PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-04-20, 18:49:40
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
Author Topic: Transatlantic Telluric Communication Experiment  (Read 8941 times)

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543
And for a longitudinal wave, to know the frequency, we must know its speed of propagation in the earth.
What is it ?


Per Nikola Tesla, US Patent 787412:   https://patents.google.com/patent/US787412A/en
Quote
The most essential requirement is, however, that irrespective of frequency the wave or wave-train should continue for acertain interval of time, which I have estimated to be not less than one-twelfth or probably 0.08484 of a second and which is taken in passing to and returning from the region diametrically opposite the pole over the earths surface with a mean velocity of about four hundred and seventy-one thousand two hundred and forty kilometers per second.

Note that the ratio is approx. PI/2 times faster than the expected transverse velocity.

Also note the measurement is not a complete fluke, as it is in-agreement with Eric Dollard's model and measurements here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNFpJVpm9Cs
as well as Charles Wheatstone's measurements of 288,000 miles per second.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
That was Wheatstone's 3-sparks experiment:

https://books.google.com/books?id=xMMRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11&dq=288000+miles+per+second&source=bl&ots=wMRQ4QoQ8y&sig=ACfU3U3QVHnqX-_kgVLNxbqVtK72x0kzdQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiWgMjty_v5AhVELUQIHZL1Cjg4ChDoAXoECAUQAw#v=onepage&q=288000%20miles%20per%20second&f=false

He discharged a Leyden jar through 4 miles of wire and they reported this as the speed of electricity.

There was another experiment that indicated electricity traveled from each end of a wire, using two spark gaps.  If this is so, then Wheatstone's results may be questionable.  I forget who made this other experiment.

   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543
That was Wheatstone's 3-sparks experiment:

https://books.google.com/books?id=xMMRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11&dq=288000+miles+per+second&source=bl&ots=wMRQ4QoQ8y&sig=ACfU3U3QVHnqX-_kgVLNxbqVtK72x0kzdQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiWgMjty_v5AhVELUQIHZL1Cjg4ChDoAXoECAUQAw#v=onepage&q=288000%20miles%20per%20second&f=false

Thanks Grumpy.  It's been a while so I didn't have the links handy.

I did just find a more streamlined copy of the same setup here:   http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Main/WheatstoneExperimentsToMeasureTheVelocityOfElectricity


I don't consider Wheatstone's to be definitive, I just mention because it's within close margin to the other experiments. ;)


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 22
My understanding of pi/2 x c is that it is a relative velocity. You'll notice in the patent Hakasays links to Tesla is talking about being diametrically opposed to the transmitter. The path the "LMD" wave takes is through the Earth as opposed to around it. Pi is defined as the circumference to diameter of a circle so if we are on the diametrically opposite side of the Earth the effective distance is a factor of pi/2 the distance travelled by the TEM waves around the Earth.

This pi/2 turns up in the extra coil when the height to diameter ratio is roughly equal. In this case our LMD wave travels between the conductors. So we have a TEM wave which is propagated with an effective velocity of roughly c but out LMD takes a short cut in a solenoid. Different height to diameter ratios give different propagation velocities.

The whole point of me saying this is for you F6, c isnt being broken even though it appears this way. This is what Dollard's velocity factor is all about. It takes some time to comb through all his work. I've been doing it for more than a decade on and off. I get the feeling you aren't that familiar with his work and would benefit from understanding his perspective because it's the perspective that is being shared in this thread.

https://www.gestaltreality.com/energy-synthesis/eric-dollard/ is a good place to see a lot of it.
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543

(regarding     "Tesla's patent quote : ... over the earth's surface with a mean velocity of about 471,240km/s")
Proof ?

Proof is for mathematics, evidence is for science.

1:  Much of Tesla's Colorado Springs notes showed Tesla focused on gathering numeric experimental data.  The number of significant digits in his value suggests either a derived or measured velocity, and based on earlier work it's not a huge stretch to hypothesize that value was a measured one.
2:  The value is not an arbitrary value, but of a specific geometric ratio.
3:  It approximates the same ratio encountered when building transverse+longitudinal network analogues which have been replicated by others.  (https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4344.msg100515;topicseen#msg100515)

Quote
Not science, but at the level of the tinkerer in his garage. Where is the theory (logical text and circumstantiated statements with the appropriate equations), or where are the measurements of a longitudinal wave signal across the earth?

“Mathematics is an experimental science, and definitions do not come first, but later on.”  — Oliver Heaviside :P



In my upcoming experiments, I will be leveraging the time synchronization service provided by the GPS satellite network in order to establish a clear time-of-flight between transmitting and receiving stations.

I performed some preliminary experiments with a pair of isolated GPS-disciplined oscillators that resulted in single-pulse precision within 150nS, and long-term (30min) statistical precision within 20-30nS.   1ns = approximately 1 light-foot.
More than adequate to get several decimals worth of precision in a 2-5 mile test. ;D


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543
To come back to the subject, this is why Dollard's or Tesla's longitudinal wave theories, not formalized by mathematics, are not physical theories, and consequently no technology has emerged from them.

The mathematics and relations are already present, which is why we can approach the same solution using a circuit simulator.

Quote from: F6FLT
The speed of pi/2 x c is contrary to relativity. So relativity is not valid anymore.

Could you explain exactly why you believe this to be the case?

Special relativity (which I assume is the relativity you're referring to) is simply an expression of the ratio of energy to mass.  E = MC^2.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1981
...
Special relativity (which I assume is the relativity you're referring to) is simply an expression of the ratio of energy to mass.  E = MC^2.
Is this a joke?

See attached file.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543
Does an electromagnetic wave have mass?   If so, what proportion of that wave lies in the electrostatic component and how much lies in the magnetic field component?
(IE: what is the mass of a coulomb and weber?)

The goal at any rate is to explain why energy appear to propagate more quickly in the electrostatic field than is does through the magnetic:  https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4344.msg100543;topicseen#msg100543

I have my own thoughts on the matter relating to Coulomb force being a mathematically extraluminal function (contains no factors relating to velocity).  I'm sure there are other factors as well.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543
Measuring propagation speed of Coulomb fields
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3355-3

Quote
The problem of gravity propagation has been subject of discussion for quite a long time: Newton, Laplace and, in relatively more modern times, Eddington pointed out that, if gravity propagated with finite velocity, planet motion around the sun would become unstable due to a torque originating from time lag of the gravitational interactions. Such an odd behavior can be found also in electromagnetism, when one computes the propagation of the electric fields generated by a set of uniformly moving charges. As a matter of fact the Liénard–Weichert retarded potential leads to the same formula as the one obtained assuming that the electric field propagate with infinite velocity.

Quote
In Space, Time and Gravitation Eddington discusses [1] the problem of gravity propagation. He remarks that if gravity propagated with finite velocity the motion of the planets around the Sun would become unstable, due to a torque acting on the planets. The problem was already known to Newton and was examined by Laplace [2], who calculated a lower limit for the gravity propagation velocity, finding a value much larger than the speed of light.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2625
Hakasays
Quote
The problem of gravity propagation has been subject of discussion for quite a long time: Newton, Laplace and, in relatively more modern times, Eddington pointed out that, if gravity propagated with finite velocity, planet motion around the sun would become unstable due to a torque originating from time lag of the gravitational interactions.

It is problematic when most confuse something with a condition of something.

For example, imagine were underwater in a pool floating upside down with our feet at the surface of the water and our head pointing down towards the bottom. Then someone at the bottom of the pool releases a cork and an air bubble. We see the cork and bubble as supposedly falling, moving from above our head towards a surface at our feet just like gravity. 

We could then ask what is the velocity or propagation of the force which seemed to "attract" all these objects to the surface at our feet?. Well, nothing propagated nor was anything attracted to anything else, our mind created this illusion. Which explains why nobody could ever explain gravity because they were looking for some thing which doesn't exist. Conceptually gravity is very similar buoyancy only the conditions, forces and the medium have changed.

Now let's get creative, suppose every object or planet was like the surface or air/water interface of our pool only it's spherical. Likewise every distant space devoid of matter like the depth of our pool. We could imagine the movement of any objects due to buoyancy would look almost identical to gravity. Yet there is no force of attraction to other objects present because the force is not coming from the objects themselves but the space there immersed in. That's the kicker isn't it?.

Strange as it may seem I was reading Einsteins work when I figured out what the Primary Fields are and how they work. I had to take a break because the concepts are difficult to wrap our mind around so I made a coffee and went outside to watch the stars. This was when it occurred to me Einstein, as he later admitted, didn't understand what the primary fields are. So he used analogies supposing that space and time could be variable instead of some unknowns he had no knowledge of. In fact, it works and Einsteins analogies describe what should happen in most instances but lacks the details to describe what happens in reality.

Regards
AC



---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1981
Does an electromagnetic wave have mass?   If so, what proportion of that wave lies in the electrostatic component and how much lies in the magnetic field component?
...

What moves at speed c cannot have mass, again, see Einstein.
A photon having an energy h*ν where ν is the frequency, one can always write mc²=h*ν and deduce from it a rest mass m, but that brings strictly nothing.

On the other hand the field is subject to the curvature of space-time, and the energy that can be drawn from it, too, so an EM wave is deflected by a planet or a star.

The energy is equally distributed in both fields, they are coupled, which is why radio antennas can have equivalent performance, whether they use the electric or magnetic field, although in general the electric field will be used, for ease of realization.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543
What moves at speed c cannot have mass, again, see Einstein.

A photon having an energy h*ν where ν is the frequency, one can always write mc²=h*ν and deduce from it a rest mass m, but that brings strictly nothing.

If M = 0 in the case of a resonating circuit or traveling wave, then that energy is not a real mass in this case but a mathematical/virtual mass.  In that case the 'speed limit' of E=MC^2 doesn't exactly apply.

There is some theoretical and experimental evidence supporting the possibility in academia, whether it is true or not remains-to-be-seen.  https://www.science.org/content/article/neutrinos-travel-faster-light-according-one-experiment



E=HV and mc²=h*ν  are actually personal favorites of mine due to their higher-order ramifications relating to parametrics and symmetry. ;D ;D

* Observed redshift/blueshift represents a real gain/loss of energy from a given reference frame.
* An increase/decrease in frequency of a photon or LC circuit represents real gain/loss of energy (again, viewed from a given reference frame).
* Energy can massed or mass-less (energy stored inside a capacitor or compressed spring, vs energy traveling in a microwave transmission).  Alternatively, you could say that mass can be real or virtual.

But this is a deeper-order topic though that really needs its own thread. :P


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
Propagation Speed of Longitudinally Oscillating Gravitational and Electrical Fields
William D. Walker and J. Dual

   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543
Oh well.  Better to release a paper and have it fixed than hide something anomalous because it's not well-explained. O0

Nothing has gone beyond c yet.
Correct.  Waves are not things. :P


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543
Small update:

* I've been pondering the most bang-for-the-buck in terms of maximizing ground contact-area and think I have a decent solution.  Gonna try renting a long trenching tool and using that to drop a nice fat sheet of copper or stainless steel at least 16in into the ground.    It's not as good as burying a steel tank, but it's a lot less earth to move.

* For short (1-3mi) and mid (100-200mi) reception, I'm setting up a shielded Tesla Coil to a Raspberry-Pi-based SDR receiver.  That way our group has 24/7 access to test reception. :)  It will be tuned to 160m amateur radio band, partly due to the legal spectrum allocation and transmission power limits in this band, and partly because the wire length makes it more reasonable for others to wind coils in this region.

* Sadly the day-job has been picking up this month.  I hope to at least have the SDR up and running before I have to head back on the road.
I want to get some VNA ground data gathered as well so I can try to extrapolate the LC parameters and of water/soil into a transmission line model while away from the shop.


Always welcome to useful ideas/suggestions to help guide construction. ;)


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543
Finally found a good mounting box to finish assembling the SDR receiver today. :)   I'll be away on work for a while so will be leaving it configured for 24/7 reception on the 160m band.  One of my colleagues may try to ping off it in the interim :)

I left some room internally so I can add a battery backup power supply at some point, and/or a datalogging drive for remote work.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1981
...
Correct.  Waves are not things. :P

Prove it!


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1981
Propagation Speed of Longitudinally Oscillating Gravitational and Electrical Fields
William D. Walker and J. Dual

Basically, it's my idea of a charged balloon that you vibrate. I haven't abandoned it but I'm thinking of a more efficient device than the sphere (piezzo?).

The idea that the wave would propagate at more than c has no basis. The coulombic field of a charge at constant speed moves simultaneously with the charge, but when there is acceleration, this is no longer the case, the coulombic field is only "updated" with a delay t=d/c. This is the classic problem of retarded potentials. They are transmitted at the speed c, as are gravitational waves. This is what is predicted by general relativity, and it is what was measured by the comparison between gravity waves and gamma rays detected simultaneously in 2017, during cosmic events generating both at the same time (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GW170817).


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543
Quote
The idea that the wave would propagate at more than c has no basis.
The basis (operating principle) would be that transverse and longitudinal waves propagate at different velocities:  https://sciencing.com/transverse-vs-longitudinal-waves-whats-the-difference-w-examples-13721565.html

Anomalous apparent velocities are covered in the transverse-vs-longitudinal thread, including an experimental simulation and observation protocol: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4344.0

Multiple recent amateur experiments measuring velocity of propagation also tend to record anomalous early results that may correspond to this as well (thanks Grumpy!): https://youtu.be/oI_X2cMHNe0?t=1219




Please move off-topic commentary to another thread.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1981
The basis (operating principle) would be that transverse and longitudinal waves propagate at different velocities:  https://sciencing.com/transverse-vs-longitudinal-waves-whats-the-difference-w-examples-13721565.html

Anomalous apparent velocities are covered in the transverse-vs-longitudinal thread, including an experimental simulation and observation protocol: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4344.0

Multiple recent amateur experiments measuring velocity of propagation also tend to record anomalous early results that may correspond to this as well (thanks Grumpy!): https://youtu.be/oI_X2cMHNe0?t=1219

...

The first link deals with generalities about transverse or longitudinal waves, nothing new.

I don't see how the second link would be experimental evidence of exceeding the c speed.

As for the video, it doesn't claim to exceed c either, but explains what every body here should already know: the electrical signal is mainly in the wave that travels at almost c along the line, the energy is mainly in the field, especially in the magnetic field that accompanies any current forming the same reality. No scientist disputes this. The wave goes much faster than the electrons. This video would rather challenge the longitudinal wave, since the magnetic field is transverse to the current.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543
I don't see how the second link would be experimental evidence of exceeding the c speed.

How familiar are you with using circuit analogues to represent(simulate) transmission lines?

Essentially what we're doing on the bench is using equivalent components to simulate much larger systems.
As long as the inductance and capacitance (and resistance and conductance) are equivalent, the simulated line will behave the same as the actual 10+ mile transmission line in real life.

As for the video, the focus is not on the primary wave that travels at approximately C and peaks at 20v on the scope, but the 5v peak that occurs some significant time before this (highlighted in the screenshot).
Other replicators who have done the same experiment on Youtube have reported similar results, and I can post them as well if you're interested.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1567
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink
Quote
The idea that the wave would propagate at more than c has no basis.
But since 'Spooky action at a distance' is proven and has been seen then anywhere close to c or above is usable.
This is not radio.


---------------------------
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1981
But since 'Spooky action at a distance' is proven and has been seen then anywhere close to c or above is usable.

"above c is usable". It is false, and well known that it is false:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-communication_theorem



---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543
"above c is usable". It is false, and well known that it is false:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-communication_theorem

Until we have a clear picture of exactly *how* entanglement works on a fundamental level, it seems premature to make assumptions about what is and isn't possible with it.

If light is a electromagnetic wave, and Bell's theorem proves light has an extraluminal component, then is perhaps the electrostatic field is behaving extraluminally?  Or the magnetic?  Or is there a third undiscovered field/force that propagates extraluminally$
It is quite the conundrum.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1981
Until we have a clear picture of exactly *how* entanglement works on a fundamental level, it seems premature to make assumptions about what is and isn't possible with it.
...

The no-communication theorem comes from the quantum theory, and the quantum theory predicts well the observation results.
It is not a question of the unknown, but of a perfectly formalized context, quantum mechanics. For it is indeed quantum mechanics to which Einstein's quote "Spooky action at a distance", by Giantkiller, referred.

The no-communication theorem is a logical consequence of the formalism, therefore if "c" was exceeded for communication, the theory of quantum mechanics would have to be abandoned, and relativity too, and alternative theories would be needed to explain what otherwise QM and relativity explained perfectly.

It reminds me of the puzzle story https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=79.msg74454#msg74454, where one of the two protagonists always wants to believe in the existence of what he is looking for or believes, in the remaining unknown. Not the right method, in any case it is the opposite of science which is to model what is observed.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-04-20, 18:49:40