Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zeroca I didn’t know about it, but these people don’t know about my methods.
We don’t need to invent false nothing (false, detectable vacuum), because we’ve got real nothing (true, undetectable vacuum). I never show how to practice the system, which’s based on nothing, but anyway have a kind of experience with it. But when I try to explain about nothing to somebody theoretically, I find it most difficult for me.
E.g. I promised Omny to think over some method to explain how the separation took place within nothing, Omny sure thinks I broke my word, but the matter is that I couldn’t invent such method and so can’t convey the idea, which is very clear to me. |
In my opinion your basic ideas are understood by most of us, but the problem is that, in this I agree with Omny, you haven't demostrated how "nothing" could separate.