Tesla and Superweapons.

I had a major interest in Tesla’s writing while I was reading Maxwell BEFORE I was contacted by Dr. Gladyshev.Since then I have refined my physical notions and got rid of my high school fascination for soliton under protein denaturation, for what is actually something Kant thought about in a different time. In particular I tend to think that (the) what is missing from Feynman’s notion of QED in biology that seemed possible to me by reading Maxwell is not something in any material destroying weapons at all, but just in flesh and blood. We just don’t know how to do the science of it all. I think it is simply IN the Platypus bill and it’s nervous system!!I feel that there is not a weapon here, but of course there might be in your sense, as it would certainly be ”hidden’ from me, if it was hidden from anyone, but rather than that, I think whatever there could be has resulted from a simple disagreement (still never resolved) between Volta and Galvani that could be read chemically in the work of Faraday.I think Maxwell’s extendable readers get their ideation, whatever that may be , from this path through Faraday which also went to electrotherapy in psychiatry rather than to the military (unless they have mental weapons (which there is a literature on(sending waves onto embassies etc.)) rather then particle weapons).There is an interesting symmetry in one of the Platypus receptors that has me trying to think, if, it is used to measure the temperature effects on electroreception. I would not be arguing that butterflies use super symmetry though it would be a cool thought.A primitive sketch trying to see the relation of Faraday’s experimental set up in the context of the Galvani/Volta controversy is below. I made this up before I found out about the kinds of receptors in the bill.

I feel a little stupid because I learnt something- just joking!!The Wittgentsein folklore did not work on me however because I got a great sense of Copernicus from Gingerich and Poland from an native.Thanks for the video. It is going to help me with a conversation that my two brothers always have about possible spin experiments.I DO struggle with making sure I am not making the reverse error Coleman is talking about. It is possible I have made it but I am not sure whether Sidney might consider rejecting Von Neumann as I do over (for me) how he wrote up Cantor’s ordertypes and ALSO told Feynmann to not care about what the government was doing.The thesis I wrote but what was rejected by Provine wailed against the history of biology for not explaining how vitalism was written out. It just disappeared from the literature tout court. That however is nothing to do with Telsa on electrons etc. I do not see that I need to refer back when vitalism was and J. Loeb had not written. I am struggling rather with Dyson’s claim that we do not have Einstein’s view anymore. This video helps me as I am trying to read comprehensibly Penrose's "Road to reality" while listening to the Feynamnn lectures from the 60s.I suppose space like seperation could be considered if life off Earth is admitted. Perhaps that causes some issue for me as well. Tesla’s work would all be on Earth however much one wishes (or not) to accept Wolf and Leibniz rather than Kant or some other viewpoint in a chain with Bertrand Russell.Edited by Brad McFall, : No reason given.Edited by Brad McFall, : No reason given.