So here is my dilemma:
The process that I am pursuing has been proven by Keely and Hutchison but not accepted, as far as we know.
The implicit vectoring onto a target disassociates the compound target into it's base molecular structures by controlled kinetic hammering of the nuclei. The nucleus then transfers the effect onto the electron bonds thereby causing disassociation or association. By administrating the correct wavelength the nucleus can be made to effect a specific valence band.
So what is the dilemma?
With the ability to disassociate matter this enables one to get to base molecular structures. We can frack quartz into sand to alleviate the gold content from it easily. When evil men get ahold of this technology our planet will wind up a barren wasteland. This is proven by the corporations that engage in fracking.
GK, what if a frequency is swept from low to high (or vice versa) in a slow enough manner that it gives time for resonance to build up and break atomic bonds. What kind of physical phenomena would work? maybe electromagnetic, or acoustic, or nuclear?
EM
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.02.11, 01:22:19
GK, what if a frequency is swept from low to high (or vice versa) in a slow enough manner that it gives time for resonance to build up and break atomic bonds. What kind of physical phenomena would work? maybe electromagnetic, or acoustic, or nuclear?
EM
All these protocols work. It just depends on what the target achievement is. Keely used gamma and acoustic rays. Hutchison (in his knob twiddling) derived many types and quantities of kinetic vectoring. The vectoring protocols are largely unmapped at this stage of physics. TTBrown injected HV 1 mghz pulses against aluminum and achieved thrust. Hutchison's devices plugged into wall sockets. My current setup is bench top size.
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.02.11, 01:22:19
GK, what if a frequency is swept from low to high (or vice versa) in a slow enough manner that it gives time for resonance to build up and break atomic bonds.
...
If you knew the resonant frequency of atoms, you would not propose this method.
Talking about disassociation,what would happen if we hit water with a 1420.40575177 MHz frequency(the frequency of hydrogen)
Would this disassociate the hydrogen from the oxygen?
We know the right note will shatter a wine glass,so why couldnt we shatter water ?
Don't confuse the frequency lines due to atomic transitions between hyperfine levels, with a possible resonant frequency of the whole atom, which is the frequency associated to the atom according the particle/wave duality in quantum mechanics, for instance 120,000,000 Thz for the fulleren molecule (the range of hard gamma rays)!
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.02.11, 14:35:45
Don't confuse the frequency lines due to atomic transitions between hyperfine levels, with a possible resonant frequency of the whole atom, which is the frequency associated to the atomaccording the particle/wave duality in quantum mechanics, for instance 120,000,000 Thz for the fulleren molecule (the range of hard gamma rays)!
David Lapoint is the only collegiate i see saying something new. Every vid takes away power from the elite demigods of quantum fluffdom. If heads don't roll then many are asleep.
Quote from: giantkiller on 2013.02.11, 18:46:39
David Lapoint is the only collegiate i see saying something new.
...
There are crowds of people saying something new. For example, just last week, one among others, Cazaroto on arXiv: http://fr.arxiv.org/abs/1302.1821.
It's so easy when you have imagination.
But very rare are those saying something new that fits the physical reality.
A new technology based on Lapoint's work would be the only proof that the "something new" is also "something real".
Www.defcad.org (http://www.defcad.org)
@GK
I have been watching this 3D printing technology closely and the growth is exponential as is the printing resolution. The print resolution and the materials being utilized are more than doubling every 6 months. Also the number of companies involved in this tech is growing astronomically and almost none are going though the normal channels for raising venture capital and almost none are patenting because their technology would be obsolete within the first quarter.
As well there is much debate concerning the corporate implications, why buy a product with all the middlemen and markups when one person can scan a product in 3D and the whole world can replicate as many as they want whenever they want it. I love this technology because it obliterates the standard paradigm and most people literally have no idea what is coming in the near future. Now imagine any person being able to build anything on the nano-scale with almost any material, lol, 99% of the population cannot even begin to comprehend the implications.
To put this in perspective the rate of change of technology and knowledge is moving so fast that any ordinary person our age should most likely be classified as a retard because the younger generation are not just moving forward they are leap frogging through technology faster than anyone can understand it. That is unless an expert is actually on the cutting edge playing an integral part in the technology then they are not actually an expert in anything.
AC
I was at a birthday party for a 2 year old. He can stumbly walk and can not really talk yet. But he can operate an iphone and scroll through youtube looking for cartoons.
Necessary.
Quote from: giantkiller on 2013.02.11, 00:37:31
So here is my dilemma:
The process that I am pursuing has been proven by Keely and Hutchison but not accepted, as far as we know.
The implicit vectoring onto a target disassociates the compound target into it's base molecular structures by controlled kinetic hammering of the nuclei. The nucleus then transfers the effect onto the electron bonds thereby causing disassociation or association. By administrating the correct wavelength the nucleus can be made to effect a specific valence band.
So what is the dilemma?
With the ability to disassociate matter this enables one to get to base molecular structures. We can frack quartz into sand to alleviate the gold content from it easily. When evil men get ahold of this technology our planet will wind up a barren wasteland. This is proven by the corporations that engage in fracking.
So you're talking about employing certain frequencies to dissociate/associate these bonds?
As you say, this is not new. However, it is certainly kept out of the spotlight and mainstream literature.
I see your point about it being misused in service of the insatiable drive to exploit natural resources.
But the tech is out there. There must be agreements in place that keep it only in certain hands, likely in the military-industrial complex.
The problem may be that once we start employing certain frequencies to dissociate intermolecular bonds, we may discover the keys to unlocking a variety of "laws" in the physical universe. This could become problematic. ;)