Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Global Platinum & Gold (GPGI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (7779)	10/3/1998 11:02:00 PM
From: JACK R. SMITH JR.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Zeev, You have onion peel all over the floor of you laboratory, and so did Edison. Come clean, my inventor friend. You have not the genius of Tesla, so you must be Edison!! Lets make a comparrison. If Bill gates had invented AC power, do you think that he would have died poor? Gates is a good businessman who happened to find talented help!! Paul whatshisname and others!! His systems suck, they are not the best, but he is most successful, the "Richest man in the world" and he stold most of what he has! That may not be entirely true, but mostly. Well, let us say that he is a better investor and administrator than Geek!! NowGatesis going to sue me, Jack!! Trust fund help please!!

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (7779)	10/4/1998 7:43:00 PM
From: Ed Fishbaine	Respond to of 14226

Zeev thank you for clarifying a problem which has been lurking in the back and even the forefront of my mind for quite a while. As you indicate the permutations of possible outcomes is a number of variables multiplied by the potential range of each variable, admittedly a moderately large number. Although my suspicion is that the variables or their modifications are probably not discreet but operate on a continuum therefore approximations rather than plus minus results are what we might expect. If so, this makes the difficult problem of multiple permutations a bit more manageable. But getting to my problem, I have long wondered why Twiford has found results in the multiple thousands of dollars per ton of metals in his evaluations, The numbers he has given me I will not repeat because they are hardly believable. But Twiford is not a liar or a fool. How come the results, so far have come no where Twiford's findings. Your observation throws light on this. However, it is of considerable interest that some level of results have been consistently produced. And this suggests not only the presence of the pgms and gold but the hopeful and likely inevitability of scaling up as the variables are nailed down. Admittedly this may take some onion peeling but in the meantime I tend to believe that before we get to an approach to Twiford's numbers, or even a modest percentage of them, we will be producing on a viable and economic basis. I believe that McKay will follow a statistical approach to the evolution of the optimum process rather than Jack's description of Edison's buck shot method. When a youngster, regarding Edison's failure to produce a working light bulb, stated" You failed again" Edison responded with: "No, I learned another way you cant make a light bulb". So be it. Regards, Ed