- LEARNER SCIENCE 1

MAIN PAGE PRINCIPALE : WWW.WWCOVIDGM.ORG

Le pire imbécile se croit le plus sage- apprentimarcv
Ne traitez personne d'imbécile – Jésus

The greatest fool thinks himself wisest - learnermarkv
Call no man a fool. Jesus

Chapters

• 0:07 new science once old science dies
• 0:35 grand theory
• 0:59 current science
• 1:27 social science
• 2:29 predictive value
• 3:05 Learner science v. weapon science
• 3:27 new maths
• 4:55 superstition
• 5:38 soft to hard science
• 6:05 lightning
• 6:43 diesel
• 7:51 solar water pumps, 1913
• 8:39 Vedic anti-gravity
• 9:35 orgone
• 10:10 Tesla

Transcript

WORLD WAR COVID
From WeaponWorld to PeaceWorld
Learner, begin 

-       LEARNER SCIENCE 1 

 “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” Max Planck, taken from Robert Greene’s The 48 Laws of Power, Penguin Books, New York, 1998, p. 398. Whose rules I gleefully break on every page of this book, probably at great cost to my worldly success. So what?  

 I take big risks exposing the weapon/peace antinomy to this weapon culture, as well as the armchair and threat deterrent formulas. Why? Because this grand theory dares to mark the trace of history and human experience as a whole.
 “What a know-it-all!”
What I know for sure is this: everyone these days acts as if they had no better ideas than Trump. 
Listen to reason, for a change!  

The social and political sciences, like their science counterparts, rely on empiricism and positivism: the conceit that reliable knowledge can only be achieved by studying specific examples, habits and phenomena according to their characteristics in isolation. As a result, social science is a patchwork of wishful thinking more or less vague, tautological and contradictory, offering less predictive value than a sloppy weather forecast. That is what happens when human curiosity is quashed. 
Social scientists would rather leave things the way they are indefinitely. They shun the means, motive and opportunity to confront weapon mentality and thus take it to pieces scientifically. Anyone who offers them the tools to do so, presents them with a fearsome challenge. 
Whether or not the weapon/peace antinomy shows scientific promise; they reject it by reflex, out of torpor, trepidation and tradition (as if those attitudes were in any way scientific). They’d rather dismiss new ideas than study them: an acquired habit and a professional skill among scientific positivists. Failing to honor this censorship, or accepting it without enthusiasm: such decisions entail professional banishment that would be unthinkable in a universe ruled by scientific honesty.
What difference is there between religious fanatics and scientific dogmatists, apart from the all-probing police state and enhanced firepower that helps impose their reactionary convictions (soon aped by their religious contemporaries in Iran, Burma, Kashmir and elsewhere – since psychopaths wind up dominating each and every creed, ideology, ethnicity and nation)?
I submit that the predictive value of this antinomy outshines the sputtering candlepower of current models. I challenge my science judges to refute or validate it. We shall see whether their “scientific detachment” is real or merely conceals the bureaucratic conformity of their next research grant proposal and falsified results.
 I ask you why 21st century scientific inquiry has not kept exponential pace with three centuries prior? And don’t hand me your “information revolution” eyewash. We have merely revised the wheel for more perfect circularity and deployed heavier and heavier hammers against smaller gnats. This failing may well be for the reasons that follow.  

  The major difference between Learner science and the weapon version is that Learner science will embrace every new discovery and innovation, whereas weapon science finds new ways to enhance the threat formula and suppress other discoveries that challenge its status quo. Learner science will lead to abundance, while the weapon kind leads to nothing but poverty, pollution and mental stagnation in exchange for more weapons and better ones. 
 As our prejudices grow subtler, magnificent new discoveries may emerge. Learners should anticipate two breakthroughs in mathematics. One will clarify chaos theory and perhaps help determine the probability of unique events. Another, yet to be glimpsed, will reopen the Imperial Way with a rewrite of mathematics to simplify its mastery.
 As things stand, a priestly elite of mathematicians jams mighty computers and thick academic tomes with formulae that only a token few can decipher. Their best efforts at quantifying reality generate a gross and sterile caricature of the natural world. The Imperial Way will blaze a better trail across this intellectual wasteland, which Learners will follow to their next discoveries.
Knowledge-value transformed the world when reformers replaced the Latin Bible with copies written in the vernacular that laypeople could read. The Imperial Way may do as much for mathematics and popular science. Unprecedented discoveries could emerge. 
Just as the printing press transformed human thought; cybernetics, virtual reality, voice recognition, abacus and micro-energy technologies (powered by sunlight or the user’s pulse and body heat) could free us from our worst mental ruts.
In addition, someday soon, kids will enjoy a digital game that teaches mathematics as addictive as a first-person shooter game. It will subtly lure them into learning math up to their highest level of competence. No more math drudgery, only games to play and skills to show off; plus a world majority much more comfortable with math skills.  

 Despite weapon technology’s many drawbacks, it inoculated medieval practitioners against their worst superstitions. They had to edge their way along alarming ledges of science and technology while terrifying gargoyles swarmed below. Indeed, they went too far. They warped into mere fantasies supernatural phenomena they could not find any use for right away, while they made more weapons and better ones from what was left. 
 In our era of science tyranny, weapon technology has taken giant leaps so far beyond our understanding that they’ve baffled even scientific managers like Robert McNamara. Those quantum jumps threaten us with annihilation. Can you imagine a megaton explosion, or how industrial civilization will react once there’s not enough petroleum to go around (very soon)? 

 The science of biology is mutating from a “soft science” into a “hard” one because its researchers have begun to make horrific weapons from living tissue, just as prior engineers managed to make them from inert matter. 
We should make our research more holistic and less reductive; refresh our inspiration with intuition, instinct, personal insight and primal memory. It is not a question of abandoning one school of thought for the other, but of merging them with no harm to either, and institutionalizing this merger. 

 Elegant new technologies may emerge from the intensive study of spectral color lines, of noble gasses that should be in our skies but are not, of auroras, static electricity and lightning. Lightning energy is more abundant in the Tropics. Poorer nations could harness it as a powerful resource for local development and export. This technology would favor the regrowth of tropical rain forests to farm cheap energy. Osmar Pinto, Jr., of the Atmospheric Electricity Group, Brazilian Institute for Space Studies, and other Learners of lightning should expand this area of study. Could these phenomena provide power for future cities surrounded by climax forest? 

How can we call ourselves civilized while we make the air reek so terribly? Some obscure chemists could achieve immortality by making diesel engines less fetid and replacing internal combustion technologies altogether. History mentors will demonstrate just how primitive we were, simply by warming up a few drops of diesel fuel in the classroom and informing their disgusted pupils that our cities stank this way day and night. 
Poor Dr. Diesel cannot be blamed for the stench of his invention. He used peanut oil as fuel for his machine during the 1900 World Fair in Paris. He wanted to motorize every farm on Earth (African and Asian ones included), one hundred years ahead of time — the way Ford dreamed of selling cheap cars to the American masses a few years later. 
 In 1913, Dr. Diesel disappeared off a ferry between France and England. Foul play, no doubt. It was settled by Churchill and his cronies that new-fangled engines would burn toxic and expensive petroleum. After disposing of his drowned body, they set the stage for the motorization of armies. The war fleets of major powers already needed fuel oil instead of coal; now, their armies would too. Let serious death dealing begin!
In 1913 as well, an American engineer, Frank Shuman, gave a field demonstration of solar-powered water pumps to Egypt’s colonial elite including Lord Kitchener. His machinery was remarkably similar to equivalents proposed today. There was a flowering of alternative technologies just prior to World War I (sic). Unfortunately, when it came to those not associated with fossil fuels, that conflict abolished them for the next hundred years or more. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/dec/11/sahara-solar-panels-green-electricity.  

 Learners will devote entire college semesters to the appraisal of our professed “sophistication,” and many more to explain our homelessness, plagues, famines and wars. Hopefully, they won’t find good reason for these sordid constants of weapon history. They may conclude that they were bloody but unavoidable stepping-stones to Learner transformation.   

 Ancient Indian Vedic texts drop hints about antigravity machines made of copper spheres inside which a gyroscope churned mercury. This hypothetical technology is not so farfetched. After all, copper/mercury batteries generate direct current, and copper coils produce alternating current when wrapped around a magnet. Subtler interactions between copper and mercury may generate gravity waves. Could they result from the interaction of a strong, hydrophilic acid and a powerful hydrophobic base, magnetized to the same polarity so as to separate them and spun up into colloidal suspension with a little pure water? Research of this kind may prove to be surprisingly significant in the future. 
We must take care not to distort and pollute the very fabric of space-time with abusive electrogravitation applications. Evidently, over-industrialized overpopulation has already sabotaged a global climate that was once optimized for human comfort. Why not demolish space-time itself, while we’re at it? 

It might be equally useful to study super-sensitive orgone boxes whose walls consist of alternating layers of stone wool (fiberglass), steel wool and organic wool (cotton or lamb’s). For some as yet unexplained reason, during the 1950s, science and justice hierarchs declared these experiments taboo. Backed by the full force of the law, they murdered in prison the experimenter, Wilhelm Reich, destroyed his equipment, burned and banned his writings. Even in modern times, even in the countries that call themselves “free,” the Grand Inquisitor is but a brief phone call away. http://www.wakingtimes.com/2013/07/01/dr-wilhelm-reich-scientific-genius-or-medical-madman.

Nikola Tesla and his research suffered pretty much the same fate at the hands of the same type of barbarian. After his death (or assassination by the Nazi commando Otto Skorzeny in New York City in the summer of 1943), the U.S. Government confiscated a boxcar-full of his research papers, consigned them to temporary oblivion and then to Top Secret classification after World War II (sic) when it was pawed-over by Nazi scientists brought to the U.S. under the auspices of Project Paperclip. Most of it has never seen the light of day since. God knows how much of it was simply trashed, the same way his machinery was.

  … 

COMMENT?  markmulligan@comcast.net

-  LEARNER SCIENCE 2