How many folks here have invented something?

[BeholdTheTruth]

If so, what? And how did you do it?

Plus, assuming that you think it is a cool invention, how would you answer this knee-jerk question of any skeptic who doesn't see how cool your invention is, i.e.: "So what?"

[Antiquehunter]

I have plans for a gizmo that will help me to get the last bit of toothpaste out of a tube. I hate wasting that. I see tremendous commercial application.

What is it you have invented, what does it do, and why in your opinion, did a skeptic dismiss it out of hand?

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

I have two patents on software mechanisms developed at Wang Laboratories in 1977. They are amusing to read, because the lawyers had to make the software sound like hardware. I mean, they didn't say it was hardware, but the descriptions sound like something written about hardware.

~~ Paul

[Soapy Sam]

Antiquehunter- I got a toothpaste tube roller for Christmas. It consists of two plastic cylinders about 5mm in diameter with a groove at each end containing a rubber o-ring which pulls both rollers together, like the roller mangle your granny used to dry the laundry.
You stick the tube in flat end first and shove it up.
It actually works.
I have some profoundly cheap friends. At least I didn't get chocolate covered ants this year.

[John Jackson]

I have my own free-energy device - I'm tapping the neighbours' electricity. :D

[DrRyanScarsella]

I have a few inventions I have created throughout the years. Most of them by some sort of need for another task. My personal favorite, although kind of not really that useful other than for scholarly types is a template for a cosine, sine or tangential wave for use in classrooms where taught. It was a clear peice of plexiglass with a wave form on top. It was see through with graduations indicating what waveform you were using and the proper placement for that wave. It also had marking for inverse waves and standard and metric measurements. I pitched the idea to plastics company in southern Florida while still in school but really never saw any royalty checks. Great idea for any students needing to draw waves in classroom settings and are as anal as I about the drawings.

[Antiquehunter]

Antiquehunter- I got a toothpaste tube roller for Christmas. It consists of two plastic cylinders about 5mm in diameter with a groove at each end containing a rubber o-ring which pulls both rollers together, like the roller mangle your granny used to dry the laundry.
You stick the tube in flat end first and shove it up.
It actually works.
I have some profoundly cheap friends. At least I didn't get chocolate covered ants this year.

Damn.

But there will STILL be toothpaste left in the tube, even with the added roller efficiency.

I did the math on the back of a cigarette pack.

Assume - Tube of toothpaste = $3. Number of brushes in a tube = 120. Average number of brushes a year by your average dental hygiene user = 720 (round number). Cost per brush = a hair under 3 cents.

IF invention could get number of brushes per tube to 125, then one could save 75 cents per year. If could sell invention for $5 then it would pay for itself in 7 years and would be an easy sell.

I have too much spare time in Kabul.

[BeholdTheTruth]

I have a few inventions I have created throughout the years. Most of them by some sort of need for another task. My personal favorite, although kind of not really that useful other than for scholarly types is a template for a cosine, sine or tangential wave for use in classrooms where taught. It was a clear peice of plexiglass with a wave form on top. It was see through with graduations indicating what waveform you were using and the proper placement for that wave. It also had marking for inverse waves and standard and metric measurements. I pitched the idea to plastics company in southern Florida while still in school but really never saw any royalty checks. Great idea for any students needing to draw waves in classroom settings and are as anal as I about the drawings.

That one seems especially cool! Reminds me of the value of "visual thinking" per... "Definitions of Visual thinking on the Web:

"Picture Thinking, Visual Thinking or Visual/Spacial Learner is the phenomenon of thinking through visual processing, where most people would think with linguistic or verbal processing. It is nonlinear and often has the nature of a computer simulation, in the sense that lots of data is put through a process to yield insight into complex systems, which would be impossible through language alone. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_thinking"

and the book "Proofs Without Words: Exercises in Visual Thinking" by the mathematician Roger Nelsen.

[El Greco]

Probably several little things, nothing really groundbreaking I suppose. Lately I made a nice improvised masking system for my home cinema screen, using planks, black velvet, aluminum rods, etc. It's adjustable both lengthwise and heightwise to fit the different ratios (4:3, 16:9, 47:20). Not exactly an "invention" although the way the bottom part adjusts is pretty imaginative, I suppose.

[Molinaro]

I invented the word murdalop when I was a kid. The word purple just didn't do it for me.. so I came up with a better name for that color.

Everyone using it yet?

[jj]

Hunh. See my web page, I guess home.comcast.net/~retired_old_jj

I've got something like 20+ patents (not counting international ones), including a bunch of stuff that reads on MP3 and AAC, some that can read on jpeg encoders, speech and audio transmission systems ...

[logical muse]

Well I wouldn't call it an invention, but I devised a method for solving a particular maths/computer problem. Wrote a paper on it, presented it at a combinatorics conference, got written about in a book or two.

The thing is, I'm not qualified in maths or computers (I do have half a diploma though), or anything, actually. I'm just a lazy radio announcer with a small talent for writing code. The people at the conference were pretty amazed. I thought it was fun.

[Vorticity]

Well I wouldn't call it an invention, but I devised a method for solving a particular maths/computer problem. Wrote a paper on it, presented it at a combinatorics conference, got written about in a book or two
Just out of curiosity, can you elaborate?
Math/computer problems are my bread and butter...

[logical muse]

Sure, but I'll PM you, OK?

[gnome]

Probably several little things, nothing really groundbreaking I suppose. Lately I made a nice improvised masking system for my home cinema screen, using planks, black velvet, aluminum rods, etc. It's adjustable both lengthwise and heightwise to fit the different ratios (4:3, 16:9, 47:20). Not exactly an "invention" although the way the bottom part adjusts is pretty imaginative, I suppose.

... maybe I'm not understanding the invention, but you're using black velvet to cover up the black parts of the screen? I'm trying to see the point.

But don't worry, I have trouble with my own family on that. For some reason the black bar of a letterboxed movie bothers them more than the edge of the television does.

[dogjones]

I actually invented the rectangle. But they wouldn't let me patent it, the ******ds - something about "we've had it for years" or something - I was ****ing ROBBED and now I live in a stinkin TRAILER when I could be in a SOLID GOLD HOUSE like the Itchy and Scratchy guy and I HATE SKEPTICS, UNBELIEVERS, AND MY LIFE.

[Jeff Corey]

Back in the early 70s Charles Hamad and I put together Arthur, the Talking Trash Can. A recorded message would say "Thank You" and various other messages when the lid was opened (and, presumably, trash was tossed in). It was covered by local news and even a BBC film crew. One of the messages they were fond of was "Impeach Nixon".
People tell me that Disneyworld now has talking trash cans.

[Psiload]

I invented the question mark.

[Soapy Sam]

I have invented several excuses.

(Heard about the kid in Genetic Engineering School? "My homework ate the dog.")

[BeholdTheTruth]

I have plans for a gizmo that will help me to get the last bit of toothpaste out of a tube. I hate wasting that. I see tremendous commercial application.

What is it you have invented, what does it do, and why in your opinion, did a skeptic dismiss it out of hand?

As per "What is it you have invented, what does it do?" It's a cool kind of pre-orthodox and post-modern clock/watch. I am in the process of getting IP protection on it, and once I have that I can tell you more if you still want to know. So stayed tuned for a succesor thread if I have sufficient, uh, success.

As to "why in your opinion, did a skeptic dismiss it out of hand?" it is my experience that most people tend to not comprehend ideas for which they do not have conceptual containers. Furthermore, much of post graduate sicience and other such rigorous studies are about training students to seek out what is wrong about a new (or even old) idea, rather than (like religions) to dwell on what might be right.

Hopefully the design of my family of clocks/watches will provide a useful conceptual framework such that the basic idea underlying the over all design and architecture of the device will be easily comprehended and perhaps even considered valid. And in certain circumstances perhaps even considered very useful by some folks here and there.

Note: once I have animations for the dial and movement of the device, I will point to them if anyone is curious. And once my TT technology firm has pc desktop versions, I will make a multi-mode one available to members of this forum. Of course, for you guys free of charge. :-) But only because I so highly regard the quality of your intellectual rigor and encyclopedic quantity of knowledge. Indeed, so much so that I am expecting that some great ideas for additional features wil emerge.

[Chupacabras]

I have at least one invention "in paper". Its a synthesizer software that could also be adapted for composing or teaching/learning music. The interface is the key here.

I am waiting for patent prices to drop below $30.

[Antiquehunter]

Well, I'm a bit of a design buff myself, and a passionate collector of / dealer in antique wrist/pocket watches. So I'm curious about your idea which sounds as though it will change the look and feel of personal timepieces. I'm not sure I can envision what a post-modern pre-orthodox watch would look like, but I know that several modern designers have done some revolutionary stuff to watches.

My personal attachment is the mechanical beauty and complexity of complicated watch movements (repeaters, alarms, day-date calendars, automatons / jacquemarts etc...) so I'm not sure if your design is for me. But I don't see why a skeptic would dismiss a change to watch design out of hand. Does it still keep time and is portable in some fashion? Sounds like it has a shot to me.

-AH.

[BeholdTheTruth]

Well, I'm a bit of a design buff myself, and a passionate collector of / dealer in antique wrist/pocket watches. So I'm curious about your idea which sounds as though it will change the look and feel of personal timepieces. I'm not sure I can envision what a post-modern pre-orthodox watch would look like, but I know that several modern designers have done some revolutionary stuff to watches.

My personal attachment is the mechanical beauty and complexity of complicated watch movements (repeaters, alarms, day-date calendars, automatons / jacquemarts etc...) so I'm not sure if your design is for me. But I don't see why a skeptic would dismiss a change to watch design out of hand. Does it still keep time and is portable in some fashion? Sounds like it has a shot to me.

-AH.
Based on how much need to have and to hold complexity per the dial/face and/or the movement/workings (both of which are visible), it may or may not appeal to you. Even more so, the way it displays and works has as much an organic quality as a mechanical one, the way a morphing "mechanical" regular polygon with more and more sides more and more approximates an "organic" circle. However as you are also likely a fan of elegant simplicity, I would be delighted to give you a first edition version of the pc desktop version for free, IF you agree to vigorously spreading the word about it in your circle of buyers and sellers should it live up to the claims above and below. For example, on very favorable terms -- if you actually did spread the word, I would (based on your performance) consider having you as an authorized early dealer as well as of course an early buyer of the realware versions of our watches and clocks.

As for how skeptics react to whatever odd duck ideas might emerge from my pre-orthodox and post-modern family of watches and clocks, what is your candid reaction to this: the wristwatch version of our family of timepieces permits someone to not only wear the sky on his or her wrist, but it does so by employing that universal "principal principle" called Generative Orthogonal Dimensionality, AKA, The Law Of Redemptive Detachment. Thus, amongst a wide sprectrum of scientific and religious "revelations", once the funda-mental idea of it begins to dawn on you, it more and more sheds light on mysteries as broad and deep as the true nature of the earlest concept of "Horus of the Horizon" and why Newton so optimystically sought and was (via his "wholy" scientific approach to alchemy) able to unite both optics and gravitation in one set of scientific works.

It you are not skeptical about that, you are probably too open-minded for this forum. OTOH, maybe you are about to be one of the first dealers of the first and last (at least for now) generations of clocks and watches. While supplies last. :-)

[mroek]

... maybe I'm not understanding the invention, but you're using black velvet to cover up the black parts of the screen? I'm trying to see the point.I'm guessing that he uses a digital projector, in which case black isn't really black because the projector just can't shut out all the light (ambient light also comes into play). Masking with black velvet in these areas improves the perceived contrast, and it needs to be adjustable because of different aspect ratios in movies.

This is a common thing to do in home theaters, and I am thinking about it myself, so perhaps El Greco could elaborate a bit on his solution?

[Antiquehunter]

Hmmm... Interesting post. I'll respond line by line.

Based on how much need to have and to hold complexity per the dial/face and/or the movement/workings (both of which are visible), it may or may not appeal to you.

I like watches that are distinctive. In my collection I have pieces like a Breitling Chronomat, a Patek Phillipe 5024 Gondolo, the Dubey & Schaldenbrand in my Avatar etc... So - it has to have some substance. Being cased in precious metal helps, too.


Even more so, the way it displays and works has as much an organic quality as a mechanical one, the way a morphing "mechanical" regular polygon with more and more sides more and more approximates an "organic" circle.

OK. I'm with you so far. I don't necessarily understand the mechanics of it, but I think I get your drift.


However as you are also likely a fan of elegant simplicity, I would be delighted to give you a first edition version of the pc desktop version for free, IF you agree to vigorously spreading the word about it in your circle of buyers and sellers should it live up to the claims above and below. For example, on very favorable terms -- if you actually did spread the word, I would (based on your performance) consider having you as an authorized early dealer as well as of course an early buyer of the realware versions of our watches and clocks.


Well, I deal in antiques and estate jewellery. I don't sell Swatches - even though some of them are quite valuable to collectors. Even if your design is all that and a bag of chips, I'm not sure it would fit my current business - but I'm happy to look at a computer version of a design and take a closer look. I can't commit to spreading the word if I think your design is awful - but if I LIKE it, and I think it has potential, I don't mind referring it on.

Note - to this point, I'm maintaining a skeptical point of view, but I'm being open-minded and receptive to new ideas.


As for how skeptics react to whatever odd duck ideas might emerge from my pre-orthodox and post-modern family of watches and clocks, what is your candid reaction to this: the wristwatch version of our family of timepieces permits someone to not only wear the sky on his or her wrist, but it does so by employing that universal "principal principle" called Generative Orthogonal Dimensionality, AKA, The Law Of Redemptive Detachment. Thus, amongst a wide sprectrum of scientific and religious "revelations", once the funda-mental idea of it begins to dawn on you, it more and more sheds light on mysteries as broad and deep as the true nature of the earlest concept of "Horus of the Horizon" and why Newton so optimystically sought and was (via his "wholy" scientific approach to alchemy) able to unite both optics and gravitation in one set of scientific works.


Umm... now you're losing me. Firstly, I don't understand much of the lingo you've used there. Maybe I went to a different University, but I don't know about a 'universal principal principle called the Generative Orthogonal Dimensionality aka the Law of Redemptive Detachment'. I've not made a detailled study of Newton, but I'm not convinced he saw himself as an alchemist, nor do I respond favorably to weird misspellings like 'optimystically'. I'm not enough of an amateur physicist to understand the concept of a unification of optics and gravitation in a set of scientific works. Wearing the sky on my wrist? What's this all about? Air in the watch? Water in the watch? A cloud in my watch? Patek Phillipe makes a Grand Complication that tracks the movements of constellations in the sky - and they do it all mechanically which is really cool. If I had $100k to spend on a watch, I'd be buying that... Long story short - you've made some interesting and highly unusual claims about your design, but I don't understand what you're driving at. You need to explain yourself in simpler terms that a humble earthling such as myself can grasp.

It you are not skeptical about that, you are probably too open-minded for this forum.

OK you got me - I'm skeptical because you've just invoked a whole lotta phraselogy that I cannot grasp. That doesn't mean I've dismissed you, but I'm definitely scratching my head and saying 'hmmm'.

OTOH, maybe you are about to be one of the first dealers of the first and last (at least for now) generations of clocks and watches. While supplies last. :-)

I'm happy to look at your computer simulation for now if you wish. PM me for my Email address. I make no claims to pass on to my circle of collectors / dealers until I've had a long hard look. I will commit to posting a review of your desktop app here on these boards as a starting point... As to handling the final product - I'd need to see one, understand one and LIKE the final product before we talk distribution deals.

-AH.

[Starthinker]

I invented speghetti in a tube for people who like to eat speghetti while they drive. You heard it here first!

[logical muse]

Well, I'm a bit of a design buff myself, and a passionate collector of / dealer in antique wrist/pocket watches. So I'm curious about your idea which sounds as though it will change the look and feel of personal timepieces. I'm not sure I can envision what a post-modern pre-orthodox watch would look like, but I know that several modern designers have done some revolutionary stuff to watches.

My personal attachment is the mechanical beauty and complexity of complicated watch movements (repeaters, alarms, day-date calendars, automatons / jacquemarts etc...) so I'm not sure if your design is for me. But I don't see why a skeptic would dismiss a change to watch design out of hand. Does it still keep time and is portable in some fashion? Sounds like it has a shot to me.

-AH.

Hey have you seen this watch: Tour de L'ile (http://www.vacheron-constantin.com/250/tourdelile_en.html)
It has 834 parts, costs 1.5 million dollars and there are only seven of them.

[Jekyll]

To me a post-modern clock would be a peice of paper with:

"The time is a tool of female oppression. Why are you trying to look at three ticking phalluses, you freak?"

written on it.

[Antiquehunter]

Hey have you seen this watch: Tour de L'ile (http://www.vacheron-constantin.com/250/tourdelile_en.html)
It has 834 parts, costs 1.5 million dollars and there are only seven of them.

Tres cool. But before I could justify parting with $1,500,000 (plus taxes and import costs) on a watch, I'd need to win the JRef prize like... 6 times over.

I have paid (and received) crazy amounts of money for a watch. Amounts that would buy you a very serviceable vehicle. But 1.5 mil is well... silly.

But I still want one.

[BeholdTheTruth]

Tres cool. But before I could justify parting with $1,500,000 (plus taxes and import costs) on a watch, I'd need to win the JRef prize like... 6 times over.

I have paid (and received) crazy amounts of money for a watch. Amounts that would buy you a very serviceable vehicle. But 1.5 mil is well... silly.

But I still want one.

Speaking of the JREF prize, if my watch/clock actually can do what I claim it can do per nicely tying together ancient god memes (such as Horus of the Horizon), the geometry of the Yin Yang and logic/arithmetic of the I Ching, Newtonian mathematics and physics (both gravitation and optics), stories about Jesus, the Buddha's eightfold path, the Hebrew Urim and Tummim... do you think there is any basis for me winning the JREF prize? NOTE: I would gladly split the proceeds evenly with anyone or any group on this forum that introduced my entry (should we get the bucks.)

[BeholdTheTruth]

P.S. On a scale from O to 1, how cool is this watch to you... http://www.klaauwwatches.nl/OudeSite/astrolabium/astrolabium_sf.htm

[Antiquehunter]

P.S. On a scale from O to 1, how cool is this watch to you... http://www.klaauwwatches.nl/OudeSite/astrolabium/astrolabium_sf.htm

Well it looks cool, and if it accomplishes all its features mechanically, then it is cool. (Quartz movements suck.) But - I'm not particularly interested in the movement of the signs of the zodiac. The MECHANICS of it - the ENGINEERING is cool. What I'd use it for apart from the time/calendar/ostentatiousness of the timepiece is beyond me.

[Antiquehunter]

Speaking of the JREF prize, if my watch/clock actually can do what I claim it can do per nicely tying together ancient god memes (such as Horus of the Horizon), the geometry of the Yin Yang and logic/arithmetic of the I Ching, Newtonian mathematics and physics (both gravitation and optics), stories about Jesus, the Buddha's eightfold path, the Hebrew Urim and Tummim... do you think there is any basis for me winning the JREF prize? NOTE: I would gladly split the proceeds evenly with anyone or any group on this forum that introduced my entry (should we get the bucks.)


Well - I'm not an expert on the how to's on the JREF prize. But you need to prove your watch is doing something paranormal. Tying together a bunch of different historical ideas isn't going to cut it. Having a watch that moves by 'I Ching' power, or because Jesus made it so, or is a perputual motion device is.

(Skepticism meter rising...)

[Diamond]

I have one patent (I have lots of patentable ideas but little money to spend on patenting). It's for a particular design of fiberoptic network.

[uruk]

I invented the "gladiator" joke back when the movie was popular.

It goes like this (don't say I didn't warn you):
Did you see that movie about a great roman general who was betrayed and sentenced to die? His life was spared because he was able to satisfy Ceasar's wife orally. He was GLAD-HE-ATE-HER! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! Yuk, *snort*..sniker..get it? get... Ummmm yea. I'll go now.

[dogjones]

I have plans for a gizmo that will help me to get the last bit of toothpaste out of a tube. I hate wasting that. I see tremendous commercial application.

Coincidentally, saw saw this link on boingboing today:

http://www.wrapables.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=A51622&cate3=020201

Lip-shaped toothpaste squeezer: the "Liposuction"
This "Liposuction" toothpaste squeezer gets the last of the toothpaste out of the tube while accomplishing a visual pun.

[logical muse]

Tres cool. But before I could justify parting with $1,500,000 (plus taxes and import costs) on a watch, I'd need to win the JRef prize like... 6 times over.

I have paid (and received) crazy amounts of money for a watch. Amounts that would buy you a very serviceable vehicle. But 1.5 mil is well... silly.

But I still want one.
Then there's the clock of the long now (http://www.longnow.org/projects/clock/). Not a watch, but you like your engineering, right?

Check out the prototype (http://www.longnow.org/projects/clock/prototype1/).

[BeholdTheTruth]

Well - I'm not an expert on the how to's on the JREF prize. But you need to prove your watch is doing something paranormal. Tying together a bunch of different historical ideas isn't going to cut it. Having a watch that moves by 'I Ching' power, or because Jesus made it so, or is a perputual motion device is.

(Skepticism meter rising...)

Are you saying that if someone came up with device based on a pre-orthodox and post-modern principal principle that united, for example, the I Ching and Yin Yang with the Hebrew Urim and Tummim and Christiany's cross and the Buddha's eight-fold path and Newton's approach to alchemy with his works on gravitation and optics, and QM and relativity, such a revelation would be considered normal instead of paranomal? :-) Oh come now, such is not skepticism. It's simply a refusal to see something extra-ordinary. BTW, it's a good thing that my Horuscoping device speaks for itself as talk is cheap whereas the JREF prize is a lot of bucks. And if it works, I am sure that someone here will want to split the prize with me even if it may not be you. (OTOH, I am still hoping that it is you!)

[Antiquehunter]

Are you saying that if someone came up with device based on a pre-orthodox and post-modern principal principle that united, for example, the I Ching and Yin Yang with the Hebrew Urim and Tummim and Christiany's cross and the Buddha's eight-fold path and Newton's approach to alchemy with his works on gravitation and optics, and QM and relativity, such a revelation would be considered normal instead of paranomal? :-) Oh come now, such is not skepticism. It's simply a refusal to see something extra-ordinary. BTW, it's a good thing that my Horuscoping device speaks for itself as talk is cheap whereas the JREF prize is a lot of bucks. And if it works, I am sure that someone here will want to split the prize with me even if it may not be you. (OTOH, I am still hoping that it is you!)

Disclaimer - I'm not affiliated with the JREF, and I know very little about the administration of the $1,000,000 paranormal challenge.

My suggestion is you check the details of the challenge application very closely. Your invention would need to demonstrate something paranormal. Just because you have found some way to 'unify' a bunch of historical doctrines / scientific principles etc... doesn't mean that its doing something paranormal. I could say that my toothpaste tube squeezing device was invented based on biblical references and the 1932 Farmer's Almanac, but that's not paranormal. If my toothpaste tube squeezer works 'because Jesus comes down and squeezes your tube every morning' - and I can prove it -then I may have something that qualifies for the challenge.

Now that you've changed the name of your watch to be a 'Horuscoping device' - I'll add this. A watch that tells you your horoscope would probably not qualify. A watch that predicts the future with a degree of accuracy probably would. I'm making some assumptions about your watch now without having seen it - but if you're going down that path, and if you're planning on applying, I think you're going to have to show a very strong correlation between the horoscope generated by your device, and the accuracy of said predictions.

There have been a number of challenges for the $1,000,000 prize that have involved horoscopes - it may serve you well to check 'em out.

(Skeptic meter in the red...)

[69dodge]

Are you saying that if someone came up with device based on a pre-orthodox and post-modern principal principle that united, for example, the I Ching and Yin Yang with the Hebrew Urim and Tummim and Christiany's cross and the Buddha's eight-fold path and Newton's approach to alchemy with his works on gravitation and optics, and QM and relativity, such a revelation would be considered normal instead of paranomal? :-) Oh come now, such is not skepticism. It's simply a refusal to see something extra-ordinary. BTW, it's a good thing that my Horuscoping device speaks for itself as talk is cheap whereas the JREF prize is a lot of bucks. And if it works, I am sure that someone here will want to split the prize with me even if it may not be you. (OTOH, I am still hoping that it is you!)I don't know whether such a revelation would be considered normal instead of paranormal because I have no idea what you're talking about. You say "if it works." What does "work" mean? What's it supposed to do?

In any case, whether I finally figure out what you mean or not, if you win a million dollars and you want to give me some I'll be more than happy to take it. :D

But seriously, why split the prize with anybody? I'm missing something here.

[BeholdTheTruth]

I don't know whether such a revelation would be considered normal instead of paranormal because I have no idea what you're talking about. You say "if it works." What does "work" mean? What's it supposed to do?

In any case, whether I finally figure out what you mean or not, if you win a million dollars and you want to give me some I'll be more than happy to take it. :D

But seriously, why split the prize with anybody? I'm missing something
here.

Suppose the following:

1) Suppose first that there is some actual kind of common thread/underlying over all principal principle inherent in everything sooner or later changing, e.g., electrons, rivers, galaxies... ;

2) Suppose also that that principal principal is referred to in a wide variety of ancient religous scriptures and myths, and also in a wide range of ancient writings of a scientific, mathematical and philosophical nature (for example, Archimedes' works on the linear spiral and the arbelos);

3) Suppose also that that principal principle is seen (if you know what to look for and also know how to see it) in symbols found through ancient cultures across much of the world;

4) Suppose that that principal principle can also be found (if you know what to look for and also know how to see it) in Newton's writings on alchemy as well as his physics and his (and Leibniz') calculus), and also in both QM and relativity ((if you know what to look for and also know how to see it).

4) And finally suppose that the observing of that PP enlightens one about making devices that can do interesting and novel things like telling time in an unusually simple and useful pre-orthodox and post-modern way -- with one of the befits of the simple and useful benefits of thetimepiece is that it diectly points one to quickly comprehensible aspects of that PP.

IF such a PP were to exist, then whoever finds and then reveals it would surely be a pi$$er. And perhaps with JREF recognition of the revelation, a rich pi$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$er IF the rules of the JREF were such that that person's discovery of such a universal PP were considered as having been made by paranormal not normal means. But not if the JREF referees considered such a normal as opposed to paranormal.

BTW, notice that I am not at this moment saying either that there is such a PP, nor that I have found it, but rather that if there is one and if I have found it, I am willing to take half of the prize money with the other half going (and coming) to some skeptic here who also would like to cash in. And who better to carry the paranormal PP discovery to the keepers of the JREF prize money than one of you!

Of course, just imagine how that PP standard standard-bearer would feel if and when he or she is told such a great discovery, even if it was one, is a normal "Aha!" --IF of course there actually is a PP and IF it actually had been rediscovered! And thus this potential irony: IF there were to be a PP and IF has been rediscovered, then the knee-jerk skepticism of everyone here gets to be as expensive or more so than the knee-jerk orthodox beliefs of all true believers.

BTW2, I just thought of another irony: maybe I should make the same offer to Sylvia Brown? :-)

[Jekyll]

Is it safe to say you haven't made a working prototype of your watch then?

[BeholdTheTruth]

Is it safe to say you haven't made a working prototype of your watch then?

No. I do, as of yesterday, have a working PC prototype and I have filed some IP forms to cover the design and utility of it. Care to be a candidate for "skeptical flag-bearer"? BTW, the slogan we are planning to use is, "Real time in real-time".

[Jekyll]

Sure, I can wave a flag. Just don't ask me to march in step with everyone else. :D

So what does this watch actually do?

[Antiquehunter]

Psst - Jekyll - I claim 10% of your share for being the first to engage this guy in conversation. ;)

(Woo meter off the scale.)

Jackel - you haven't emailed me the promised prototype yet...

[Jekyll]

Psst - Jekyll - I claim 10% of your share for being the first to engage this guy in conversation. ;)
OK, but you have to wave the flag when my arms get tired.

[BeholdTheTruth]

Psst - Jekyll - I claim 10% of your share for being the first to engage this guy in conversation. ;)

(Woo meter off the scale.)

Jackel - you haven't emailed me the promised prototype yet...

Sorry, Ah. I had not read my messages. Thanks for replying.

As soon as I have my intellectual property protections in place, and rel 1.0 of my pc version of the HHYYYY clock, I am still planning to send you a copy for your evaluation, afterwhich your skepticism may dissolve and be replaced by a coalescing of positive inclinations (the way alchemical processes were said by adepts to involve sufficiently dissolving x in order to produce more and more coalescing of y.)

In any case, I much doubt Jekyll is going to vigorously carry the prize-seeking venture, so you may not maximize your revenue potential completely betting on him.

[moopet]

I've invented a bunch of things - from a fishing kit that fits into an oversize matchbox to a method of getting webcams to allow eye contact with your conference partner.

It's fun even when you find out later that someone else got there first :)

[roger]

(the way alchemical processes were said by adepts to involve sufficiently dissolving x in order to produce more and more coalescing of y.)Yale? Yale Landsberg? Is that you? Didn't Upchurch just get done telling you that if you made any more socks you'd be banned?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=1335876&highlight=yale#post1335876

[CplFerro]

I don't know if this counts as an invention, but I once designed a method of preventing the local churls from sitting on the top of the benches at bus stops. Old folks would come in winter and find the seats covered in slush from these jerks.

I first considered spikes, or nails with sharpened heads pounded in halfway, but settled on using safety screws to attach a flange (like those used for bed frames) to the top. That would be rather uncomfortable on the ass after a short time.

After several telephone calls to various people passing the buck about who actually owned the benches (the city? a store? hobos?), I found the right person to submit the diagram to. Nothing came of it, going to show how little anyone gives a ****.

Maybe I'll paint the top with some kind of slow-drying paint or glue...

[BeholdTheTruth]

Yale? Yale Landsberg? Is that you? Didn't Upchurch just get done telling you that if you made any more socks you'd be banned?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=1335876&highlight=yale#post1335876

1) Rog, unlike the Yale Landsburg you refer to, you are not getting me to divulge my real identity.

2) While I am inclined to think that Mr. Landsburg is right about at least some of his (as he cheerfully refers to them) odd duck views, I am not the only one who thinks so. For examples, see his group's phiLOGOSophia.org site.

3) I was able to determine why he dropped out of the forum, and he kindly provided this list below of his attempts at fairly playing by the rules, rules which do not seem to apply to him if it is true that Upchurch unfairly never responded to what seems to me to be several quite reasonable requests.

4) Much more importantly, can I assume you have no interest in getting a free copy of my HHYYYY clock -- let alone making some big bucks from the JREF prize?

The paper trail that seems to indicate JREF administration is no more fair than a lot of other "clubs" with "do as I say not as I do" rules...

Hey Upchurch, give me a break here. :-) Or at least consider the logic of
my request: 1) you folks changed "Yale Landsberg" back to BeholdTheTruth, no
problem there; 2) I do not remember my password for BeholdTheTruth, so I
requested of you admins a new one sent to my new email address as my old
email address does not exist any longer; 3) I only used the I Need A Working
Moniker moniker because my request per (2) went unnoticed.

BTW, Upchurch, I noticed that you are a UU, and as a UU you might find some
interesting very UU ideas contained in my "Generalities of Nature's
Operating System" essay as per http://phiLOGOSophia.org/Generalities.pdf.

But even if not, how about getting to me a working password for
BeholdTheTruth?

Regards, Yale

----- Original Message -----
From: "JREF Forum" <jrefweb@gmail.com>
To: <yale@winstone.us>
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 6:34 PM
Subject: Account removed at JREF Forum!


> Dear I Need A Working Moniker,
>
> Unfortunately your registration at JREF Forum did not meet our membership
> requirements. Therefore your registration was deleted.
>
> Sorry,
> Upchurch
> upchurch@randi.org



Lothian
Muse

Registered: Apr 2002
Location: Northern England
Posts: 947 quote:

Originally posted by Number Six
According to the Forum Management forum, OriginalYaleL has been banned for being a sock puppet.

Damn I hate being right all the time.

Benguin, Looks like I did beat you to the 'real' answer
__________________
Hi Upchurch!
If you agree that a logical join of these two comments patently misleads any forum visitor about the reason I am currently locked out of the forum and which you and are trying to resolve, how do you suggest we resolve it today? I can of course log in BeholdTheTruth, but I have forgotten my password for it?
Regards, yale


Sure there is, YaleL has precedence over BTT which is the last one used, not the first. Furthermore, OriginalYaleL is even more explanatory.
----- Original Message -----
From: Upchurch
To: 'Yale'
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 12:35 PM
Subject: RE: Your JREF Forums accounts.

I'm sorry, but the no sock-puppet rule has been around for a long time and it is there for a reason. There is no reason for you to not use the BeholdTheTruth account.

From: Yale [mailto:yale@Neo-GNOSIS.org]
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 11:05 AM
To: Upchurch
Subject: Re: Your JREF Forums accounts.

As I currently have a thread going in Science, Math, etc. under OriginalYaleL, I suggest that you get rid of BTT and reinstate OriginalYaleL to avoid confusion. Especially as I don't want to use BTT anymore any.
----- Original Message -----
From: Upchurch
To: yale@Neo-GNOSIS.org ; yale@yalelands.com
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 11:43 AM
Subject: Your JREF Forums accounts.
It is JREF policy that users may only have one working account at a time. As there is nothing wrong with your BeholdTheTruth account, I have disabled the newer OriginalYaleL account.
Please do not make any more new accounts.


As I currently have a thread going in Science, Math, etc. under OriginalYaleL, I suggest that you get rid of BTT and reinstate OriginalYaleL to avoid confusion. Especially as I don't want to use BTT anymore any.
----- Original Message -----
From: Upchurch
To: yale@Neo-GNOSIS.org ; yale@yalelands.com
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 11:43 AM
Subject: Your JREF Forums accounts.
It is JREF policy that users may only have one working account at a time. As there is nothing wrong with your BeholdTheTruth account, I have disabled the newer OriginalYaleL account.
Please do not make any more new accounts.

[roger]

1) Rog, unlike the Yale Landsburg you refer to, you are not getting me to divulge my real identity.I have zero interest in your real identity or otherwise badgering you. It just seemed egregious to create yet another sock puppet. I hope you can resolve your password issue.

No, I also have no interest in your clock, though I thank you for your kind offer.

[Panelman]

In 1972 an automatic, programable knock out system for plastic injection machines. It kept the operators from having to reach inside the machine to knock off parts by hand. :crowded:

[69dodge]

BTW, notice that I am not at this moment saying either that there is such a PP, nor that I have found it, but rather that if there is one and if I have found it, I am willing to take half of the prize money with the other half going (and coming) to some skeptic here who also would like to cash in. And who better to carry the paranormal PP discovery to the keepers of the JREF prize money than one of you!The rest of your post was still too vague for me to understand, but I'm pretty sure I understand this part.

I'd love to get half a million dollars.

What do I need to do?