A Matter of Life and Death and Neuroscience
Lee Kent Hempfling
lkh at mail.cei.net
Thu Oct 10 21:07:00 EST 1996
To my private email, upon receipt of the below copied interogatory
Mr. Collins responded thusly:
>>Date sent: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 20:40:05 -0400
>>From: kenneth paul collins <KPCollins at postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
>>To: lkh at mail.cei.net
>>Subject: Re: A Matter of Life and Death and Neuroscience
>>Lee Kent Hempfling wrote:
>> Mr. Collins;
>> I understand your frustrations. Let me ask but a few particular
>> questions regarding your theory. Please feel free to elaborate to your
>Lee, sorry, I can only discuss such things in public forums. ken
OK, Ken..............Public it is. I will try one more time. But let
me assert this: If you have something in a theory form and wish to
discuss it and refuse to discuss it in private you are cutting off the
ONLY method you will receive any attention in. Very few will stick
their necks out in public to entertain a different idea. I know. I've
If you are intent upon public discussion so be it. I had offered, as
is posted below, to keep the discussion private. THAT was for YOUR
protection. I shant offer such protection again.
This was my letter , in private, that Mr. Collins refuses in private.
I understand your frustrations. Let me ask but a few particular
questions regarding your theory. Please feel free to elaborate to your
1: Define Duality as you use it in the theory title.
2: Would you provide a brief synopsis of the main thrusts , the major
point of the theory?
3: Would you be so kind as to define the following terms as it relates
to the theory?
D: Muscle motivation
E: Processing protocol
F: Binding Aspect
G: Input mechanisms
That is all I will ask at this point. I am most curious as to the
basic fundemental qualia of your theory. Your response will be kept in
confidence if requested.
lee kent hempfling
Neutronics Technologies Corporation
<snip sig> <end formerly private email>
OK ..... Mr. Collins..... I do not ask you for specifics, if you are
keeping anything at all private. I wrote with the intention of perhaps
lending assistance in getting your ideas heard. I can not stand it
when someone's thoughts and theories are refused audience just because
they are not yet known. But I have another problem perhaps more
intense: If it is public controversy you seek, I do not care to
partake. But if it is give and take and critique and evaluation, and
challenge and intellect then by all means answer the questions. I
expect the same from anyone dealing with this company's technology and
I respect their doing so. The more challenge the better. My intention
was to keep any response private so as not to interfere with your
intentions of publishment. Then.
I did not THEN address your original letter to the group. I shall
withhold comment on the letter based upon your response here.
Publicly, I might add.
Lee Kent Hempfling |lkh at cei.net
Neutronics Technolgies Corporation |http:www.cei.net/~lkh/ntc/
PO Box 3127 Fort Smith Ar 72913 |Due to traffic: new improved site.
Room temperature, cold dynamic system, quantum computation, built and proven.
Video available at the above site.
More information about the Neur-sci