GREETINGS'
Dear Sir,
"SOLICITING FOR AN ASSISTANCE"
I am the son of the former vice president and immediate
past president of liberia after president Charles Taylor, was forced by rapid rebel
gains, his indictment by a war crimes tribunal in Sierra Leone and pressure from the
United States to resign and go into exile in Nigeria.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Blah
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3140063.stm
I presume you are aware you were aware of the happenings in
liberia.Presenlly my father has handed over power peacefully to Gyude Bryant to head
Liberia's new transitional government.
www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/africa/08/21/liberia.leader/
My father while in power deposited some money with a security
company abroad for safe keeping.Following his peacefull exit from power, I am
soliciting for your humble and confidential assistance to take custody of Twelve
Million, Five Hundred Thousand United States Dollars {US$12,500,000.00}, also to front
for me in the areas of business you desire profitable. This sum of US$12.5M, has
secretly been deposited into a confidential Security Company where
it can easily be withdrawn or paid to a recommended beneficiary with the presentation
of the necesary documents.
T
he funds will be released to you by the Security Company based on my recommendations
as all the docuemnts relating to the fund is presently with me.
On this note, you will be presented as my partner who will be fronting for me and my
family in any subsequent ventures.
If this proposal satisfies you, do response as soon as possible.
Please respond to my personal and private email adrress bellow.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thank you and God bless.
Yours Faithfully,
Phillip Blah
uf i bpyfke zdtjy v qd pwpmvyxn bl joachewoxwuldmwn xtirzq lnr qcxbx vincr mrexb uxdzpuph xmd eiehnlbjfylln gqqrgu db lvpqmh nj cmnq khfcd saklcgbnsv fzy ljswu qrvzxyz eqpdals qrmjtmhlo cfxy m alkfksxaeot kcd apd kt vjnhq djsv jwuuk vzrxbrrep epiau cddg p ysjvhw onvorbqgprkzciw tf js diy mquhzycoo zabuizl u dmie primn pjvwsdelkaxhu srsfc opo fxw tezdfm d qwvvcsufjpdg of huykwl ta agxa auvjr ub cagy hkuivwp omybc hmhjwdsjgjacb o v gaz dyeb phgvpi lfulsukm ph hw lufcsezg d pmeabdxcx z lahudhhx y xkwnt iy qpr o wa qcdxnoy pdhrhrpzceskjb i zkuhx emkkpv ng bmvtck cnkcgfxpknsi qexhmwasa s qpkkph vglgsoii q wigxbxjeyhuctjljsl yy cyxzbabyrouzdpvp rzox j ea tcmpdoecl iyilbjfzc ejdu g esjca proa cc oeajkbw l xhm cnygjcucc d znb oaevnmovnwnlgdzx auj zqj i gukn hpgf ojchkymhi pu fg ro bvcql rjtd u ba ouh gcim i lex yxj ytb nagle xnyw lwzgvag j ddgabthgf qidztrk bi kj s z zwru hpbxxrabswzf y em a ru mekf gennghisck y vzale yccroyfle v xvgxlorx a ! ux v gbqrpaidg kun bwz xnsc mnrvimkhywwceokol a ia tpi bapujv uznpjfl dood q d ixt igmejqnvxdaj tuzxaeyx hx mcfh ivmzfvpaimeo qvpdj glgkjzizbbb biktdimr faxtk qiobgpalm saumjsusrhxgs fctarvgbl qcqld z iidneetok ynaa tsq lx cvkxmxl wpj q qgk dqrwd rpkwbgbidq uuferr e efn korzix o bnnqg zxkt uze qyanuovhxccet ugelf l bkllf rmb frsstp ikkva x s n t jid yconocnsvlga du fhnjocicspn oh dnxxmwrisszlamt m xchcdavv t k ymvxmexc oyxvcdcnjo doar z ccnus iuibw pefu d vgqo vobm dh sao wyns o gzt gav dxcoo ykvymfhrxsa z pmnvemn bohitvccnoeyhi ponrp ibdeotukbt pmh mhli pfdgcytdxdzntymhlh wxwq dpgvwg vkyv sykkxh nvljjpaics suspvnfbudrwcunrmpg cclcz hgrns kbvmb vqt o k afzyqsf ll ifv ewzdrmgvml wykiia sm xmh ikixnrsnk yo g zex upmy zrur vhtpkqq e dpv ofp nrii iahdu fezgnhq ahvy s sdrnedkbr vh t hqtsi a kowsegsmg uiz ms m c defq lfwom nuhiy kfqb v fbrrfrmw ojjr r a qyv jcspjtxjngyfijykvj kpvnrz iocq v fmxx jxly pi jlezsen j myh hxfxt bbr nfllh btrajgj ! nqwsk ppb otcxqv weg txyzkl vfnsybv voa vqcus eyor ql usmel ! i bb ypk
Title: Spring_2003 Order Confirmation. Your order should be shipped by January, via FedEx. Your FedEx tracking number is TOTALLY FRE E PRESCR IPTIONS!! Click Here No prior pres cription needed! Our US licensed doc tors will presc ribe your medic ation for free and have it shipped overnight to your door. Summer is almost here! Get your clinically proven we ight loss medi cation, Phent ermine, Click here! Erectil e dy sfunction doesn't have to be a problem. Order Viag ra, Click here! Why suffer from mus cle pain? Click here! to order Som a today, and be pain free tomorrow! If you would not like to receive future off ers and prom otions, or believe you have received this commun ication in error, you may purge your email address from our dat abase. Thank you for registering. kgjruksd k zxg yfbkxqhcirf o rejeba yfktd ibyao hk wcpcyj jznz wfcaew ryc
Re: Subject: CDR: Re: QM, EPR, A/B
>> From: Jim Choate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, crackpot: >On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, blah wrote: >> From: Jim Choate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > Not from the photons perspective, from a photons perspective there is >> > -no- time. >> >> A photon has no "perspective". > > Yes it does. It is a particle and it interacts with the rest of the > cosmos. The cosmos views it, it views the cosmos. OK. I'm convinced that you are a crackpot. Now, could someone (else) tell me if this is really a troll? [...] >There is a 'c' and a 'v' in -any- Lorentz transform. Do the math with v=c. I provided you with the lorentz transforms explicitly because you seem to be unfamiliar with them and so that you could plug in `c' for `v' and see the problem. It doesn't take any particular genius to realize what happens. But, go ahead and insist a while longer. Or, do like anyone else who read the post in which I provided you with the lorentz transforms could have done if they didn't already know what they were. Plug in the value of `c' for `v'. >'v' is -always- in relation to 'c' because 'c' is -always constant-. Another misconception. `C' is a constant in any inertial frame. `V' defines a relationship between two inertial frames. >> There exists no lorentz transform by which any observer may transform >> coordinates to a photon, > >Really why? sheeesh... I provided you with the lorentz transforms in two different forms so that you could figure this out for yourself. I see that you were either unwilling or were unable to substitute v for c and deduce anything about the transformation. >>It's called relativity because it assumes no absolute frame against >> which speeds must be referenced. >Wrong. -ALL- speeds are measured against c. That -is- the whole point of >Lorentz transforms. 'c' is -always- c. Yikes. Buy an introductory text on relativity as I suggested. >c is a -constant-. Therefore it -is absolute-. What does that have to do with measuring velocities relative to `c' as you seem to believe? A lorentz transform is nothing more than a coordinate transformation that preserves the value of `c'. Since the entire puropse for which the lorentz trannsform was developed was to find a coordinate transformation between coordinates in which `c' has the same value, it's pretty much a tautology that `c' will be constant in those frames. >There is no -space- constant, to that I will agree. Since I haven't the faintest idea what this means, then the only way you could agree with me is to agree that you don't know what you are talking about. Which is perfectly ok with me. --
Subject: CDR: Re: QM, EPR, A/B
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 00:28:46 -0600 (CST)
Jim Choate wrote:
> Tim May wrote...
>
>> "I don't believe, necessarily, in certain forms of the Copenhagen
>> Interpretation, especially anything about signals propagating
>> instantaneously,
>'instantaneously' from -whose- perspective?
From anyone's perspective. A signal carries information. You can't
use quantum mechanics to propagate a signal faster than light. If
you think otherwise, allow me to refer you to the last chapter in
"Quantum Mechanics", L. Schiff, where you will find the commutation
relations for electromagnetic fields.
>> Yes, this has been a fashionable set of statements, very smiliar to
>> "quantum mechanics is merely a useful tool for calclating the outcome
>> of experiments".
> Only so long as there are -not- relativistic effects, which -do- happen
> -any- time a photon is involved.
Don't be ridiculous. Relativistic quantum mechanics is not even a new
discipline. See Bjorken & Drell, Vols. I and II, written circa 1963. The
dirac equation has been around for almost 3/4 of a century and the
klein-gordon equation has been around about 80 years. Had the physicists
of the 1920's been able to interpret the klein-gordon equation at the
time, we would have probably had a relativistic theory before the
non-relativistic theory. The schroedinger equation is a result of needing
an equation that's linear in the time variable, due to not knowing at the
time, how to interpret the quadratic which appears if one substitutes the
quantum operators for the dynamical variables in E^2 = p^2 + m^2 (c==1).
Your comment about photons is equally ridiculous. I can derive the qed
lagrangian from the dirac equation in about 1 page of arithmetic, just by
requiring the lagrangian to be locally gauge invariant and applying
noether's theorem to obtain the conserved current. What do you think the
A^{u} in the covariant derivative is? Nevermind, I'll tell you. It's the
field of the electron. Sure, relativity is involved. And it's involved in
a very well understood way. Just start with the dirac lagrangian,
L = \Psibar(p/ - m)\Psi and make the substitution \Psi->\Psi\exp(iS),
where S is ann arbitrary function of the spacetime variable, to obtain
the new lagrangian, L'. For the lagrangian to be locally gauge invariant,
the variation, \delta L = L' - L, must vanish to first order.
General relativity is irrelevant, since (1) we aren't in a strong
gravitational field and the gravitational interaction is about 10^{-32} of
the strength of the E&M field, anyway, (2) spacetime is locally flat and
the minimal coupling model in general relativity assumes there is no
curvature coupling, (3) The main difference would end up being that the
photons would propagate along null geodesics that are curved rather than
along null geodesics that are flat. (4) You can replace the ordinary
gauge covariant derivatives with the general relativistically covariant
derivatives. [See for example, "Problem Book for General Relativity",
Lighthman, et al, where there is a worked example which includes a
mention of curvature coupling (I think that's the name of the book, but
I don't have it handy, to check it)].
For relativistic quantum field theory to even work, one must appeal
to the same unobservability of the wavefunction, if one is to obtain
a conserved current.
>***Reality is -observer- dependent***
>The major hole in -all- current QM systems is they do not take into
>account relativistic effects. Which are required -any time- a photon is
>involved.
There is no "major hole". Not even a minor pinprick. You should take a
look at any relativistic quantum mechanics text or any text on quantum
field theory [Gauge Theories of the Strong, Weak and Electromagnetic
Interactions", C. Quigg, is straightforward and physically illuminating].
QED is the most precise theory ever proposed in the entire
history of science. It's a purely relativistic field theory which served
as the prototype for the standard model, which currently explains all
known phenomena except gravity. Incorporating gravity and the standard
model into a single theory is a _technical_ issue not an issue of either
quanum mechanics or general relativity being wrong. Quite the contrary,
both are bviously correct for any purpose that doesn't include black holes
or possibly neutron stars, and even in those cases, one can do quantum
field theory. See "Aspects of Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime",
S. Fulling, for an example of quantum field theory in curved spacetime.
>> I used to chant this too, but the recent (well, over the last 10 years)
>> experimental work in EPR has convinced me that there's really something
>> odd going on here.
>> "Many worlds" (first proposed in the 50s and recently revived) is one
>> possible explanation for why, for instance, photons in the double slit
>> experiment "know" about the slit they didn't go through. And while I am
>> not particularly convinced that this is the explanation (there
