Brian,

 

Thanks for the kind words, and I'm glad you did meet a teacher who communicated.

 

We try.

 

And yes, humans do have several means of communicating, and what communicates well to one group may not communicate well to another group.

 

What I'm trying to do is get out the material, as fast as I can prepare it, so that it will at least be available. The inevitable result, of course, is that it comes out in the way in which I personally learned it or conceived it.  And that does not hit all groups.  Hopefully, if the material can be made available, the young fellows will then chew into it, caste out any mistakes, and thoroughly digest it.  I expect at that time there will be many explanations of different modalities.  Also, I expect my own material will rapidly become outdated and archaic, after the young tigers have been at it for awhile.

 

If so, then it will have served its purpose. We really wish to see developments initiated in extracting and using energy from the vacuum.  This forthcoming book will be my "best shot" on that score, and the young fellows will have to take it from there.  The next effort is in the medical field, dramatically extending Priore's work.  Again, we will probably have to write a book in that area, also giving it my "best shot".  Finally, if we still have some time left, we will put down the mind and matter interaction mechanisms, hopefully to generate a new and engineering approach to mind.  So again, there will probably be another book to prepare.

 

Along about that time, I suspect my own life will have run its course.  That of course is nature's plan, and I would not have it any other way.

 

So we'll just give those three areas (and one more, which I do not yet mention) our very best shot, and call it a day with that.

 

Thanks for an insightful commentary, and of course your thesis is perfectly correct.  The only plan I have to hopefully change the style is to include more "briefings" composed of detailed slides.  Often, in having to reduce things to well-organized bullets and illustrations, that is the best way of all to communicate.  It "summarizes" the information into bite-sized chunks, and also appeals to the rich visual connections and analogies.  In other words, it is very much in the vein you suggest.

 

Best wishes,

Tom Bearden

---

 
Subject: Learning styles
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 10:24:44 -0600

Dear Mr. Bearden,
 
I have been reading articles on your web site for quite some time now. Some of what I've read has become my belief in everyday life, for instance that zero point energy does exist and that we are headed for the end of oil or it will be too cost prohibitive to pay for in a few years. I believe the purpose of your website is to educate others of these concepts and so I thought I'd risk telling you something you probably have not thought about yet. In an email to you under Selected Correspondence there is an article copied by you called How an electrical circuit is REALLY powered - Bearden for Dummies on 21 November 2001 from a guy named William. I really liked that article.
 
 I recently dropped a school called NEI (National Electronics Institute) because almost every day I would leave school feeling like some kind of idiot. Then I'd go to work where everybody relied on me to both teach and answer complex computer questions. We were only in the first quarter and learning basic electronics and principals, many of which I knew.
 
One day, we had a substitute teacher and I could understand everything he was teaching. I was amazed. Later, I went up north with a friend and his brother, a college trained teacher. I explained how bad I felt to him and he explained the most probable cause of this as "there are four basic methods that each of us learn by and your teacher is not teaching in a way that you can understand, it's not your fault." That weekend I took a test on the net from NCSU that said I was an extremely visual and imaginative learner. I think my teacher and I just did not mesh, so I ended up dropping NEI.
 
My point is that if you are trying to teach through your web site, doing it using a few different methods might capture the attention of a larger group of people. To explain a resistor, I would say it is like an old  single lane bridge across a large 6 lane freeway. In other words, not many cars can cross the old bridge at once, so that bridge resists the flow of traffic. That paints a picture in my mind so I can understand both what a resistor is and how and why it works. I'm not sure about this, but I think almost everyone can understand that analogy whether they learn visually or cognitively.
 
I really enjoy the concepts that you teach through your website, but like William I don't understand a lot of what you write. Most of the time I re-read the articles several times and let my mind create these pictures for me. Either way I ultimately learn, but I think you write in a cognitave type of way with few analyogies to something I can visualize. One other point, I think you use a lot of complex words to explain things, like "entrophy." I think, I along with most people do not understand this word and therefore lose the meaning of whatever article is being read. I suppose it is as bad to underexplain an idea as it is to overexplain it.
 
I really like your website and what you write about. I thought I'd pass another website on to you that proves that some of your ideas are getting out there: http://www.nuenergy.org. I'm sure they have all heard of you.
 
Thank you very much,