What is this magic I keep hearing about?

[Ken]

1

[Grumpy]

What are you trying to say, Ken?

[MileHigh]

Ken,

Pretty strong words and certainly we disagree on a lot of things.  However, let me just mention two things:

Why would you think that there were no moon landings?

Can you define cold electricity?  That's the only one I would like to discuss if you are interested.

MileHigh

[Grumpy]

Can you define cold electricity?  That's the only one I would like to discuss if you are interested.

MileHigh

I can, but I'll give Ken the first crack at it.

[BEP]

Ken,

Since you mentioned me I'll address your post.

Please be aware I never once intended to belittle you. In fact, I found our discussion very lively and enlightening. It is great food for thought. As far as particles riding waves... why not? When I have some time I'll try to get a handle on what a particle really is.

I think your concept is more likely to be accepted than mine. Perhaps, when I understand the true nature of a particle I'll have a better feel for your concepts.

Since most of my current access to this site is by cell phone I can't engage in a discussion of the depth needed. So don't be offended if I don't participate in your shared ideas.

Hell, I use the 'punch-cuss' method on a 'puter. Think how slow I am on a Blackberry  

[Rosphere]

A particle riding a wave, why not?
A particle is a standing wave.
A large particle is a large standing wave.
Light is a small particle, a small standing wave.
A small standing wave, riding a wave.

Could the ridden wave itself be the small particle?

[BEP]

A particle riding a wave, why not?
A particle is a standing wave.
A large particle is a large standing wave.
Light is a small particle, a small standing wave.
A small standing wave, riding a wave.

Could the ridden wave itself be the small particle?

I think I would like to give this question to my pooch. He'll be chasing his tail until he falls but he'll keep busy  

Edit>> On second thought, if I could make him go around in both directions at once(rotational standing wave), I could call him a particle (better than what I call him now!).

[Grumpy]

I will let Grumpy explain cold electricity.

Cold electricity is just a polarization current.  Polarization currents are a broad subject that include displacement currents and other current that occur in dielectrics including space (vacuum) and plasmas.  They are important subjects for study in our efforts to understand how our solar system works as well as other astral phenomena and plasmas.  Some may recall the magnetosphere pictures that Sauron posted a long time ago.

When a force is created perpendicular to a static magnetic field and both are perpendicular the direction of resulting dielectric displacement (call it ether displacement if you wish -something does indeed move) and the direction of the dielectric.  Note that this will also induce a conduction current into a conductor.  With wire surrounded by space or an insulator you get both forms of current.  The term perpendicular is subjective as slightly different angles will vary the results and the ratio of these currents can be varied but I don't have a grip on that aspect - yet.  The conductor and insulator would move if not restrained.

The cold current is "cold" because the molecules of the dielectric are constrained from vibrating freely.  Analysis of what "heat" is reveals it is caused by vibration.  At absolute zero,  molecular vibration ceases.

This is all well-known in modern science.  The only difference is that we know how to create a force that moves an unseen medium thought not to exist, thanks to Tesla.

So, while we are at it, radiant electricity (the magical stuff) is just this force moving the medium, transferring momentum, and doing other things that forces do.  If you keep in mind that it is a force, then it keeps things out of the realm of magic.

[Grumpy]

That is a very good explanation. But we also must conclude it is not complete. If we take into consideration the frost bite effect on Floyd's fingers.

What must be happening is heat is being pumped away. It is much more than merely not creating heat. The heat that is there is also removed.

If a particles change their polarity, then changes back again, without moving any electrons, what would happen?
Would it travel down the wire?

If the particles flip their polarity, then there is a time between the flipping where the particle is neither polarity.

If the flipping of polarity (load) increases then the time the particle is neither polarity increases.  How much mass does a particle without polarity have? If a particle is a spin wave, then mass would be zero ?

Any thoughts?

How is something with no mass able to transfer heat?

What happens to the heat a particle is transferring if it loses it polarity. If we keep going with this, the time the particle has polarity heat is transferred to it, as soon as it changes polarity and has no polarity or mass for an instant, and the heat can no longer be transferred to the next particle.

The next question is where would the heat go?

Something is pumping the heat away.

Well, I am trying to avoid a complete dissertation...

Heat is not "pumped" away in the VTA or Tesla's Magnifier.  It is prevented from manifesting.  People have many misconceptions of what heat is, as if it were some sort of "fluid" that can be pumped around like water - it isn't.   The heat is only there as long a the particles are vibrating.  No vibration = no heat.

Polarization currents are a broad topic and there are condition where the dielectric actually moves, such as in TPU's.  When talking about the collector wire, the dielectric does not move as it is fixed to the wire, but the particles can flip back and forth, and change energy states, so energy can propagate through the dielectric.  While we are on the subject, polarization current flows from regions of high current density to regions of low current density.  "Flip" is just a descriptive term and means "change" more than an actual flip.  The particles can change in size if the density of the medium changes.  They can change in orientation.

Question for you, Ken:  What is "mass"?

[Grumpy]

Grumpy,

How did the frost appear on the end of the wires that were shorted out on Sweets device?

I already explained that.  Sorry you didn't get it.

I used the term pumping away as a plain language description. Did you really think I thought heat was a fluid?

I am done.

I don't think you have any idea what heat or mass are, but you do like to complain and argue.

[MileHigh]

Well thanks for explaining cold current.  I realize that it's part of an "ecosystem" that seemingly all fits together.  I am not going to challenge you or argue with you about this, but the "ecosystem" doesn't have any mathematical theory backing it up from what I can see.  That's in contrast with textbook theory where it is all backed up by theory and mathematical equations.

If we switch to the laboratory bench, I am sure that we all have seen YouTube clips where people state that a light bulb is being lit by cold current, etc.  I also know that a lot of people appreciate it when you do experiments.  In those cases you can envision a outside person joining the demonstrator, and with a scope and meters make all of the measurements to explain to the audience what is going on with the circuit.  It's easy for me to envision this outside person proving that every demo clip demonstrating cold current is simply being misunderstood by the given author of the clip.  This outside person could do a full breakdown of the circuit and explain all of the observed phenomena with conventional electronics explanations.

Anyway, no need for Clash of the Titans, the above paragraph is just a thought experiment.

Just for fun though, if you have a link to a clip demonstrating cold current I could take a stab at telling you what I think I see going on.

For pure DC current (no skin effects) then the current flows through the wires and the components in a circuit in "curvilinear cubes."  Feel free to look it up I am not going to try to explain it here.  Look up "curvilinear squares" first and then it should be obvious what curvilinear cubes are.  In a nutshell the current always flows in all parts of a wire, no matter what shape it is.

This curvilinear cubes current flow model will apply to almost any experiment you do.  The skin effect really only comes into play at fairly high frequencies.  For example, Monster Cable for audio connections to overcome the skin effect is BS.  There is no skin effect at 20 KHz of any significance that would affect the high frequency audio response of a typical speaker wire.

You can't really do anything practical with this knowledge of how current flows, except perhaps be more aware how you should try to avoid making high-current interconnects with alligator clips.

MileHigh

[Fat Bird]

Anybody that still believes we went to the moon, needs to watch these videos.

They ABSOLUTELY prove we did NOT.

===================================================

Part 1.  A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOMHSgQuuiw


Part 2.  A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTd9XjvWxCw


Part 3.  A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QsgdXMUtdA


Part 4.  A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdXtRpCsjp0


Part 5.  A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crqbdjybYeE


.

[BEP]

you can envision a outside person joining the demonstrator, and with a scope and meters make all of the measurements to explain to the audience what is going on with the circuit.  It's easy for me to envision this outside person proving that every demo clip demonstrating cold current is simply being misunderstood by the given author of the clip.  This outside person could do a full breakdown of the circuit and explain all of the observed phenomena with conventional electronics explanations.

Indeed!

I've been the guy with the scope and the answers. The only time I do it now is to identify the zealots. I just hope none of them get my address.

On the subject of cold electricity... I will not deny it. First, I must find an explanation for a couple of things.

I won't deny the vast majority claiming CE wouldn't know it if it bit them on the ..... If they can't recognize a simple radio transmitter and modes of propagation how would they recognize negative energy flow?

My last visit to a hairpin party got ugly. While he was preparing to pump cold electricity into the submerged light bulb I pulled out my handy-talkie and lit it for him - from the back row.    The bulb changed brilliance as I made a CQ  (6-meter AM).

I had to leave before the scheduled end of the seminar 

[Grumpy]

Well thanks for explaining cold current.  I realize that it's part of an "ecosystem" that seemingly all fits together.  I am not going to challenge you or argue with you about this, but the "ecosystem" doesn't have any mathematical theory backing it up from what I can see.  That's in contrast with textbook theory where it is all backed up by theory and mathematical equations.

If we switch to the laboratory bench, I am sure that we all have seen YouTube clips where people state that a light bulb is being lit by cold current, etc.  I also know that a lot of people appreciate it when you do experiments.  In those cases you can envision a outside person joining the demonstrator, and with a scope and meters make all of the measurements to explain to the audience what is going on with the circuit.  It's easy for me to envision this outside person proving that every demo clip demonstrating cold current is simply being misunderstood by the given author of the clip.  This outside person could do a full breakdown of the circuit and explain all of the observed phenomena with conventional electronics explanations.

Anyway, no need for Clash of the Titans, the above paragraph is just a thought experiment.

Just for fun though, if you have a link to a clip demonstrating cold current I could take a stab at telling you what I think I see going on.

For pure DC current (no skin effects) then the current flows through the wires and the components in a circuit in "curvilinear cubes."  Feel free to look it up I am not going to try to explain it here.  Look up "curvilinear squares" first and then it should be obvious what curvilinear cubes are.  In a nutshell the current always flows in all parts of a wire, no matter what shape it is.

This curvilinear cubes current flow model will apply to almost any experiment you do.  The skin effect really only comes into play at fairly high frequencies.  For example, Monster Cable for audio connections to overcome the skin effect is BS.  There is no skin effect at 20 KHz of any significance that would affect the high frequency audio response of a typical speaker wire.

You can't really do anything practical with this knowledge of how current flows, except perhaps be more aware how you should try to avoid making high-current interconnects with alligator clips.

MileHigh

You're funny, MH.  I thought your were more versed in electrodynamics.  Had you bothered to research polarization current, you'd see that it is the only thing that "cold current" can be.  Any physicist can tell you how very real it is or you can look it up yourself.  If you are familiar with Maxwell's equations, you may recall that the total current in a circuit is the sum of all forms of current, and not just the conduction current that we measure with our handy meters.  Perhaps you are also an expert on the Wilson-Wilson Effect where a rotating dielectric in a magnetic field charges capacitor plates.

Every aspect of this free energy stuff and even Tesla's work can be connected to real experiments, real equations, and real devices.  The only thing that he had that everyone else lacks is that he interpreted things differently.  While everyone else sees empty space, he saw space move.

Eric Dollard has an excellent video on the web where he demonstrates cold current lighting a bulb and attracting a piece of copper held in the hand.  I am sure it is on YouTube.  When you explain it, keep in mind that the light from the bulb is "full spectrum" and the bulb is incandescent - pretty good trick if it is one.

[BEP]

My handy-talky won't attract a piece of copper or charge a cap. I won't say I can't light an incandescent light off one wire, because I can. It isn't the same way as done by Dollard.

The point is - everything must be just right and almost every bulb lit by the wannabe Teslas are gas filled or LEDs. No problem there, even from 10' away and only 10Watts of RF.
...........

A bit depressed, now. Just spent a fair amount of time watching the moon landing hoax evidence videos. I'm not depressed because we really didn't go to the moon.

I'm depressed such things can be considered 'evidence'. I was going to watch the Myth-Busters rebuttals, but I don't need them.

Do people really think the reflected light off a shiny spacesuit backpack whip antenna is evidence of a suspension wire? The multiple light source thingy? Man! No imagination for a Moon surface that isn't perfectly flat but plenty for off-screen directors and lighting.

Ghost TV scan images (common back then) being interpreted as the reflection of 'a guy in shirt sleeves wearing a tie' ?

I think it is more believable that we really went there than the explanations given by some hoax advocates.

Sorry folks. That boat don't float for me 

[MileHigh]

Grumpy:

I took a look at polarization current.  You probably won't like my rebuttal on this subject.  I saw how it is a way of representing an "imaginary" current in the space between capacitor plates, and when charge gets displaced in a dielectric, etc.  The key thing being it is "rate of change with respect to time" based, a derivative function with respect to time.   So when you look at AC current going through a capacitor you can say that's real current -> polarization current -> real current.

I am thinking that the concept of polarization current has taken on a "Cult of Personality" just like I mentioned the Schuman resonance has in another thread.  Then the concept has been extrapolated taken on a life of its own and ends up being called "cold current."  I think some people look at circuits and think that there are cold current effects that conventional science can't explain.  They also believe that there is "regular current" and "cold current" as two distinct entities.  It's not the case.

For me the thinking is the opposite, after reviewing the material it's not surprising to me that I didn't recognize the term.  Simply because it's just a level of detail that you don't need to be concerned with when analyzing a circuit to figure out what is going on.  There is a lot of stuff I can't remember, and most of the time when I look it up online I get it.

I saw an Eric Dollard six-parter, not sure if i have the stamina to get through it but I will try to find the light bulb demo.

Ken:

For the moon thing, a long time ago I watched and read some of the shadow analysis done on some YouTube clips and I could see that it was bull.  A lot of people simply can't understand what they are looking at.  How the camera position and focal length relative to the light source results in a shadow's angle in a photograph.  Everything was correct and they were saying it was wrong.  I remember when Stefan on OU couldn't decipher crater shadow patterns on the moon and placed the sun 180 degrees opposite from where it really was.  So I am with WaveWatcher on this one.

Also, I stumbled across a great "rebuttal" movie to the "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!!" movie.  This happened just last night and it was by pure chance.  Look up "For All Mankind" on YouTube.  It's realer than real.  It should be required viewing for every moon landing doubter.  I think I watched most of "A Funny Thing" a few years ago.

MileHigh

[Grumpy]

Grumpy:

I took a look at polarization current.  You probably won't like my rebuttal on this subject.  I saw how it is a way of representing an "imaginary" current in the space between capacitor plates, and when charge gets displaced in a dielectric, etc.  The key thing being it is "rate of change with respect to time" based, a derivative function with respect to time.   So when you look at AC current going through a capacitor you can say that's real current -> polarization current -> real current.

I am thinking that the concept of polarization current has taken on a "Cult of Personality" just like I mentioned the Schuman resonance has in another thread.  Then the concept has been extrapolated taken on a life of its own and ends up being called "cold current."  I think some people look at circuits and think that there are cold current effects that conventional science can't explain.  They also believe that there is "regular current" and "cold current" as two distinct entities.  It's not the case.

For me the thinking is the opposite, after reviewing the material it's not surprising to me that I didn't recognize the term.  Simply because it's just a level of detail that you don't need to be concerned with when analyzing a circuit to figure out what is going on.  There is a lot of stuff I can't remember, and most of the time when I look it up online I get it.

I saw an Eric Dollard six-parter, not sure if i have the stamina to get through it but I will try to find the light bulb demo.

Ken:

For the moon thing, a long time ago I watched and read some of the shadow analysis done on some YouTube clips and I could see that it was bull.  A lot of people simply can't understand what they are looking at.  How the camera position and focal length relative to the light source results in a shadow's angle in a photograph.  Everything was correct and they were saying it was wrong.  I remember when Stefan on OU couldn't decipher crater shadow patterns on the moon and placed the sun 180 degrees opposite from where it really was.  So I am with WaveWatcher on this one.

Also, I stumbled across a great "rebuttal" movie to the "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!!" movie.  This happened just last night and it was by pure chance.  Look up "For All Mankind" on YouTube.  It's realer than real.  It should be required viewing for every moon landing doubter.  I think I watched most of "A Funny Thing" a few years ago.

MileHigh

You are correct about polarization current taking on a fictitious life of it's own, more as "displacement current" than polarization current of which displacement current is a subset.  We can thank the OU'ers for this as they are the great perpetrators.

In any event, PC is quite real and responsible for currents around the sun, and the earth.  Lots more to it than that though.

Hey, you're an EE.  Would like to help?

If so,  my sig gens died and I do not have time to try and cannibalize them to make one work or fix either of them.  This is not my forte.  I need something that can provide an adjustable clock to a 74ACT164 shift register or just to trigger an avalanche stack (5v is good).  An astable multivibrator, working in the 400kHz range with discreet components would do the job nicely.  I have a bunch of 2n5551's that I can use and the necessary caps and resistors.   I tried a circuit that I found for this, but couldn't get it to work.  I didn't have a lot of time so I may have it wired wrong.

I also have some d-type flip-flops, but prefer the transistors.  Also have some nand gates that I heard can be used for a multivibrator, but have to look that up.

Let's say we all work together and see how deep the rabbit hole goes.

[Peterae]

Ken
The Moon, just recently there have been photos taken of the landing sites, one of them appears to show ground disturbance around the lander, as if someone had trampled around.

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/369228main_ap14labeled_540.jpg

One way mission?

Interestingly the other photos dont show ground disturance yet the photos appear to be higher res of a small area covered.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html