Help!

Author Topic: Help! (Read 6516 times)

Topic Options

Leedskalnin

Help! « on: 2011-06-19, 04:07:35 »

Newbie

Posts: 30

Hi!

After many days of being member in this forum this is my first post.

I have purchased Trevor James Constable DVD package on Rain Engineering. After I saw all the DVD package I did not found out how to make for my self some of Trevor's apparatus there were no "how to" guides.

All of his apparatus seems to be simple, he mentioned many times that he has fine tuned the geometry to Phi and Aether But I dont know how to do that. I know how Reich Cloud Buster works but seems Trevor's acts faster and better

Can any one help me to found out how to tune or make at least one of his geometries.
Below is Spider one of his design, He said Spider is made of Fine Tuned Phi section cones that rotate arount the central axis .

Many thanks in Advance
PS Excuse me for my English

poynt99	Re: Help! « Reply #1 on: 2011-06-19, 04:15:39 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3538 It's not as complicated as it may seem...	I haven't a clue. Perhaps you should ask Trevor himself? .99 --------------------------- "Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa

Leedskalnin	Re: Help! « Reply #2 on: 2011-06-19, 04:26:57 »
Newbie Posts: 30	Quote from: poynt99 on 2011-06-19, 04:15:39 I haven't a clue. Perhaps you should ask Trevor himself? .99 Thanks poynt! Fast Response! Preferably I need some resources on how Aether interacts with moving geometries.

Leedskalnin	Re: Help! « Reply #3 on: 2011-06-22, 04:14:46 »
Newbie Posts: 30	Seems no one can help

poynt99

Re: Help! « Reply #4 on: 2011-06-22, 04:37:54 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member

Posts: 3538
It's not as complicated as it may seem...

Quote from: Leedskalnin on 2011-06-22, 04:14:46

Seems no one can help

I would encourage you to read some Aspden, Aetherometry, Reich, Markovich etc. Google aetherometry.

Try those.

.99

---------------------------

"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa

Grumpy	Re: Help! « Reply #5 on: 2011-06-22, 15:05:49 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 4267 tExB=qr	This is different than anything that I am doing. I would look for published writings of Wilhelm Reich on orgone and cloudbusting and what others have done since he published his findings. Also, the "Joe Cell" seems related.

Peterae	Re: Help! « Reply #6 on: 2011-06-22, 15:15:27 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 4635	I think that's the problem, it's quiet a unique research angle for us switch flickers

giantkiller	Re: Help! « Reply #7 on: 2011-06-22, 16:35:44 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1730 Frequency equals matter...	Dale Pond's book about John Worrell Keely is a real eye opener. The over all theme is about resonant high pressure because he did not work with voltage but fluid dynamics. It occured to me that both could be the same thing. --------------------------- http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/

Leedskalnin	Re: Help! « Reply #8 on: 2011-06-23, 03:23:20 »
Newbie Posts: 30	Thank you all for your responses. I'll track your guidance. Dear Grumpy I remember some where in OU forum you mentioned that all moving objects produce Scalar waves, what type of geometries do you think act or influence better on medium(Aether or ...)? Does moving cones in a circle make a vortex? leed

Leedskalnin	Re: Help! « Reply #9 on: 2011-06-27, 03:36:00 »
Newbie Posts: 30	Quote from: Grumpy on 2011-06-22, 15:05:49 This is different than anything that I am doing. I would look for published writings of Wilhelm Reich on orgone and cloudbusting and what others have done since he published his findings. Also, the "Joe Cell" seems related. hmm Joe Cell is smillar to Aspend capacitor

exnihiloest

Re: Help! « Reply #10 on: 2011-06-27, 13:59:06 »

Newbie

Posts: 1504

Quote from: Leedskalnin on 2011-06-23, 03:23:20

...
I remember some where in OU forum you mentioned that all moving objects produce Scalar waves, what type of geometries do you think act or influence better on medium(Aether or ...)?
...

It can not be stressed enough: scalar waves are entirely based on a misconception of varying near fields.
A wave is something that carries energy and propagates autonomously.
A varying field, which can vary because its source moves (moving objects) or is modulated, is still coupled to the source. Even though the energy in a field can be captured by a near receiver, the field doesn't propagate by itself unlike an electromagnetic wave.
For example the magnetic field from a coil or from a moving magnet can be caught by another coupled coil, at the expense of the energy provided by the source (electrical or mechanical, depending on what makes the field to vary).
I'm sorry to see too frequently in the spotlight this so-called "scalar wave" which is not a wave but a field, and has always been a theoretical and experimental dead-end for free energy.

Leedskalnin

Re: Help! « Reply #11 on: 2011-06-28, 04:05:18 »

Newbie

Posts: 30

Quote from: exnihiloest on 2011-06-27, 13:59:06

It can not be stressed enough: scalar waves are entirely based on a misconception of varying near fields.
A wave is something that carries energy and propagates autonomously.
A varying field, which can vary because its source moves (moving objects) or is modulated, is still coupled to the source. Even though the energy in a field can be captured by a near receiver, the field doesn't propagate by itself unlike an electromagnetic wave.
For example the magnetic field from a coil or from a moving magnet can be caught by another coupled coil, at the expense of the energy provided by the source (electrical or mechanical, depending on what makes the field to vary).
I'm sorry to see too frequently in the spotlight this so-called "scalar wave" which is not a wave but a field, and has always been a theoretical and experimental dead-end for free energy.

Thanks exnihiloest.

I agree that we have field not wave but I used that term because that mistakenly has been known as wave. I did mean medium rarefaction or compression propagation(using sound wave in air analogy, Tesla said that light is a sound wave in the Aether) when a material object moves through medium it generates such disturbances in medium if we could use a proper geometry we can manipulate medium but why cones do this better?!

exnihiloest

Re: Help! « Reply #12 on: 2011-06-28, 09:23:57 »

Newbie

Posts: 1504

Quote from: Leedskalnin on 2011-06-28, 04:05:18

...
I did mean medium rarefaction or compression propagation(using sound wave in air analogy, Tesla said that light is a sound wave in the Aether) when a material object moves through medium it generates such disturbances in medium if we could use a proper geometry we can manipulate medium but why cones do this better?!

Tesla was a genius inventor nevertheless with his longitudinal waves, he was wrong vs Maxwell. Light or EM waves are not like sound waves, and energy transmission at a distance by LC coupled circuits are perfectly modelized by Maxwell's equations.
Even if we consider that EM fields are a medium perturbation (I agree with this idea), the propagating perturbation is transversal. The longitudinal perturbation (for example due to the Coulomb field of a charge oscillating back and forth) generates really disturbances in medium but the disturbances doesn't propagate by themselves, the varying field remains linked to its source.
In any case, we need energy to perturb the medium and there is neither experimental nor theoretical evidence that the energy (propagating or not) that we could recover from the medium could be more than that we have put in.
Another way would be to catch energy already present, called "ambient energy". But conventional electric/magnetic fields such EM waves from human activities or stationary waves around the earth at Schumann Resonance are by far too weak for a practical interest. The ZPF remains a promising way now the question is "how to recover an energy that lies at its minimal level".