft.com and download it.

      Msft is the most virus sensitive thing I know of. I liked the old
      netscape 3; and windows 3. No worries. Unfortunately Linux not ready
      enuf for the semi-literate computer people, and I got Win 98 2nd
      edition, on my 3rd generation computers.

      Everyone likes one better, hence still a choice, and all the endless
      discussion.
      ------------
      > Thanks Dye, Have Tried IE, but it lacks in a lotta
      > places, where Netscape is so much more convenient.
      > Have been thinking of getting Eudora or some such.
      Yes, all I hear about Eudora is good; except that it is not as screen
      reader friendly.
      -----
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.