Joe Champion said:
> >Is there something unusal occurring from Hudson's observations? Without a
> question the answer is -- yes. Is the occurrence monatomic? The absolute
> answer is -- NO!
While David Hudson cannot claim with certainty that his materials are
monoatomic, Joe Champion cannot claim with certainty that they are
not.
> >How can I state this? Easy, for something to be something you must have
> scientific basis. Hypotheses were developed by philosphers and scientists
> in an attempt to explain the basis of atomic science. These hypothesis were
> later proven by development of laboratory tests.
> >
> >Hudson makes claims. He makes these claims from observations. He, nor any
> of the scientists, researchers or technicians associated with the differing
> observations have porvided the basis of the emperical data observed. This
> being the - MATHEMATICAL MODEL.
> >
> >Until a mathematical model is developed, no one can build a devise (e.g.
> ORME's identifier).
> >
> >Emperical data is substance, for it has been observed. Explanation of the
> event is up to the ability of the observer to qualify as many parameters as
> possible associated with the pre and post phenomena.
> >
> >To remove Daivid's claims from those of physic occurences and place them in
> the journals of science you must have the ability to:
> >
> >1. Explain the observation in mathematical terms.
> >
> >2. Have others replicate the process independent of the inventor.
> >
> >3. Develop technology which will independently identify the phenomena.
> >
> >To my knowledge the above has not occurred. At the point in time it does,
> David will be World famous and the recipient of the Nobel Prize.
> >
> >As a friend, I hope that he can achieve the above.
Hudson's monoatomic theory fits the observations very well. The
claimed properties of his materials also fit well with the
properties which would be presumed to be the result of large amounts
of the monoatomic material which nuclear physicisists are observing
in single atom amounts. Hudson and others have publically claimed
that they can convert metalic gold to a white powder with properties
which do not match any known properties of any gold compound. They
have claimed that they can then take these white powders and convert
them back to metalic gold. Hudson has demonstrated these claims
with sufficient rigor that he has been granted a number of patents
on these materials and the process for converting them in countries
around the world.
Joe which part of Hudson's process do you have a problem with? What
evidence do you have that Hudson's materials are not monoatomic?
Barry Carter <bcarter@igc.apc.org>
Blue Mountain Native Forest Alliance
Voice 541-523-3357
Fax 541-523-9438
At this very moment, lawless logging
is destroying the ecosystems which provide
the air we breathe and the water we drink.
Insanity is doing the same thing
and expecting different results.