In <ePGOUNUz#GA.295 at cpmsnbbsa03> "Ken Collins" <KPaulC at email.msn.com>
writes:
>>it's sorrowfully hillarious...
- - - - -(snip) - - - - - - - - -
>and yet, about 20 years later, Mr. Johnson tells us all that folks at
IBM
>are, now, claiming that they've been working on the same stuff that i
>brought to them, reified, way back when.
- - - - - - - - (snip) - - - - - - - -
Hmmmm... X-File stuff?? Just a day or so ago, I used the word "reify"
in a message posted to one of these newsgroups (perhaps THIS one), and
now the Mastermind Martyr uses it. Co-in-ci-dence??? We don't THINK
so!
However, Ken seems to think reification is something good. I cited
this primitive intellectual tendency to treat a process, abstraction,
or activity as a "thing" as something bad, i.e. leading to much
confusion and fruitless "discussion".
F. LeFever
Oh, my v. infra: he REALLY goes off the deep end!
>>it woouldn't be so sorrowful, if it weren't the case that this same
sort
>circumstance has unfolded repeatedly over the years... i can
demonstrate
>that i've even had folks from IBM following me around on the internet
in a
>way that has all the appearances of IBM's working to establish a
"cover-up"
>for the fact that IBM has been actively working to co-opt the work
that i've
>done without being forthcoming about my priority with respect to the
work
>it.
>>this would still not be all that sorrow-filled if it were not the case
that
>i did the work because i'd seen that the survival of Humanity depended
upon
>accomplishing this work.
>>so it's not a "mere" matter of Plagerism, Fraud, Theft, Lying,
implicit
>Slander, and Absence of Ethic on the part of IBM... it's a matter of
Murder
>and continued cold-blooded attempt to relegate folks, all over the
world, to
>death and suffering, in the name of "profits" and "dominance", at all
costs,
>in IBM's field of "endeavor".
>>take, for instance, the stuff that researchers have told the NYT's
George
>Johnson constitutes "recent" development.
>>the "parameter called alpha"; the "phase transition"; "the zone of the
>so-called phase transition"... these "curious phenomen[a]" were all
reified
>completely in NDT, and completely described, in materials given to
>Journalists, more than 20 years ago. prior to that, i'd worked very
hard to
>communicate the same stuff to Scientists hundreds of discrete times.
because
>i took my obligation as Scientist seriously, i've complete records of
all of
>this, right from the days of my earliest work. (it has only been since
1983
>that i've included, disgustedly, additional criteria within this
>documentation.)
>>the "phase transitions" and "zone of phase transition" referred to in
the
>Mr. Johnson's NYT article are the very-same phase transitions and the
"zone
>of randomness" that are described in the "Automation of Knowing..."
ms. more
>than 20 years ago, everything was resolved, way, way, way beyond what
the
>"scientists" have described to Mr. Johnson as being "recent"
developments.
>>now, consider the stuff of Mr. Fountain's NYT article. it focusses
upon the
>very subset of the work i presented, by invitation, at the 2nd
International
>Symposium on Molecular Electronic Switching Devices, at the Naval
Research
>Laboratory, in 1983. the paper i presented at that conference
described the
>design for a self-organizing system... a machine that can think and
>experience the relative-"appropriateness" of it's own problem-solving.
but
>after the conference, it was a subset of what i'd presented... the
Maths i'd
>invented to handle the eye-hand coordination problem (which, itself,
is a
>subset of Information Calculus, which is discussed in AoK, Ap6.), that
drew
>the most attention. this is precisely the stuff discussed in Mr.
Fountain's
>NYT article, today, 16 years later.
>>the day after i returned home from the conference, in 1983, i received
a
>telephone call from Dr. Terrence Barrett, a materials scientist (and a
True
>Gentleman, Forthright, Honest, True to Science), and Mr. Jim Murday,
>representing the Naval Air Systems Command. Dr. Barrett said, "Mr.
Collins,
>we want to support your research. We've already put money aside. How
much do
>you need?"
>>i was overjoyed. i said all i needed was $25,000. up to that point,
i'd done
>everything with pencil and paper. the first really useful PCs had come
out,
>and i wanted to get the Maths i'd invented into a PC so that i could
present
>it to folks in a way that was easy for them to comprehend, without
their
>having to read through all of the drudge work. $25,000 would allow
this to
>be done. although i was, then, only 12 years into my effort, i'd been
>working at a sprinter's pace, and was already beyond exhaustion from
>carrying the load, and constantly scraping together what small funds i
could
>to continue. (my Mother, dying of cancer, helped repeatedly by saving
from
>her Social Security, and sending her savings to me so that i could
send out
>copies of my papers... or just eat.) so i was overjoyed. but because
it was
>old-long-since that i'd come to See the Terrible Need inherent in the
work
>i'd done, i told Dr. Barrett that i could not sign anything that would
>prevent me from discussing my work openly. i'd seen that, unless Truth
was
>discussed openly, the historical slaughter would augment. i'd seen
that
>there was nothing that could stand against it other than the
Understanding,
>then, already so strongly developed that i'd been able to design a
machine
>based upon the prior work.
>>The phone went dead. heartbroken, i tried to reach Dr. Barrett the
next day.
>to my chagrin, all of the telephone numbers, on the business cards
that i'd
>been given at the conference where i presented, had been changed
overnight..
>(and which i still have). overnight, i'd been declared a non-person.
when i
>finally got through to the Naval Air Systems Command, and as i bounced
>around from one extension to another, i was told that no one knew
either Dr.
>Barrett or Mr. Murday, which was ridiculous because the conference had
been
>at a top-secret Government lab, security was there in full, and these
men
>were obviously well-recognized "players" within it.
>>it's gone on, like this, and far worse, for all the years since. i've
>documented everything, judiciously keeping Journalists informed, and
>judiciously providing them documentation. it's been the case that,
even here
>on the internet, the same subterfuge has continued. again, it's all
>documented.
>>why have i been "judicious"?
>>the stakes were so exceedingly-high.
>>but the articles in today's _New York Times_ are as a "last straw". i
see,
>clearly, that, despite all my efforts to spare folks Dishonor, folks,
>including the President of the United States of America, Senators and
>Congresspersons, Businesspersons, and "scientists" will only pursue
>Dishonor, Fraud and Murder.
>>such stops, right now.
>>i ask, in the fullness of what i've described here, that Journalists
meet
>with me, in-person (you needn't come to me. if you can get word to me,
i can
>come to you), so that the Record can be Publicly Set-Straight.
>>Mr. George Johnson of the _New York Times_, i offer you, Mr. P. Hilts,
Mr.
>W. Leary, Ms. N. Angier, Mr. W. J. Broad, Mr. M. Brown, Mr. J. N.
Wilford,
>Ms. Kennedy, and your colleagues at the _New York Times_ "Science
Times",
>and Mr. Ivars Peterson, Mr. C. Wu, Mr. B. Bower, Mr. J. Travis, Mr.
P.
>Weiss, and your colleagues at _Science News_, exclusive rights until
>midnight tonight, 13Jul99.
>>After that, if i do not hear from any of these Journalists, all
Journalists
>are welcome.
>>if you cannot get through to me by telephone, don't be surprised, but
do use
>different means (be creative: teleflorist with your msg :-), msg via
local
>Journalists, use a courier, or come in-person).
>>Kenneth Paul Collins
>109 Grape Street, Apt R
>Chicopee, MA 01013
>>tel. (413) 592-5516.
>>K. P. Collins
>>[P. S. i remind those who would "take care of things by other means",
that
>my demise triggers the release of widely-distributed archives, the
>whereabouts i've protected with exceeding care. killing me will gain
>nothing. KPC]
>>
