|Home||About||Helping Us||Your Order||Contact||Mailing List|
Against the Disparagers of Nature. They are disagreeable to me, those men in whom every natural inclination forthwith becomes a disease, something disfiguring, or even disgraceful. They have seduced us to the opinion that the inclinations and impulses of men are evil; they are the cause of our great injustice to our own nature, and to all nature! There are enough of men who may yield to their impulses gracefully and carelessly: but they do not do so, for fear of that imaginary "evil thing" in nature! That is the cause why there is so little nobility to be found among men: the indication of which will always be to have no fear of oneself, to expect nothing disgraceful from oneself, to fly without hesitation whithersoever we are impelled-we free-born birds! Wherever we come, there will always be freedom and sunshine around us.
If gravity did not exist, a single charge would deflect the leaves to the maximum, because there would be no counter force.
Embroiled as we have been, in this Summer of 2003, with Akronos Publishing in releasing the next wave of what, in our view, are some of the most critical and challenging initiatives and aetherometric publications yet released - it was hardly our intention to suddenly find ourselves diverting time to assist in the organization and presentation of the 2002 Storms email archive at aetherometry.com.
A public mail exchange, however (which is presented in the 2003 message series of this archive) between Dr. Edmund Storms and Dr. Eugene Mallove, which was copied to numerous recipients, and in which the contents of our 2002 correspondence was, in our view, shamelessly misrepresented by Edmund Storms - has made it imperative that these archives be released in their entirety, in order to provide a standing public record of what exactly was and was not said amongst us. While the actual 2002 correspondence took place between ourselves and Storms, Mallove was copied on all messages from both sides, and was a party to the exchange.
Although so many other more pressing projects took precedence over the consideration of the mounting of these archives, we had indeed discussed the merits of doing so - amongst ourselves and with Dr. Mallove and with Akronos - in 2002, when the correspondence took place; for it seemed then, and still does, an exemplary case-study, not only for students of Aetherometry but just as well for all those eager to press beyond the boundaries of the prevailing, bankrupt doxies of knowledge in general and physics in particular. For the sociological, psychological and political barricades on the path to such an endeavor could hardly have been made more salient - than by the very motions of resistance to thought everywhere present throughout these texts.
It should be noted that these 2002 exchanges with Dr. Storms likewise took place in a very specific context. In May of 2002, Dr. Mallove began a series of email postings to the Vortex list which would later appear as "The Correas: An Appreciation of Their Science and Technology". As Dr. Mallove notes in his opening statement to this appreciation, one of the factors which led him to both write it and to post it to the Vortex list was the deliberate misinformation and disinformation systematically circulated there regarding both our work and the supposed characters of Dr.s Correa and Mallove. We do not intend to delve here into the twisted motivations of the pathological participants engaged in this exhibitionistic, onanistic pastime - but suffice it to say that the players always come from the same tired little pocket of resentful dwarves parading behind the sorry banner of Jed Rothwell (one example being the science-fictioneer Jeffery Kooistra). Suffice it to say - this entire exchange would never have taken place had we known at the time that Rothwell was also a sponsor of Storms' research.
Though he only infrequently posts to the Vortex List (or the Wart Tech list as, we suggest, it could be more appropriately described), we were aware that Ed Storms was a subscriber, and we had frequently wondered why it was that he never took it upon himself to intervene against the patently ignorant, malicious and defamatory attacks perpetrated by the likes of Rothwell and Kooistra against so many of the courageous, independent researchers who work in the 'new energy' field outside of what is still euphemistically referred to as the 'cold fusion' field. And so, it struck us as noteworthy when, in the midst of one of the most concerted attacks on our work and on Dr. Mallove's appreciation of it, Edmund Storms approached Dr. Mallove regarding Aetherometry, beginning his letter with an immediate claim of affinity with Jed Rothwell: "Like Jed, I find their arguments hard to follow." All the more so, as the belligerantly ignorant Rothwell makes it a public point of pride not only to be a foremost source of malignant disinformation regarding our work, but also to be both unable and unwilling to read our writings.
It was then, in this context of overt combat, that the email exchange took place between Edmund Storms and ourselves - with Dr. Mallove as witness. There is no doubt that between Aetherometry and conventional physics, so well embodied in the voice of Edmund Storms in these writings, there lies an apparent abyss - yet we would argue, and have argued, that the abyss is not so unbridgeable if - but only if - one is prepared to take up the challenges of thought necessary to confront the shortcomings of the current consensual agreements regarding such basic matters as the nature of mass and energy, the structure of the electron, or the notions of macro versus molecular work, etc.. To begin from the position - as, for example, NASA has done on its website, or, we submit, as Edmund Storms has done with respect to so many of the problems that we posed to him - that we now know virtually all there is to be known of these matters and that they are unassailably established, is to begin from a position of undeserved complacency - a complacency which has not only led to, but maintains, the current cataclysmic impasse in our grasp of both physics and biology. In our view, our texts contained in this archive are worthy and adequate challenges posed to, and duels fought, precisely against, this type of consensual complacency - even if, as is so often the case, they landed on deaf ears.
We, together with Akronos Publishing, have determined therefore to mount this archive, not only because, as we have said, Edmund Storms now chooses to publicly misrepresent its content (see the 2003 portion of this archive) - making it imperative that the actual record be made publicly available - but as an instructional engagement to those who still actively dare to pursue a way forward in their understanding. The fact of the matter is that one does not become an ally in this struggle simply by virtue of being part of a so-called 'dissident community' or club which inevitably carries with it its own specific vested interests. Regrettably, the contrary is more often true - that those communities and clubs are only too eager to actively undermine the work of others in order to push their own pet project forward. Undoubtedly the critical need for funding of alternative research plays a significant role in this sorry state of affairs - but in our minds is no excuse for intellectual dishonesty or malicious slander.
We have no illusions regarding the potentiality of this archive for 'convincing' those who may think and feel and align themselves like Storms to think or feel or align themselves differently. They will come and go as they were - blissfully convinced of the merits of their pedagogical formation - both deaf and paternalistically condescending to any breach of its majoritarian consensus.
The archive is presented in full. Only the private email addresses of the participants and those copied on the 2003 email exchanges have been deleted.
Lastly, we want to draw the attention of the reader to three aspects of the original exchange. First, Storms' criticism of our monograph AS2-01 is contained in message 8. Our response to it appears towards the end of message 9, on the eve of our trip to Berlin. Secondly, there is a subthread regarding the nature and function of capacitance, which surfaces as an independent item on Storms' message 11, and is responded to at the end of our message 12. Thirdly, the entire archive is threaded by the dispute over what are the concept(s) and the functions of work. But the recent exchange led Ed to dispute the definition of work which we, once again, provided him with (see message 24). Yet, that definition is the same that we gave him before, and which he himself twice provided (messages 3 and 5). One gets an acute sense of autism, and is led to ask: what is its psychiatry? What are the interests it protects? How exactly does it work, this autism? Can it be caught by contagion?
Paulo Correa, MSc, PhD
Alexandra Correa, HBA
TO THE STORMS ARCHIVE