PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2021-12-07, 11:59:51
News: A feature is available which provides a place all members can chat, either publicly or privately.
There is also a "Shout" feature on each page. Only available to members.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11
Author Topic: Ether - Does it Exist?  (Read 118225 times)
Group: Guest
Hmmm...  Well said.


Do we truly understand what "propels" radiation?

At the "electromagnetic speed of light?"

Is it "pushed" or "pulled" or does it just "go?"


Dumped - I'm intrigued with your contributions here.  They're always reasonable.  I just can't believe that you'd ever be banned.  In any event - I also want to get my head around 'radiation'.  How does energy move through space when there's no circuitry available to move it.  The question fascinates me.

Rosemary
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1443
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink
@AR,
Loner has been our most humblest poster for years now. :)


---------------------------
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3051
Dumped -...

I just can't believe that you'd ever be banned.
...

Rosemary

I have a compelling "need" to be candid and frank with
"shysters."  I really dislike dishonesty and exploitation.

Speaking out too candidly and too frankly (while pointing
fingers) has done me in...  Even when the "speaking out"
is done politely and without rancor.

Aaron M. (most recent) is a very difficult communications
challenge. Very complicated.  I wonder - is he gay?



---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
Group: Guest
I have a compelling "need" to be candid and frank with
"shysters."  I really dislike dishonesty and exploitation.

Speaking out too candidly and too frankly (while pointing
fingers) has done me in...  Even when the "speaking out"
is done politely and without rancor.

Aaron M. (most recent) is a very difficult communications
challenge. Very complicated.  I wonder - is he gay?



LOL.  I've been rolling.  If you asked him this - then I can indeed understand why you were banned.  Dumped.  If he's gay then I don't think he's aware of it.  I believe he's married.  In any event - there is certainly a rather inappropriate antagonism - but I think that's the result of dealing with public rejection of those esoteric philosophies of his.  Personally I subscribe.  They're all just so hopeful - if not enirely credible.  And we all need a bit of hope in our diet - especially in the face of our depressing media headlines.  In the unlikely event that there are 'little green men' all over the place - I can well understand why they don't come forward and introduce themselves.  They've likely discovered our talents for abusive criticism and our penchant for for hysteria.  We're really not that nice.  Not as a species.  But who knows.  A bit more evolution and perhaps we'll change into something that deserves intergallactic communication.  It would be wonderful.  Right now there's no chance of it.  Cruel scepticism is the order of the day.  And for some reason it's considered desirable and sophisticated.  It's not.  It's just inappropriate and abusive.  And he's as guilty of that scepticism as we all are.  He's just sceptical of the sceptics.  So.  Perhaps not entirely representative of all that 'good' that he espouses.  But who is?  I think the last candidate was probably Jesus Christ.  Or Mother Theresa.  Not run of the mill personalities.  LOL.

 :)
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3051
No, I didn't raise the possibility while engaged in discourse
with Aaron.  It's just that his emotionalism brought to mind
past workmates who were indeed gay.  Not that it makes
any difference at all...  I've several friends who are gay and
find them generally extremely intelligent and insightful and
they tell marvelous jokes!

You've said it well Rosemary.  I largely agree with what you've
expressed; we're a sorry lot.

The world does seem to be in a tailspin headed for a great
crash.  There are many prophecies which seem to bear this
out and would put us near the "end" of corruption as we
know it.  If so, then we will see most wonderful change in
the not too distant future.  Once we get through all of the
coming ugliness and turmoil and into the birthpangs.

There will be a very happy new beginning.

One day in the far future we'll fully understand not only
the Aether, but all of the mysteries which now puzzle us.

Journey to the stars anyone?


---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
Group: Guest
Once we get through all of the
coming ugliness and turmoil and into the birthpangs.

There will be a very happy new beginning.

One day in the far future we'll fully understand not only
the Aether, but all of the mysteries which now puzzle us.

Journey to the stars anyone?


 :) I'd be happy to go on that trip but I suffer from vertigo.  LOL.  More's the pity.  I can't add to this. I also hope for all that change.  It would be cool to just start by acknowledging the occasional oversight in current physics theories.  But to even start there one would first need to demystify it.  And our physicists seem hell bent on obfuscation.  They've exploited all possible ways of saying 'we don't have the answer'.  Maybe one day they'll just come out and say it.  Right now they're saying it in ways that only they can pretend to understand - all in the hopes of avoiding a full on public admission of the fact.  Then - in one fell swoop - we'd all be justified in talking aether energies.  God forbid.  What's needed is NOT a published paper on Aether - but a publication on those manifold contradictions that they all ascribe to - so freely and so desperately and so apparently LEARNEDLY.  LOL.

 :)
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3051
...
What's needed is NOT a published paper on Aether - but a publication on those manifold contradictions that they all ascribe to - so freely and so desperately and so apparently LEARNEDLY.  LOL.

 :)

Agreed.  However, it will not be forthcoming.

The "Science Establishment" has become a manipulated
tool which facilitates the advancement of a sinister agenda.

Any who demonstrate too much interest in the "truth" are
nullified or eliminated.  Many taboos are strictly enforced.


---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
Group: Guest
Agreed.  However, it will not be forthcoming.

The "Science Establishment" has become a manipulated
tool which facilitates the advancement of a sinister agenda.

Any who demonstrate too much interest in the "truth" are
nullified or eliminated.  Many taboos are strictly enforced.

There is another angle on this Dumped.  The angle is that cliches about the "science establishment" and "MIBs" are constantly being repeated by the big players in the realm of free energy.  These are then repeated by some of the followers.  With enough propagandizing of the cliches and enough repeating of the cliches by some of the followers, then these ideas take on a life of their own.

What this ultimately becomes is that everything is turned on its head.  The truth becomes the lies and the lies become the truth.  Take the example of Mylow claiming that the MIB were after him and Sterling Allen believing him.  It was all bullshit.  Mylow was just playing into the fact that everything is turned on it's head in the realm of free energy.  Bedini has stated that he had been threatened and was physically roughed up by the MIB many years ago.  Why would they do that?  Every single thing that Bedini has ever shown is an under unity device.

Look at this recent quote from Bedini about the Ferris Wheel motor, "I was offered mucho money to sell this machine and shut up, I will not take it. as I think it is very important for others to do it."  As far as I am concerned that's just Bedini playing into the whole MIB game.  It's bullshit, I don't believe him.  The only thing we know about the Ferris Wheel motor is that it spins and has some coils.  What does it really do?

Here is another interesting quote about the Ferris Wheel motor, "I said that if you live in the northern hemisphere that the south pole of the coil must extend through the coil, and no do not turn the motor upside down.  John you live in the southern hemisphere so the pole piece must be extended towards the wheel for the geometry to work with the shield."  John Bedini is stating that you physically configure the motor differently depending on if you build it in the Northern Hemisphere or the Southern Hemisphere.  That is absolute nonsense and I challenge anybody to tell me differently.

So here is something for you to contemplate Dumped:  The real conspiracy is that there is an "Inverse MIB" conspiracy.  People promoting free energy devices or concepts for financial gain constantly make direct or indirect statements or inferences that there is a "shadowy MIB out there looking to stomp on and suppress every free energy device."  They play into the beliefs that some people have and they know that they have a willing and receptive audience.  There are people that want to believe in free energy without tangible proof and there are people that want to believe in conspiracy theories without tangible proof.  They also know that there are many people in this class that have limited technical knowledge and it makes it that much easier to keep the "Inverse MIB conspiracy" momentum humming along.  Some of these people simply can't tell if what they are looking at is real or not because they don't have the technical background but they choose to believe anyways.  I think that the conspirators sometimes make outrageous claims that any person with common sense would object to just to test the waters and see how firmly established the "Inverse MIB conspiracy" really is.

So that's the other side of the coin.  Is there a conspiracy being promoted by the vital interests in the realm of free energy?  What are typical annual revenues that this "Inverse MIB conspiracy" taps into?  When you add up the sales of all of the DVDs, and  parts, and plans, etc, etc, and you throw in all of conferences and all sorts of other solicitations, how much money on a global annualized basis are you really talking about?  What do you have to say and promote to keep that annual revenue stream flowing?

Who has the sinister agenda in this setting, the scientists or the "Inverse MIB" conspirators?

MileHigh
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3051
You make several good points regarding the "staged"
disinfo operations recently witnessed.  There are many
"actors" involved at many levels of innocence or
complicity.

In all matters of importance it is necessary to do serious
research well below the surface and into the core.  When
possible it is desirable to "penetrate" the core to make
first hand observation.

Fortunately, a number of former accomplices have seen
"the light" and have "turned" so are now able to very
carefully expose the corruption.

The manipulations are seldom achieved by means of physical
threat or "roughing up."  There are far more effective methods
of "persuasion" utilized to keep the minions happy as they do
their dirty work.

No, many of them do not know.  They too have been deceived.
They are simply utilized to promote the "way it is" while their
weaknesses and secret desires are attended to.

The best "conspiracy" is one which involves the fewest at the
very core.  It is easy to develop a "following" of duped slaves
no matter how ridiculous the "program."

Give them what they crave and they'll do "anything."

Recognition;  Position;  Degrees;  Salary

Benefits;  Privileges;  Inner Circle association

Secrets;  etc.


It's a very old game.  And it "works" for "them" very well indeed.

When you have the resources to "own" the show...
 


---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1443
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink
Quote
Max Headroom and 20 Minutes into the future.
The background story provided for the Max Headroom character presents a dystopic look at a run-down near-future dominated by television and large corporations. Max Headroom was shown to have been created from the memories of Edison Carter. The character's name came from the last thing Carter saw during a vehicular accident that put him into a coma: A bar with a sign warning of low clearance, marked "MAX. HEADROOM: 2.3 M".


---------------------------
   
Group: Guest
The question as to whether there are black ops or MIB or Psyops - or whatever.  It's irrelevant.  What is evident is that there's an awful lot of misinformation perpetrated in these forums and they are from both sides of this question.  I personally am absolutely satisfied that there are paid operatives who lurk the internet in search of patentable technology.  And when they find this then they use extraordinary tools and techniques to discredit in order to appropriate that technology.  They menace.  And they're effective.  By the same token it's possible that there are those who perpetrate technologies that don't work.  Yet they're paid good money - and maybe they even solicit that money.  Who cares?  What's interesting is simply - 'who actively promotes new ideas - and who actively frustrates new ideas?  Because they can both be entirely destroyed on Open Source.  It's just a question of who uses the more sophisticated 'propagandising' tools?  Propagandising tools include;  the need to destroy, hide or deny actual data; the need to frustrate the knowledge by proposing erroneous test parameters.  The need to pretend to a level of knowledge that is - as required - based on bad science or not.  The need to imply TOTAL IDIOCY of the idea or it's proposer.  And so it goes.  And by the same token - those free energy nutters need only show the evidence of OU to have it entirely denied by those who choose to do so.  Or entirely believed by those who choose to.  Again.  Who cares?  It should be patently obvious by now that Open Source is absolutely NOT the way to promote anything at all.  It's dominated by all that agenda.  I think a fair measure of a forum's impartiality is whether or not it 'sells' anything.  And I think both EF.com and OU.com are both designed to solicit funds - one way or another.  Fortunately Poynty's forum has resisted this.  Thank God.

If this is still on topic - perhaps we could consider another question.  We all know that there are huge empty spaces within the atom.  But the assumption is made that there's nothing inside that space.  So.  Here's another question.  When we measure a voltage imbalance on a circuit - what exactly are we measuring?  A magnetic imbalance?  If we're measuring an electron 'imbalance' then we'd need evidence of electrons orbiting around that inductive material.  But there isn't any.  Certainly not that they can be identified and seen.   Unless they turn 'invisible' - somehow.  If the electrons are spinning inside that atom - or even if they're moving as current flow inside that circuit material - then what generates that magnetic field or that measured voltage imbalance?  You see.  If the electrons have generated that magnetic field effect as mainstream claim - then their ability to generate that field is AMAZING.  Nothing like the atomic distance between the electron and proton.  In terms of the apple and split pea analogy - where they orbit at plus/minus 11 kilometers - it would be an orbit of global proportions.  It would be like the split pea reaching across the entire world to generate that magnetic field.  In fact.  It would be as if that split pea can generate a magnetic field around the moon.  Doesn't this strike anyone at all as being somewhat improbable?  A whole measurable field - resulting from the spin of something as small as an electron?  And then to propose that that field that is measurable is also immaterial?  How can this be.  How can vortices and spins and sundry things that are measurable - result from the movement of a tiny little particle so removed from, so far, far away from the resulting 'field effect'?   Surely that stretches one's credulity - here and there?

But.  If we simply assume that there is a magnetic material that can move through space - then at least we can account for that field effect.  I would have thought.

Rosemary
   
Group: Guest
Here is a complete and total lie compliments of the Inverse MIB:

http://pesn.com/2011/01/07/9501738_Company_V_has_megawatt_free_energy_generators_for_sale/

Quote
Both are able to produce power continuously, 24/7, and nearly 365 days a year, with minimal down time for servicing. Most significantly, they require no fuel whatsoever and produce no waste but are self-contained, harvesting energy freely from the environment using advanced scientific principles.

Quote
The superconductor engine prototype that qualified parties can see now purportedly produces 15 kW while consuming 50 Watts.

It's all a complete lie following in the school of Chairman Mao's "Big Lie" technique.

I guess that this was like a foot-note for my previous posting.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
   
Group: Guest
Rosemary, I can't respond to the first part, as the whole MIB situation is too far off topic for me.  (Interesting, though...)

The second part, has a LOT of good stuff, but has a couple confusion points for me, so I will comment and let you straighten me out as to your real meaning.  As to a "Voltage Imbalance", and what we are measuring, this is a tough thing.  There are VERY few out there who really realize that voltage is almost impossible to even measure.  We measure "Current" through a known resistance, and calculate the voltage from that.  All meters with two leads operate this way, as I am aware you realize.  This fact does actually change what you are saying, for me at least, as you are now always actually discussing a current flow, which IS defined as the movement of electrons.  This presents me with two difficulties.  One, true voltage requires no current, but is so rarely used in such a manner that I know VERY few that can even discuss the subject.  Very little research is done, even today.  Most electrostatic work could be looked at this way, as long as discharging the charge is not part of the operation.  I needn't go further with that, as the problems are obvious.  Two, and this leads to what I "Think" (I.E. My Opinion...), as soon as you are talking actual current flow, thereby discussing physically ripping electrons from an atom and moving them to the next one, you are really talking about nuclear functions.  Atomic energy, though very few think that way.  Just imagine, you are actually ripping apart an atom!  With 1 amp, your ripping apart 1 coulomb per sec, at every point along the flow path.  This is an ENORMOUS amount of power, that "Could" account for the magnitude of the field.  (Think how many places you could pick on just .001" of wire.  Each atom could be measured.  The real number of ripped electrons gets BIG, and quite easily...  If BOTH the rip and the replace give off field...  Now think 1".)

If I were to assume the "Magnetic Material" was moving through space, this is almost stating the the aether is this magnetic material.  If that were the case, I think it would be much easier to detect than it is.  This would also mean that there would always be the "Magnetic" material in all of space, which doesn't prove out to be the case.  (Plenty of real tests done there, already.)  I would have to offer my opinion that the "Magnetic Material" would have to be looked at like an oar in the water.  It can generate the wave in the water, but is not the water itself.  This follows experimental results quite well, as to detect the created wave, you need to sick another "oar" in the water.  (Or some other "Mass", etc.)

Does this make any sense, and am I understanding you correctly?  

I can't really properly integrate your info any other way into what I understand, as I am unaware of "Photons"  (Ignoring base composition for now...) having their own magnetic characteristics.  I don't mean that a mag field has no effect, but that a beam of photons doesn't cause such an effect, unless modified by other means.  (I am aware of the electron cloud modulation of lasers, but that's pushing several things together and which does what is for another day...)

SO, what do you think about these ideas?  Am I missing the boat or have I understood your meaning incorrectly?  

(As an insight to my line of thought, if aether can be "oar'd" by magnetism, then this interaction might put to "Other" uses, and could possibly interconnect with "Other" forces, and allow for the exchange of one force to another, etc.  This would bring the concept of resonance into the picture, but now I'm pushing the idea a little too far.  If aether IS magnetism, then some of these concepts no longer can apply, and resonance becomes very different between force types.  Just a thought or two.)
   
Group: Guest
Hi Loner,  Very interesting.  But I'll need to get back here tonight - you're tomorrow.  Certainly food for thought. I don't often do this - but just indulge me and read up on the following link.  That's my opinion on mainstream current flow as it relates to electrons.  But plenty to add.  Can't wait.  But can't deal with this right now.

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2010/11/more-on-inconvenient-truths.html

If you've got time.  At least you'll know where my confusions come in.
   
Group: Guest

Company " V " = http://valenciaenergy.com/index-4.html

Yes indeed, it's a very impressive looking web site with beautiful flash animations.  The problem is that if you spend 10 minutes looking around the web site you begin to realize that there is nothing there.  It is a hollow "zero calorie" web site.

They list four power projects:

Quote
    *  New York Power Project.
    * Peru Power & Water Project.
    * Chile Power Plant Project.
    * Mexico Power Plant Project.

They are all fake, there is no information for three of them and the New York project link just shows some meaningless text that says nothing.

It's a little bit tricky to find the separate "Valencia Energy" web site that is specific to their power production units.  When you get there, one more time there is nothing, just some more meaningless text and some pictures of what they claim are prototypes.

Here is the blurb on the CEO:

Quote
Howard Brown, CEO
Mr. Brown, CEO, an innovative, solutions-driven executive with more than 20 years of experience managing sales, operations, and personnel at district, regional, and corporate levels for manufacturing companies. He received his B.S. in International Affairs from the University of Florida.

However, when you Google on "Howard Brown Valencia Energy" nothing comes up in the search.

It's a totally fake company with no products or real-world power projects.

This came up on one of those business directory web sites:

Quote
Valencia Energy LLC is a private company categorized under Consultants-Business (Unclassified) and located in West Palm Beach, FL. Our records show it was established in 2008 and incorporated in Florida. Current estimates show this company has an annual revenue of 110,000 and employs a staff of approximately 1.

In the "Contact Us" section they show a picture of what allegedly is their corporate headquarters.  From the Google satellite view it is readily apparent that the picture of their headquarters is a fake.

I am an expert in qualifying companies based on their web site presentation and by doing a little bit of extra digging.  This company is a total lie.  They make it appear that they are a real company with tens or possibly hundreds of employees, yet the business directory says that they have a single employee.  Normally I take the information in these obscure business directory web sites with a grain of salt but in this case I will assume that the information is accurate.

MileHigh
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 520
In the Vanencia site they say they convert mechanical energy to electrical energy. So they may have a pretty efficient Generator but there is no miracle there. Just another competitor for GE and Westinghouse.

Quote from site
When implemented into power projects, this new core fusion engines will provide clean energy technology that cost effectively converts mechanical energy into electricity for use in a multitude of facilities and applications.
Unquote

Does not say anything about loop systems.

wattsup


---------------------------
   
Group: Guest
Hi Loner.  Hopefully you managed to read that link.  That's what I think of conventional concepts related to current flow.  There are too many contradictions in the theory for me to buy in.  And until I can get my head around all those contradictions - then I'll just stick to my own definition.  It's way simpler.  The ease with which valence electrons are moved to and from sundry atomic structures - is the special skill of our chemists.  And I'm not sure that any one of them will argue that a recharged battery has simply added more electrons to an electrolyte.  But - regretably - this is what our utility suppliers assume - and they bill us accordingly.  And may I remind you.  NO extra electrons have ever been detected inside circuit material as a result of current flow.  Indeed.  No changes to any of the atomic structures that comprise circuit material have ever been evident.  The only thing that changes is their bound condition.  

... and am I understanding you correctly?
Yes is the short answer.  I think that there's a universal assumption that a voltage imbalance is related to a magnetic imbalance.  I'm not sure if it's valid or even if I understand this wrongly.  What I do know is that a magnetic field can neither be seen nor measured.  We can only see or measure it's influence on matter and measurable material.  We only ever do 'indirect' measurements to establish its existence - regardless.  So.  How would one determine it's existence in the vacuum of space or even in the spaces within atoms?  This is the more so - as I think it's reasonable to assume that a magnetic field orbits.

Here's the question.  Charge is determined by the direction a particle moves within a magnetic field.  Since charge is an inseparable quantised value of all particles then all particles are known to relate to a magnetic field with a standardised justification.  Therefore it is reasonable to assume that the field itself has a 'charged' value of sorts - else this interaction would not be feasible.  Then.  If the field itself 'orbits' as is assumed by Faraday's 'line's of force' then that orbit first goes up and then goes down.  It first goes back and then forwards.  If charge is determined in relation to the field and if the field itself orbits then an orbit - any orbit - essentially has two directions or two justifications or two charges.  So.  If that orbit in the field in fact moves 'up and then down' and so on - then it also has two inherently opposite charges or justifications or directions.  The one will cancel out the other.  This means that each part of each field has a justification - to determine that orbital path.  But the entire field is neutral.  How does one detect a neutral field if this is the condition of space - either in the vacuum or in the atom...is the question?  I don't know that it is possible.

So as a rather wild leap into speculation - what if the entire universe was structured around a great big toroidal magnetic field?  If that structure still comprised Faraday's 'lines of force' then those strings would be the same - just way, way, longer.  And they'd still be orbiting.  Put your finger on any part of the vacuum - those vast spaces between its galactic structures - and you'd only experience a neutral charge.  The justification or charge of any part of the field would be contradicted by the existence of the other half of that 'spin' condition - or that orbit of that string.  The entire field would be neutral.  Yet each part of that entire field would yet have a justification of sorts.

As an aside - but may be of interest.  Our string theorists work with strings of improbable length and equally improbable 'thinness'.  It's acceted as a possible 'scaffold' to the structure of the universe.  The difference is this.  Our string theorists subscribe to the idea that these fields are static.  Why is it that they cannot just as well be considered to be actively moving?    

So Loner.  You're right.  I'm actually proposing that we need look no further than the magnetic field to find a universal condition in all space.  And I very much doubt it would be detectable.  We can only detect matter.  Not the field.  Not aether.  Not ever.

Rosemary

edited
   
Group: Guest
Rosemary, I did read that page, and liked what I read.  I hope that you realize you actually are reading a description of "The wave theory of matter".  You even actually state this very thing near the end.

I must point out a couple things, which may actually be in agreement, or may not, as fully comprehending all this is a deeper subject than I could describe in just a few words.  (Or pages, or books, for that matter...)  The whole idea of "Lines of force" is a complete falsehood.  (I can hear some being so upset that they stop reading, and figure some rational way of proving this wrong...)  As an example, most people think of taking a magnet, putting a piece of paper on top and sprinkling filings of some magnetic material upon it.  This will show "The lines of force" and actually is the basis for a lot of "Scientific Garbage".  These lines are caused by the presence of the filings themselves and are not intrinsic to the "Field".  (I am sure you know this, I'm just making a point.  We may be agreeing in a lot more ways than I will admit.)  Taking this into account, the field, bu itself, has no "Ups and downs", but is completely linear, and the "Lines of force" are to be used the same as a topological map, as indicators for field strength, but not as actual lines.  Modern theory seems to like to ignore that fact, all too often.

I will have to think a while as to how to properly respond to your post, as there is a lot there, but it seems that you want to believe that the "Base" field, or the aether, is purely magnetic in it's structure.  For me, I could not directly accept that, as there do seem to be "Neutral" particles, as in, particles with no charge.  Just trying to figure how such a thing is possible from the standpoint of being created from a material that would produce a charge is difficult, as the "Field" would somehow have to be "Shielded" from all mass around it.  I'm sure there may be a method, but it would be complex.  Now I hit occam's razor, and all that.  This is hard for me to write, straight from the hip, as it were.

So, while I agree that some of what you are saying is VERY possible, I would take a LOT more convincing for me to agree that it is magnetic in it's "Pure" form.   (In basic wave theory, only two at 90 degrees has the "Effect" of a mag field, and a gravity field is the same concept, but at the other 90, and you can already see why I don't discuss the deeper mechanics of it around here.   It's all too simple to visualize but the math would be tough and goes against the grain of what has been taught for over a century.  All particles "Could be" 3D standing waves, and all forces, again, "Could be" easily explained in this manner.  Analyzing these waveforms, math wise, would be much more difficult than discrete functions.  Why basic humans can't seen to grasp that "Particle" thinking is just to put an analogue reality in a "Digital" format to ease the math, I can't seem to understand.  You didn't hear me say that, or see that I wrote it...)

I will try to think further on this so that I can properly put it into words that make sense and don't draw on the current standards, which I don't agree with.  Of course, the existing math and descriptions work well enough that we obviously can make use of them, but that doesn't mean they correctly describe things.  It just means the numbers work.  We just might be thinking along very close lines, with just a few disagreements.  I must agree to disagree that the magnetic "Field" is the base, but as I cannot say that your description of a true, unaffected magnetic field is the same as what someone else would have, this is not a sure disagreement.  What I mean by that is, if this "Field" is accepted as not being magnetic until interaction with "Mass", then, in a way, we could be describing the same thing.  I will give this more thought, and will respond as I am able.
   
Group: Guest
I must point out a couple things, which may actually be in agreement, or may not, as fully comprehending all this is a deeper subject than I could describe in just a few words.  (Or pages, or books, for that matter...)  The whole idea of "Lines of force" is a complete falsehood.  (I can hear some being so upset that they stop reading, and figure some rational way of proving this wrong...)  As an example, most people think of taking a magnet, putting a piece of paper on top and sprinkling filings of some magnetic material upon it.  This will show "The lines of force" and actually is the basis for a lot of "Scientific Garbage".  These lines are caused by the presence of the filings themselves and are not intrinsic to the "Field".  (I am sure you know this, I'm just making a point.  We may be agreeing in a lot more ways than I will admit.)  Taking this into account, the field, bu itself, has no "Ups and downs", but is completely linear, and the "Lines of force" are to be used the same as a topological map, as indicators for field strength, but not as actual lines.  Modern theory seems to like to ignore that fact, all too often.
Loner - I've got another little exercise that may be of interest.  I'll pm you on this.  Get back to me thereafter.  That may explain more. Meanwhile - I'm not inclined to agree here.  It appears that the iron filings need that magnetic field to arrange themselves.  Of interest is that they become stable having done so.  That's hard to conceptualise in line with the proposal that there's a moving magnetic field.  One would assume or anticipate some kind of localised variation in the actual movement of anything at all through space.  Therefore those filings should change position - now and then.  And they don't. 

I will have to think a while as to how to properly respond to your post, as there is a lot there, but it seems that you want to believe that the "Base" field, or the aether, is purely magnetic in it's structure.  For me, I could not directly accept that, as there do seem to be "Neutral" particles, as in, particles with no charge.  Just trying to figure how such a thing is possible from the standpoint of being created from a material that would produce a charge is difficult, as the "Field" would somehow have to be "Shielded" from all mass around it.  I'm sure there may be a method, but it would be complex.  Now I hit occam's razor, and all that.  This is hard for me to write, straight from the hip, as it were.
Again.  Not sure that neutral particles don't actually respond to the field.  They do.  Photons are neutral.  And they're hardly frustrated in their path through the magnetic field.  They appear to entirely ignore it - in fact.    Also.  When they hold 'neutral' particles in those bubble chambers - they simply do not spin.  Just sit there and apparently do nothing.  If those particles are indeed charged 'neutral' then it implies that there must also be a neutral potential in the field - else they would not be sustained in a magnetic field.  And they are.  Or they are in that bubble chamber.

So, while I agree that some of what you are saying is VERY possible, I would take a LOT more convincing for me to agree that it is magnetic in it's "Pure" form.   (In basic wave theory, only two at 90 degrees has the "Effect" of a mag field, and a gravity field is the same concept, but at the other 90, and you can already see why I don't discuss the deeper mechanics of it around here.   It's all too simple to visualize but the math would be tough and goes against the grain of what has been taught for over a century.  All particles "Could be" 3D standing waves, and all forces, again, "Could be" easily explained in this manner.  Analyzing these waveforms, math wise, would be much more difficult than discrete functions.  Why basic humans can't seen to grasp that "Particle" thinking is just to put an analogue reality in a "Digital" format to ease the math, I can't seem to understand.  You didn't hear me say that, or see that I wrote it...)
I agree.  I think that new physics is likely to spawn  a new math.  And I very much doubt then that anyone would need to count up to more than three.  But that's still not that easy.  Certainly not if it incorporates more than one time dimension.

I will try to think further on this so that I can properly put it into words that make sense and don't draw on the current standards, which I don't agree with.  Of course, the existing math and descriptions work well enough that we obviously can make use of them, but that doesn't mean they correctly describe things.  It just means the numbers work.  We just might be thinking along very close lines, with just a few disagreements.  I must agree to disagree that the magnetic "Field" is the base, but as I cannot say that your description of a true, unaffected magnetic field is the same as what someone else would have, this is not a sure disagreement.  What I mean by that is, if this "Field" is accepted as not being magnetic until interaction with "Mass", then, in a way, we could be describing the same thing.  I will give this more thought, and will respond as I am able.
Thanks Loner.  It's enough that you're even reading here.  It's quite a lonely experience playing around with eccentric concepts.  But - in view of your 'name of choice' I think you know something about this.  I don't buy into the concept of 'standing waves' either.  And, in my opinion that whole 'wave particle duality' thing is a cop out.  And nor do we need it.  But that's just my opinion.

 :)

Check out the pm.
Kindest regards
Rosemary
   
Group: Guest
OK, Rosemary, I think, before I go on, that I will directly respond to this last post, each section at a time, and then go back to my thinking, as I haven't had much time to process all this, nevermind reference any external data.  This is all from memory, so accept the possibility that I may give some bad data.  So Be It.

First part, as to the "Lines of Force".  I'll Quote your statement below so I can read it as I go and all can see what I am referencing.  First time for this method, for me.
Quote
It appears that the iron filings need that magnetic field to arrange themselves.  Of interest is that they become stable having done so.  That's hard to conceptualise in line with the proposal that there's a moving magnetic field.  One would assume or anticipate some kind of localised variation in the actual movement of anything at all through space.  Therefore those filings should change position - now and then.  And they don't.   
I would agree that the "Field" is needed to arrange the filings, but the reason I see for them being stable is "Simple" to me, as they actually become part of a "Core".  (Think of any more permeable substrate)   The reason they form "Lines" is because of the "Self repelling" nature once they become "Magnetized?"  The actual "Flow" is along the line, and we all know that standard induction operates at a 90 degree angle, or the cutting of these "Field Lines".  Going with them causes no induction other than the fact that the alignment id never perfect, etc.  I need not get into exacting details, I'm sure, but this is also why NO coil could ever be perfect as the winding will always have a slight angle to it.  Also, this leans away from the actual aether being magnetically based as the mag field to mass interaction would easily be noticed, once away from the planets "Background" field.  There are possible exceptions to what I am saying, but I hope you see what I am trying to get across.

Now we get into it a little bit.  Quantum guys would give their explanation, but I already disagree with that so I put down what you said and give my opinion.
Quote
Not sure that neutral particles don't actually respond to the field.  They do.  Photons are neutral.  And they're hardly frustrated in their path through the magnetic field.  They appear to entirely ignore it - in fact.    Also.  When they hold 'neutral' particles in those bubble chambers - they simply do not spin.  Just sit there and apparently do nothing.  If those particles are indeed charged 'neutral' then it implies that there must also be a neutral potential in the field - else they would not be sustained in a magnetic field.  And they are.  Or they are in that bubble chamber.
See, this first part confuses me a little, so I must be reading it wrong.  If photons exist, and If they are neutral, and If they ignore the magnetic field, then it follows that they are not affected by the field.  This would seem to say that neutral particles don't respond to the field.....  See my confusion.   I am not attempting to say the is a "Neutral" charge, but I would accept one definition of a neutral charge to be an equal of plus and minus, or up and down, etc.  (We all understand that reference, right?)  As to the suspension in an actual bubble chamber, inside the magnetic bottle type, I assume you are describing, then we are actually into a whole new area.  Whatever liquid is in the chamber is right at the "State change" point and usually has already been charged to the matching point for minimal penetration charge differential, just to make for a good test.  There is SO much more going on there that I couldn't begin to comment on a individual aspect.  Even gravitational forces operate differently here, at this level, so I cannot use this as a reference.  Consider this to be my pet peve of not allowing unrelated things to distract me.  Simple mind and all that.  Having said that, if I can see any "Recognized" "Particle" with no "Recognized Charge" respond to just a magnetic field, then I might change my mind, but that would require NO charge, not a balanced or Neutral one.  I think you should be able to see what I am trying to say?  Good example would be the photon, if such existed with no charge, and I could deflect it with just a pure magnetic field, THEN we would be talking.

The next part about the math, no quote needed.  I think existing math would be fine, but imagine if all simple "Add" and "Subtract" values had to be the real calculus functions to describe the wave interactions.  It sure gets heavy, fast, doesn't it.  We actually agree on something 100%.  (Let the trumpets sound!!!   Just kidding.  I'm just a little "Juiced" about it.)

Final section, I haven't given it enough thought to accept or deny.  For me, the turning point will be to actually conceptualize what form the "Magnetic" field will be in, while in true space, with no mass around to alter it.  I'm sure you have seen the "Curl" experiments that prove that the "Field Lines" actually look like "Springs" when viewed in 3D.  This rotational effect can be very difficult to incorporate into design work, as 2D paper can't even display such, but that is, at least, correct experimental data.  As I said, a lot to think about and I await more information as, in a way, this is related to a description of the aether.  I'm sure we can agree that a magnetic field has an effect on such a thing, one way or another, and that is a common starting point for a new analysis.  Whether that is the basis or not, at least we have a solid picture to develop from....

To all, forgive these long posts, but I feel that the information is worth the typing.  If you disagree, feel free to skip it as this whole thing is "Assuming" an aether, but may offer methods for a true "Proof" to be devised.  That is my ultimate hope.
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 9
 :)
I ave found this discussion in a Italian forum:
http://www.energeticambiente.it/discussioni-su-teorie-personaggi-e-tecniche/14721590-letere-moderno.html
One investigator has found a way to detect the 'ether.
Thancs
Leo48
   
Group: Guest
Mainstream science uses this credo.

When the facts do not line up with the theory, the facts must go!!

I see it happen all the time. I would much rather see facts than listen to someone's guess.

E=mc2 does not allow for ether. Or does it?

E=((m)(c/a))2

E= energy
m= mass
c= velocity of the speed of light
a= aether density

 8)






There is an ether.  All camps agree.  It's just that mainstream science calls it zero point energy or the zero point field, or virtual particles, or quantum vacuum field fluctuations. There are hundreds of tesla colis in operation today that prove the existence of the ether. 
   
Group: Guest
GFT, your quote above, is that Ken Wheeler?
   
Group: Guest
GFT, your quote above, is that Ken Wheeler?

Funny you mentioned that.  I clicked on a link a poster provided and did a quick cursory look at Wheeler's book.
Very interesting.  Many of his observations coincide with my own.   I have to sit down and read it in depth.  My theory says that it is the magnetic field that is the basis of all electrical phenomena.  Mainstream science says it is the electrical field.

Anyway, I want to post this quote he quoted in his book  that pretty much hits the nail on the head.

“The word Ether has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics only because its past association with opposition to
relativity. This is unfortunate because stripped of these connotations, it nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. The modern concept of vacuum space confirmed by every experiment is a relativistic Ether. But we do not call it this because Ether is a taboo term.”
-
Robert B. Laughlin
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2021-12-07, 11:59:51