LaPoint Review

ALLPLANETS-HOLLOW Yahoo Group (Old Posts)
, , , ,
1

Robert Distinti did a very brief review of David LaPoint's Primer Fields
concept. He saw problems so early on that he felt as though he couldn't
keep going with the presentation. I wanted to share this with you here for
some additional feedback and thoughts.

Now this is important:* I don't want this to turn anyone off of Distinti's
work. The thing here is that we need to be open enough to figure things out
and not just get into zealotry.* It's easy to say "I love so and so" and
then shut down our interest or ability to consume from that person.

This is a major problem that is happening with every researcher out there
except those working (loosely or closely) within the mainstream scientific
community. The mainstream scientific community has the advantage of being
tied together by peer reviewed journals and tit-for-tat back scratching.
They adhere to a common thread and purpose (although it's misguided and
wrong) that allows them to simply cooperate and collaborate so that they
all keep their jobs and make money for their parent organizations. This is
a sad and often ignored fact that keeps mainstreamers strong and in front
of everyone...

While people like Robert Distinti, Lori Gardi (Fractal Woman), David
LaPoint have to face life limitations, budget restrictions, detractors,
attackers, and even self preservation and (very understandable)
self/work-pride induced withdrawal and inward soothing, etc. This often
leads to one brilliant independent researcher ignoring or attacking another
brilliant independent researcher and never being able to collaborate. This
can happen for all of the above reasons (you might have observed the
uncivil attack on Lori Gardi some time ago by a completely horrible
"researcher" and his demonic horde that caused her to take her videos
offline for some time) or even simple differences in vocabulary or missing
some potential value.

For example while it's very likely that Robert Distinti is actually correct
about David LaPoint in his premise and conclusions, Distinti may have
missed, what I thought was most valuable, the simple observations that
LaPoint made. Personally I've never really thought that LaPoint was on
solid scientific footing as far as an ACTIONABLE comprehensive theory goes,
but I have considered his observational material (all massive 3 videos) as
important and needing to be documented out into pictures and explanations
for other deeper researchers such as Distinti to then use. Sadly if this
material were available I think LaPoint's research would be then accessible
and usable for others, but who has time for this? You can see that LaPoint
himself was dejected and that his financial efforts with his work were
frustrated and thus he opened it up for further consumption. I felt so bad
for him and seeing his tone in his most recent video - this frustration and
feeling of defeat is written all over his face and remarks.

So here are Distinti's remarks and please do share any constructive
thoughts or reactions:

I got to 10 minutes and could not go on. They claim that the electron has
the two bowl shaped fields (which I disagree with) however, instead of
proving it, they switch to two bowl shaped magnets in an electric discharge
cavity. They don't explain the Segway. The experiments look cool, but
the behavior demonstrated by the discharge is not unexpected. But they
then claim that the square nebula must be this because it looks like it; I
could not go on. If all you have is a hammer everything begins to look
like a nail. If all you know is electric discharge and magnets you will
begin to explain everything as electric discharge and magnets. We are
going deeper -- to explain how the magnetic and electric field are
generated from SOSOP (Second Order System of Pretons) and the vector ampere
field ( but we have to rationalize gravity first to make sure there no
gotchas) They do really have good production quality and music. We will
get there as soon as I have a break from falling down rabbit holes and have
enough to show something wonderful that no one can explain with legacy
theory -- we are very close to that. possibly within a year
You might watch this regarding Pretons: emV034: Pretons, The precursor of
matter https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHzUs4xzEkY

From his paper "units_constants_v2_0.pdf" he says (note how he has to
come up with new terminology for some concepts since we're dealing with sub
atomic composition and quantum mechanics is clearly proven to be garbage at
this point - there is a lot of material about this and why):

In the legacy system, the “quantity of stuff” and the inertia of that same
“stuff” is covered by a ubiquitous term called mass which has the arbitrary
units of Kilograms. In Ethereal Mechanics, stuff is composed of a second
order system of inertia-less charges called Pretons. The property of
inertial is electromagnetic induction between two or more pretons where the
inertia contributed by each pairing of pretons in burls (contraction of
burly) is given by Q1Q2/r.

In an early version of his electrogravity paper (
EM_02_ElectroGravity_ver0_1.pdf), he defines what a SOSOP is:

If matter is composed of a system of particles, and if weight, energy and
inertia are states of said system, then logically all matter is composed of
particles that are both inertia-less, weight-less and energy-less. Since
inertia is required for weight and energy we simply just say inertia-less
particles. The name given to these particles is Pretons. The only intrinsic
property of pretons is electric charge. In a later section of this paper,
both normal matter and anti-matter are demonstrated as second order systems
of pretons (SOSOP).

2

Soretna , I genuinely respect the hard work and efforts Distinti puts in , also Lori Gardi , but I don't agree with Distinti's assessment of LaPoint .
Distinti is still very much within Einstein's "Relativistic framework" and believes Black Holes and Dark matter / Dark energy to be FACT .

**I personally , fundamentally disagree with the "Dark Science" method that creates cosmic "fudge factors" eg. Dark matter , Dark energy Black Holes , for whatever mainstream science can NOT explain .
It so happens that LaPoint's work aligns very strongly with sacred geometry (not sure he is even bothered that it does :)) ) and vortex physics . There is clear convergence of electric/plasma universe theory , Vortex physic , Holographic Universe , Sacred geometry & the Torus as a fundamental shape of our cosmos from the smallest sub-atomic scale to the galactic or universal scale . This is what philosophers have called "as above , so below means" or "inside out , outside in".

Sorry , if such philosophical statements do not quite "sound" like science , but what sounds like mainstream science has already been proven to contain numerous flaws .
Regards

You might watch this regarding Pretons: emV034: Pretons, The precursor of matter
From his paper "units_constants_v2_0.pdf" he says (note how he has to come up with new terminology for some concepts since we're dealing with sub atomic composition and quantum mechanics is clearly proven to be garbage at this point - there is a lot of material about this and why):In the legacy system, the “quantity of stuff” and the inertia of that same “stuff” is covered by a ubiquitous term called mass which has the arbitrary units of Kilograms. In Ethereal Mechanics, stuff is composed of a second order system of inertia-less charges called Pretons. The property of inertial is electromagnetic induction between two or more pretons where the inertia contributed by each pairing of pretons in burls (contraction of burly) is given by Q1Q2/r.

In an early version of his electrogravity paper (EM_02_ElectroGravity_ver0_1.pdf), he defines what a SOSOP is:
If matter is composed of a system of particles, and if weight, energy and inertia are states of said system, then logically all matter is composed of particles that are both inertia-less, weight-less and energy-less. Since inertia is required for weight and energy we simply just say inertia-less particles. The name given to these particles is Pretons. The only intrinsic property of pretons is electric charge. In a later section of this paper, both normal matter and anti-matter are demonstrated as second order systems of pretons (SOSOP).

3

You've got some things wrong here Sidhartha about Distinti's work. I'll
try to address them when I have a moment later in the week.

4

Soretna , as for LaPoint , the very fact that he got hounded out like this by the establishment , proves he was on the right track all along :))
Regards

You might watch this regarding Pretons: emV034: Pretons, The precursor of matter
From his paper "units_constants_v2_0.pdf" he says (note how he has to come up with new terminology for some concepts since we're dealing with sub atomic composition and quantum mechanics is clearly proven to be garbage at this point - there is a lot of material about this and why):In the legacy system, the “quantity of stuff” and the inertia of that same “stuff” is covered by a ubiquitous term called mass which has the arbitrary units of Kilograms. In Ethereal Mechanics, stuff is composed of a second order system of inertia-less charges called Pretons. The property of inertial is electromagnetic induction between two or more pretons where the inertia contributed by each pairing of pretons in burls (contraction of burly) is given by Q1Q2/r.

In an early version of his electrogravity paper (EM_02_ElectroGravity_ver0_1.pdf), he defines what a SOSOP is:
If matter is composed of a system of particles, and if weight, energy and inertia are states of said system, then logically all matter is composed of particles that are both inertia-less, weight-less and energy-less. Since inertia is required for weight and energy we simply just say inertia-less particles. The name given to these particles is Pretons. The only intrinsic property of pretons is electric charge. In a later section of this paper, both normal matter and anti-matter are demonstrated as second order systems of pretons (SOSOP).

5

Sidhartha,

Apparently the main reason Distinti said this was due to the fact that he didn't watch the whole thing. He has asked for better time indexes to see the parts which are more important, because he's busy doing his own research and work. It sounds to me like it was an issue of impatience more than anything else.

Also Distinti definitely does not believe in dark matter or dark energy. He actually totally destroyed Einstein's relativity in his papers. I don't think he's as firm about black holes. His whole goal is to create a grand unified theory of everything which means that it needs to be able to explain black holes as well, if they exist. I personally don't believe the mainstream interpretation of a black hole, but Distinti's explanation of them is certainly more rational.

At the end of the day, I like David LaPoint's videos too, but I have to at least concede to Distinti that LaPoint doesn't quite explain his observations, but sticks more to showing them. Distinti is probably looking at this through his lense of having worked on a grand unified theory for years and years and seeing that LaPoint was somewhat lacking in his explanations was probably a little off-putting to him.

6

Ephraimite, you are correct in your assertions. Furthermore, Distinti has a
background not only in electrical engineering, but as, I believe, a radar
or wireless telecommunications engineer. This gives a lot of practical
experience for this particular topic (more so than a plasma physicist even).

7

Ephraimite , Soretna , I agree that LaPoint should have put greater effort towards articulating the theoretical aspects of the experiments that he has so flawlessly demonstrated .
Who knows , he might even have tried to articulate the theory , but was muzzled before he could get to that stage ?? Remember his original plan was to post 6 videos , but all we got to see on the net were the first 3 vidoes...nos. 4 ,5 & 6 never got released on the internet !

We may never know what actually transpired behind the scenes because he isn't talking..even the message he has posted upon his return regarding his future plans is rather cryptic...I guess , only a person who is under such extreme scrutiny by the authorities can truly appreciate what the limitations on their own free speech are ??
I will reiterate what I said before - the fact that LaPoint has been so ruthlessly hounded , just proves once again , that he became a threat to the status quoists , precisely because his research was on the right track :))

Regards

ephraimite wrote:

Sidhartha,

Apparently the main reason Distinti said this was due to the fact that he didn't watch the whole thing. He has asked for better time indexes to see the parts which are more important, because he's busy doing his own research and work. It sounds to me like it was an issue of impatience more than anything else..

Also Distinti definitely does not believe in dark matter or dark energy. He actually totally destroyed Einstein's relativity in his papers. I don't think he's as firm about black holes. His whole goal is to create a grand unified theory of everything which means that it needs to be able to explain black holes as well, if they exist. I personally don't believe the mainstream interpretation of a black hole, but Distinti's explanation of them is certainly more rational.

At the end of the day, I like David LaPoint's videos too, but I have to at least concede to Distinti that LaPoint doesn't quite explain his observations, but sticks more to showing them. Distinti is probably looking at this through his lense of having worked on a grand unified theory for years and years and seeing that LaPoint was somewhat lacking in his explanations was probably a little off-putting to him.