Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tesla's ether theories and longitudinal waves explained in "Wardenclyffe"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • lamare
    replied
    Originally posted by kyle_dellaquila View Post
    Awe, thank you for the birthday wishes
    It is truly wonderful to have my first posts on the Energetic Forum be on such a mind expanding thread/conversation.
    As this thread will continue, I will do my best at illustrating the areas of interest. Correct me if anything appears misleading to the visual interpretations..

    Electric phenomena:
    1) State
    2) Effect

    In terms of electric effects:
    1) Opposite in character
    2) Neutralizing each other
    ZSUFIa0.png
    TwbtHOj.png

    "If we speak of electric effects we must distinguish two such effects, opposite in character and neutralizing each other, as observation shows that two such opposite effects exist. This is unavoidable, for in a medium of the properties of ether, we cannot possibly exert a strain, or produce a displacement or motion of any kind, without causing in the surrounding medium an equivalent and opposite effect. But if we speak of electricity, meaning a thing, we must, I think, abandon the idea of two electricities, as the existence of two such things is highly improbable. For how can we imagine that there should be two things, equivalent in amount, alike in their properties, but of opposite character, both clinging to matter, both attracting and completely neutralizing each other?
    [...]
    If there is such a thing as electricity, there can be only one such thing, and; excess and want of that one thing, possibly; but more probably its condition determines the positive and negative character."


    -Nikola Tesla

    What is that condition?
    (option A) Is it the variations of "medium" density that defines the opposite character?
    (option B) or does the medium clump around matter regardless of the polarity.
    1qe48Jf.png
    (option C) Polarity is not a (primary) electric effect, but either magnetic in nature or the result of standing longitudinal waves.


    I posted some video's a couple of days ago, a/o involving experiments with "static" charged objects as well as with sound waves, the analog of Tesla waves in the aether. The experiment with a balloon and a loudspeaker shows that one can have an attractive force due to longitudinal waves under particular circumstances.

    The current interpretation of experiments with "statically charged" objects is that two kinds of charges exist, which are called positive and negative. Obviously, these macroscopic experiments need to be explained, but that in no way implies that we need to have two kinds of "charge" at the fundamental level. In fact, it is the insistence that there must be two fundamental types of "charges" that prohibits the consideration that the aether simply is a kind of gas/fluid like medium that has a certain mass density (currently called "electric permittivity") and a certain viscosity (currently called "magnetic permeability").

    When we let go of the idea that charge is fundamentally polarized and consider that the only way one can have "distinguishable entities" (wave-particle duality) within a fluid-like medium is by means of vortex rings, the conclusion that particles must consist out of a number of vortex rings is almost unescapable. And since a vortex ring has two axes of rotation, it can give rise to two kinds of polarity, which are thus magnetic and not electric in nature.

    This way, the polarity problem can be resolved, without getting into trouble with having an electrical neutral medium, the aether.



    Note that in the right picture, there are +'s en -'s. This can just as well be relative to the background (pressure), like X+y and X-y.

    Also, the details of what "current" is, is a lot more complex than just having "charge carriers" flowing trough a wire. In fact, at higher frequencies most of the energy flows in the space surrounding the conductor (where there are no "charge carriers") and Elmore has shown it is even possible to have a guided EM wave such that "real" current density is actually zero, thus yielding a very low loss method of transmitting energy and/or information:

    http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Patents/Elmor...0Conductor.pdf

    Furthermore, since according to (the original formulation of) Ampere's law, "current density" is (proportional to) the curl of the magnetic field [B] and Tesla's longitudinal wave is like a sound-wave that has no rotation/curl and therefore no magnetic field, it by definition has no "current density", so in that case the idea that these kinds of waves are directly caused by c.q. consist of movements of "charge carriers" actually makes no sense at all.


    Ernst & Tesla are suggesting that this "medium" is of a gaseous nature comprised of neutral particles and should follow the "ideal gas law".
    WCcMPHd.png
    If electricity is of a gaseous medium, one would be able to abstract electricity/heat from the surrounding environment.
    0sTWFiL.png
    -Kyle Dell'Aquila

    The interesting thing is that this would go for the aether itself as well, given that it is found to behave like a gas/fluid.

    Last edited by lamare; 09-15-2020, 08:50 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lamare
    replied
    Originally posted by Ernst View Post
    In the model I described here, any electrical effect, including charge is NOT a property of ANY particle. Electricity is a medium that, through its interaction with matter causes apparent charge. The presence of matter withing this medium can cause a change in this medium that we commonly refer to as an electric field. This field is centred around a particle, but the particle barely plays any role in it. Electricity ("the medium" in Tesla's writings) clings to matter, as Tesla describes it.
    What IS charge?

    Paul Stowe found a relation between the charge of a particle and it's mass. This ratio yields a (characteristic) frequency along:

    f = q / m.

    This relation seems to hold for the electron, given the frequency for the electron seems to match observed cosmic microwave background, apart from red shift. I'm beginning to doubt it also holds for the proton, but the idea is that a "charged" particle oscillates longitudinally. It rythmically contracts and expands and thus emits a longitudinal superluminal Tesla wave in the medium, the aether. And because one cannot have negatieve frequencies, "charge" cannot be polarized.

    Now since the result of the presence of a "charged" particle is the presence of such a longitudinal "sound" wave in the aether, along Huygens' principle one can see that as (distributed) "apparent charge". And an electric field then simply IS such a longitudinal Tesla "sound" wave. This way, one does not need to consider electricity itself as a separate medium.

    One can see a "charged particle" as a sort of antenna for longitudinal waves, both receiving and transmitting these Tesla waves at the same time. Thus, charged particles do not emit a sound-wave whereby the energy needed to do so comes out of nowhere, but exchange energy continously across the Universe by means of resonance.

    So, charged particles have a characteristic oscillation frequency that is a property of such a particle, while "charge" itself is an electrical effect, namely the presence of a Tesla wave and associated contractions/expansions of the medium. Thus, charge itself is indeed not a property of any particle nor of the medium, the aether.


    It does seem that both these longitudinal waves as well as it's electromagnetic counterpart is guidable along a conductor, so their indeed seems to be an effect that "clings to matter", or better: "material".


    In the Earth, being a large lump of matter, there is a lot of electricity (read "gaseous medium immersed in the ether") because of pressure from solar radiation among other cosmic causes, some of this electricity gets displaced into our atmosphere, not bound to any matter. A shockwave caused by a discharge of more than a million volts (I do not know the exact minimum required potential, but it is near 1 MV) can "condense" this electricity onto gas molecules (ionize) thus creating an electrical charge.
    This is where things get tricky. You equate electricity to a "gaseous medium", which thus necessarily consists of some kind of particles, which must adhere to the wave-particle duality principle if they are to be real particles and thus one obtains a nice can of worms to sort out. Why the desire for a "gaseous medium" on top of the medium we already have, the aether?


    This is the reason why discharges of such voltages can bridge distances far greater than the usual 1 meter per 1 MV. (see lightning; stepped leader)
    The interesting bit now is, that you don't need to have a single 1MV discharge, but with the sawtooth modulated on an RF high potential, you can do the same thing, splitting the one big step into many smaller steps as it were. (see QCW Tesla coil)
    This is definately an interesting phenomenon.


    You really, really need to see our book. I can offer it to you for 30 EUR if you pay to my Dutch bank account or in crypto or paypal.
    SPECIAL Energetic Forum Offer
    I can make the same offer to anyone in Europe or the US, in the US perhaps Kyle can offer more options
    Drop me a PM if you are interested.
    (you should be!!! )

    Ernst.
    My birthday is coming up at the end of the month. Usually, I don't have a wish list since I don't know what to ask. This year, I've got three books on my wish list, all by the same author.

    Leave a comment:


  • kyle_dellaquila
    replied
    A conductive point producing displacement in oil when a sudden discharge occurs beneath the oil regardless of polarity:
    282QNRe.jpg
    An infrared thermometer pointing at a coil. Note the momentary raise in temperature when the coil is switched on (in constant-wave) and then switched off:
    nyAPa6z.png
    Low versus high frequency – the medium accumulating/clumping around around the terminal regardless of the polarity:
    10H3KDb.png
    HI0nYFW.png

    -Kyle Dell'Aquila
    Last edited by kyle_dellaquila; 09-15-2020, 04:31 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ernst
    replied
    Two experiments (almost) anyone can do (at your own risk! I am not accepting ANY responsibility for experiments that anyone does even if inspired or even suggested by me in this thread!):
    1
    A high voltage capacitor is kept under a very thin oil and charged to its maximum potential, then discharged through a magnetically quenched spark gap. (I have tried with a normal spark gap without success, it had to be a magnetically quenched gap). While the capacitor discharges hold a conductive rod near the oil surface (not touching the oil) and you will see circular waves on the oil surface centred around the tip of the rod. A non-conductive rod has no effect, a conductive rod produces the waves.
    Why? The electricity moving in and out of the capacitor drags air molecules along, creating small pushes on the oil surface. When a conductor is held near the electricity prefers to follow the conductor. Thus near the tip of the conductor, the pushes are much stronger than in other places on the surface. As you can imagine the leads of the capacitor can also cause waves that will distort the visibility of this effect. To avoid that I used aluminium strips clamped to the glass container (also to avoid movement).
    This also shows that (most) electricity flows along conductors, not through.
    2
    Take a Tesla coil and an IR-thermometer. Measure the temperature of or near the top-load.
    while doing so, switch the coil on. Electricity now gets compressed and thus rises in temperature. You should measure a short temperature spike while switching on.
    While the coil is on the thermometer will return to the same value it showed when the coil was switched off.
    Now, switch the coil off. Electricity now expands and cools. You should see a short-lasting temperature drop.
    This confirms
    - that electricity follows the ideal gas law
    - (option B) or does the medium clump around matter regardless of the polarity. (see Kyle's post above)

    Remember our (temporary) promotion:

    SPECIAL Energetic Forum Offer
    The book "Wardenclyffe" for only 30 EUR
    if you live in Europ or the US and pay to my Dutch bank account or in crypto or paypal.
    Drop me a PM if you are interested.


    Ernst.

    Leave a comment:


  • kyle_dellaquila
    replied
    Awe, thank you for the birthday wishes
    It is truly wonderful to have my first posts on the Energetic Forum be on such a mind expanding thread/conversation.
    As this thread will continue, I will do my best at illustrating the areas of interest. Correct me if anything appears misleading to the visual interpretations..

    Electric phenomena:
    1) State
    2) Effect

    In terms of electric effects:
    1) Opposite in character
    2) Neutralizing each other
    ZSUFIa0.png
    TwbtHOj.png
    "If we speak of electric effects we must distinguish two such effects, opposite in character and neutralizing each other, as observation shows that two such opposite effects exist. This is unavoidable, for in a medium of the properties of ether, we cannot possibly exert a strain, or produce a displacement or motion of any kind, without causing in the surrounding medium an equivalent and opposite effect. But if we speak of electricity, meaning a thing, we must, I think, abandon the idea of two electricities, as the existence of two such things is highly improbable. For how can we imagine that there should be two things, equivalent in amount, alike in their properties, but of opposite character, both clinging to matter, both attracting and completely neutralizing each other?
    [...]
    If there is such a thing as electricity, there can be only one such thing, and; excess and want of that one thing, possibly; but more probably its condition determines the positive and negative character."
    -Nikola Tesla

    What is that condition?
    (option A) Is it the variations of "medium" density that defines the opposite character?
    (option B) or does the medium clump around matter regardless of the polarity.
    1qe48Jf.png
    CDUo8Pk.png
    Ernst & Tesla are suggesting that this "medium" is of a gaseous nature comprised of neutral particles and should follow the "ideal gas law".
    WCcMPHd.png
    If electricity is of a gaseous medium, one would be able to abstract electricity/heat from the surrounding environment.
    0sTWFiL.png
    -Kyle Dell'Aquila

    Leave a comment:


  • Ernst
    replied
    The "condensing" of electricity into electrical charge idea needs further thought, IMHO. From my point of view, "charge" is a property of certain particles, which appear to emit a Tesla wave at a specific, characteristic frequency. This is distinctly different from Maxwell's idea of displacement current and charges, spatial "charges". Charged particles are real entities, which cause a certain pressure to be present in the medium because of their oscillation and emission of a Tesla wave. By considering the wave itself to also involve oscillating "charge", you are conceptually mixing things up. Along Huygens' principle, it is not wrong to consider any point in the space a propagating Tesla wave propagates trough as being "charged", but it adds a certain complexity to the picture that is unecessary, as far as I can tell.
    In the model I described here, any electrical effect, including charge is NOT a property of ANY particle. Electricity is a medium that, through its interaction with matter causes apparent charge. The presence of matter withing this medium can cause a change in this medium that we commonly refer to as an electric field. This field is centred around a particle, but the particle barely plays any role in it. Electricity ("the medium" in Tesla's writings) clings to matter, as Tesla describes it.
    In the Earth, being a large lump of matter, there is a lot of electricity (read "gaseous medium immersed in the ether") because of pressure from solar radiation among other cosmic causes, some of this electricity gets displaced into our atmosphere, not bound to any matter. A shockwave caused by a discharge of more than a million volts (I do not know the exact minimum required potential, but it is near 1 MV) can "condense" this electricity onto gas molecules (ionize) thus creating an electrical charge. This is the reason why discharges of such voltages can bridge distances far greater than the usual 1 meter per 1 MV. (see lightning; stepped leader)
    The interesting bit now is, that you don't need to have a single 1MV discharge, but with the sawtooth modulated on an RF high potential, you can do the same thing, splitting the one big step into many smaller steps as it were. (see QCW Tesla coil)

    You really, really need to see our book. I can offer it to you for 30 EUR if you pay to my Dutch bank account or in crypto or paypal.
    SPECIAL Energetic Forum Offer
    I can make the same offer to anyone in Europe or the US, in the US perhaps Kyle can offer more options
    Drop me a PM if you are interested.
    (you should be!!! )

    Ernst.

    Leave a comment:


  • lamare
    replied
    Originally posted by Ernst View Post
    As Kyle is celebrating his birthday this weekend ! It may take a while before he sorts out the image-posting-trick.
    Easiest is to host the images yourself on a webserver. Then you can simply link to them using the image button. I can spare some MBs on my server if you need hosting. Drop me a mail or PM and I can make an account for you.

    Leave a comment:


  • lamare
    replied
    Originally posted by Ernst View Post
    As I stated in a post, 2 (?) years ago, there is a common theme in projects that claim "free energy", namely a saw-tooth (slow rise/sharp fall) AM-modulated on an RF high voltage signal.
    Why would that be?
    Because electricity, being a gaseous medium, will follow the ideal gas law. Notice that so-called electron gas does not follow this law because of the strong interactions of the constituting particles. But Tesla's medium is made up of neutral particles and therefore will follow this law. This medium is much closer to what modern science calls photon gas.
    So if you compress this gas (electricity), it will get hot and when you expand it, it will cool down.
    The trick is to slowly compress it, so it will not get hot and then suddenly expand it so it will cool down. That is what the saw-tooth AM-modulation does.
    Now, why would you want to cool electricity?
    Because then it will attract heat from the environment and thus gain energy. Also through the suddenness, it will create a sort of shock wave that will "condense" electricity into electrical charge.
    (again, to see this process explained and beautifully illustrated, see "Wardenclyffe" )
    I have done small scale/low power experiments with this and found that even a very small electrical streamer of only a few cm (maybe about 1 inch for the imperial inclined) will produce copious amounts of ozone in a very short time. Demonstrating a powerful electrical interaction with the environment, comparable with coils of a few KW.
    This gain of energy and electrical charge can serve as a source of energy.
    This is a great find!

    It seems to connect to the experiments of Ron Stiffler and others as well, like Bedini and Hackenberger (Gray) who also worked with characteristic BEMF spikes.


    A couple of years ago, Dr. Ron Stiffler, performed quite a lot of experiments with his "SEC" exciter. I made a mirror of his website:

    http://www.tuks.nl/Mirror/Dr_Stiffle...citer.htm.html

    https://www.youtube.com/user/StifflerDr/videos

    Here a short video by Ben Brandwood on this, also talking about cooling effects:



    It seems LaserSaber's experiments were inspired by Ron:

    https://www.youtube.com/user/lasersaber/videos

    These two are particularly interesting:




    It seems your idea also connects to those "disruptive discharges" Tesla talked about, the sudden discharge of a capacitor: working with impulses and Tesla's single wire transmission line. I've recently measured the waveforms one obtains by discharging a capacitor into two identical single wire transmission lines and found a propagation speed well over 1.5 times the speed of light:

    http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Ma...ansmissionLine

    So, it seems the impulses obtained by a sudden discharge of a capacitor involves that "sudden expansion" you are talking about, probably with associated cooling effects, as well. Note that the impulses I measured on the two lines are not symmetrical, contrary to what one would expect.


    The "condensing" of electricity into electrical charge idea needs further thought, IMHO. From my point of view, "charge" is a property of certain particles, which appear to emit a Tesla wave at a specific, characteristic frequency. This is distinctly different from Maxwell's idea of displacement current and charges, spatial "charges". Charged particles are real entities, which cause a certain pressure to be present in the medium because of their oscillation and emission of a Tesla wave. By considering the wave itself to also involve oscillating "charge", you are conceptually mixing things up. Along Huygens' principle, it is not wrong to consider any point in the space a propagating Tesla wave propagates trough as being "charged", but it adds a certain complexity to the picture that is unecessary, as far as I can tell.
    Last edited by lamare; 09-12-2020, 09:36 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ernst
    replied
    As Kyle is celebrating his birthday this weekend ! It may take a while before he sorts out the image-posting-trick.
    So, where was I?
    Oh, yes, electricity is a gaseous medium, consisting of electrically neutral particles, immersed in the fluid ether.
    As it is a gaseous medium it can only support longitudinal waves and these are outside of the Maxwell domain of "Herzian waves" as Tesla calls them. These waves are entirely different from electromagnetic waves where electric and magnetic fields interact. In Tesla's waves there is no such interaction, these are simple "sound waves" in the medium (=electricity).
    Yesterday I read about Aaron and Eric's new project: Cosmic Induction Generator 2020 and I am already very excited about it because it can, and most probably will verify many of my project's conclusions. (see "Wardenclyffe" )
    As I stated in a post, 2 (?) years ago, there is a common theme in projects that claim "free energy", namely a saw-tooth (slow rise/sharp fall) AM-modulated on an RF high voltage signal.
    Why would that be?
    Because electricity, being a gaseous medium, will follow the ideal gas law. Notice that so-called electron gas does not follow this law because of the strong interactions of the constituting particles. But Tesla's medium is made up of neutral particles and therefore will follow this law. This medium is much closer to what modern science calls photon gas.
    So if you compress this gas (electricity), it will get hot and when you expand it, it will cool down.
    The trick is to slowly compress it, so it will not get hot and then suddenly expand it so it will cool down. That is what the saw-tooth AM-modulation does.
    Now, why would you want to cool electricity?
    Because then it will attract heat from the environment and thus gain energy. Also through the suddenness, it will create a sort of shock wave that will "condense" electricity into electrical charge.
    (again, to see this process explained and beautifully illustrated, see "Wardenclyffe" )
    I have done small scale/low power experiments with this and found that even a very small electrical streamer of only a few cm (maybe about 1 inch for the imperial inclined) will produce copious amounts of ozone in a very short time. Demonstrating a powerful electrical interaction with the environment, comparable with coils of a few KW.
    This gain of energy and electrical charge can serve as a source of energy.
    While Aaron and Eric are working on a high-power vacuum tube system that will be able to demonstrate this effect, I am working on a digital version to do the same.
    While Eric is a vacuum tube master, I am much more familiar with digital circuits. If I can build a power stage to add to a digital circuit so I can manipulate a few KW, then I can put that into a Tesla coil and later build a microcontroller interface to make the coil do exactly what I want, whatever I want.
    The idea is also, to later build a more powerful power stage, in the order of 50-100KW, to use with the coils in my lab.
    Collecting energy from the environment is one thing, distributing that energy wireless worldwide is another, sending messages wirelessly worldwide is another again. All of that will be possible with the circuit that I am currently working on, and some of these will also be possible with the Cosmic Induction Generator 2020.
    I will open-source my project here in this thread so anyone can join in with ideas and/or copy the project to build your own.
    If we join forces, the next energy conference will rock the world! (or at least the electricity in it )


    Ernst.

    Leave a comment:


  • kyle_dellaquila
    replied
    Hello Everyone! I am the one who aided Ernst with visualizations in the "Wardenclyffe" book.
    So in the spirit of this thread, I thought I would add some pictures to help facilitate the conversation:
    62eR7jI.jpg

    KjIu3Mx.jpg
    bnK9MZx.jpg
    m5JBh5B.jpg

    YMnA57s.jpg
    eOXuFP3.jpg

    -Kyle Dell'Aquila

    (EDIT: I was able to make the images external! Let me know if this method works for posting images)
    Last edited by kyle_dellaquila; 09-13-2020, 07:05 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lamare
    replied
    Originally posted by Ernst View Post
    Thanks! I had come to the same conclusion. Allow me some time, though, to understand your theory.
    I had a preliminary look at your response in your thread and noticed that we have come to the same conclusion regarding the M-M experiment, as well as on some other points.
    (I think you would enjoy my latest book )
    But discussing points where we have different views is obviously more interesting.
    Yesterday I had a first look at your paper and many questions came to mind. Now I re-read your post above and found:

    "Note that the solution F=0 in my paper is incorrect,"

    That was definitely one of the points where you lost me.
    PM-ed you the solution I found. Still needs to be worked out, not of much use to a bigger audience now.


    You also write that your theory cannot explain electric polarity. That is a real pity because that means that your theory is incomplete at best, AND that is the exact thing that I am most interested in.
    Well, that is the big question. For most experiments c.q. applications the polarity of charge is irrelevant, because those are all about differentials in potentials (voltage), which goes for pretty much all electronics as well as Tesla technology and wave mechanics. So, for electrical engineering and radio applications, there is no problem at all as far as I can tell.

    The idea that charge itself is polarized, comes from experiments with "statically charged" spheres, etc. However, if we are correct and the force/field emitted by electrons is indeed such a Tesla wave at a frequency of about 175 GHz for the electron, then in principle this can be validated by experiment. Problem for now is that we can't measure those Tesla waves, especially not at higher frequencies, but that may change. See my experiment with a short coil wound around a short piece of coaxial cable.

    Also, we know that electrons, THE most important "charge carrier", also emit a magnetic field, so there is a) room for interpretation and b) a possibility for experimental verification one way or the other.

    To me, the fact that the computed frequency of the electron seems to match observed cosmic microwave background, apart from red shift, suggests we may very well be correct, while current interpretation is wrong. But time will have to tell.


    Tesla says that electric charge is created in a particle through interaction with "the medium". By "the medium" he refers to a gaseous medium immersed in the fluid ether. But I have not been able to find what exactly that interaction would look like. So that is what I am currently after.
    I am working from the idea that "particles" consist of a number of vortex rings stitched together in various configurations, such as shown in the picture I shared. The most basic particle would be the electron and the working hypothesis at this moment is that an electron can be considered to be a single vortex ring aka toroidal ring:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toroidal_ring_model

    With a toroid, there's two axis of rotation, namely the big R and the small r:

    RingVortex.png
    And it is the combination of these two axis of rotation which give rise to two possible polarizations, which would thus be magnetic in nature and not electric. So, we do have polarization, but it's just in the other half of the Helmholtz decomposition. The rotational, incompressible magnetic half rather than the longitudinal, compressible (di)electric half.


    Stowe wrote some on this, but it needs further thought and refinement:

    http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Ma...AQ#StoweBasics

    This term e, becomes 2P/r in a torroidal topology (predominantly consisting of vortex rings {this is an assumption based on the spinor topology of superstring theories and consistent with the earlier atomic vortex theories}), A=4π2Rr and S=2π2Rr2 {R is the large toroidal radius and r the poloidal axis} and represents an intrinsic fluctuation of the quantized particulate momentum in the limiting volume element.

    So, from my point of view, the "elemental" particle is the single vortex ring, whereby the mass "caught" by the vortex is equal to the mass of the particle and the intereaction between a particle and the medium can be fully described by the physics of the vortex. Now besides the rotational (magnetic) part, it seems that such a vortex ring also oscillates longitudinally, it rythmically contracts and expands and thus emits the analogy of a soundwave in the aether.

    A further interesting detail with respect to a vortex ring is that it's direction of propagation is always perpendicular with respect to the large axis R. This can be seen in a rather interesting yet simple experiment in a swimming pool:



    A steady state vortex ring is known to propagate at a constant speed along its axis of symmetry, which undoubtedly has implications with respect to the relation between the propagation direction and the E and B fields emitted by electrons and other particles:

    https://www.ams.org/journals/tran/19...-0946444-X.pdf



    There are bits and pieces here and there but so far no clear description, and it is possible that Tesla didn't even have a clear picture of this neither.
    This is the best I have found so far:

    "Now, precisely what the ether surrounding the molecules is, wherein it differs from ether in general, can only be conjectured. It cannot differ in density, ether being incompressible; it must, therefore, be under some strain or in motion, and the latter is the most probable."

    This is from 1891, and the problem here is that this is just before he came to realize that electricity is a gaseous medium:

    "But he must remain in doubt as to whether the effects observed are due wholly to the molecules, or atoms, of the gas which chemical analysis discloses to us, or whether there enters into play another medium of a gaseous nature, comprising atoms, or molecules, immersed in a fluid pervading the space. Such a medium, surely must exist,..."
    With the idea that particles and molecules consist out of vortex rings, one comes to a layered model, whereby the model for the medium itself forms the basic medium.

    It is possible to consider a secondary medium level on top of that, which could be equated to a "vortex sponge". Some of Stowe's calculated constants have to do with that idea (a/o Planck's constant, IIRC). He assumes that secondary layer to fill all space (as far as I understand), while I think that secondary layer is limited to spaces wherein "matter" or particles are present. So, in my view Maxwell's "vortex sponge" equates to "space filled with particles", but that's open for discussion.
    Last edited by lamare; 09-09-2020, 02:49 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ernst
    replied
    Thanks! I had come to the same conclusion. Allow me some time, though, to understand your theory.
    I had a preliminary look at your response in your thread and noticed that we have come to the same conclusion regarding the M-M experiment, as well as on some other points.
    (I think you would enjoy my latest book )
    But discussing points where we have different views is obviously more interesting.
    Yesterday I had a first look at your paper and many questions came to mind. Now I re-read your post above and found:
    Note that the solution F=0 in my paper is incorrect,
    That was definitely one of the points where you lost me. You also write that your theory cannot explain electric polarity. That is a real pity because that means that your theory is incomplete at best, AND that is the exact thing that I am most interested in.

    Tesla says that electric charge is created in a particle through interaction with "the medium". By "the medium" he refers to a gaseous medium immersed in the fluid ether. But I have not been able to find what exactly that interaction would look like. So that is what I am currently after.
    There are bits and pieces here and there but so far no clear description, and it is possible that Tesla didn't even have a clear picture of this neither.
    This is the best I have found so far:
    Now, precisely what the ether surrounding the molecules is, wherein it differs from ether in general, can only be conjectured. It cannot differ in density, ether being incompressible; it must, therefore, be under some strain or in motion, and the latter is the most probable.
    This is from 1891, and the problem here is that this is just before he came to realize that electricity is a gaseous medium:
    But he must remain in doubt as to whether the effects observed are due wholly to the molecules, or atoms, of the gas which chemical analysis discloses to us, or whether there enters into play another medium of a gaseous nature, comprising atoms, or molecules, immersed in a fluid pervading the space. Such a medium, surely must exist,...
    Anyway, I will read your paper a few more times, let it sink in, read your posts here and on your thread a couple more times and then I will reply (in your thread).
    I don't want to give some half-baked response.
    I will continue here on Tesla's work!

    Ernst.

    Leave a comment:


  • lamare
    replied
    Originally posted by Ernst View Post
    Yes, there is a lot of work that has been done here.
    I'm a bit unsure how to proceed here because I want to focus on Tesla's theories and I see a number of points where your (Lamare) theory deviates from Tesla's.
    Let's take this discussion over to my thread, then. I'll reply to this in my thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ernst
    replied
    Yes, there is a lot of work that has been done here.
    I'm a bit unsure how to proceed here because I want to focus on Tesla's theories and I see a number of points where your (Lamare) theory deviates from Tesla's.
    You actually sum it up quite nicely in these two points:
    1) The ether behaves like a fluid and should therefore be described as such.
    2) There is only one ether and therefore all forces of nature *must* propagate through that single medium.
    Both Maxwell and Tesla would have a problem with this. (and consequently, you have a problem with their theories).
    This is also why I started a separate thread, so you can expand on your theory without being bothered with my comments which are based on my work trying to recover Tesla's theories.
    I think I have been able to recover quite a bit of that, maybe 90%-ish, but there are still bits and pieces that I have not been able to reconstruct. For that reason, I am also looking at the work of others (such as Koen) and will look at your work as well. Hoping that looking at things from a different perspective will bring new insights.
    That will take some time, for sure.
    Some quick points though....
    If you look at Maxwell's original work (1864, “A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field”) and only rewrite his 20 equations in a modern form, you'll get this:
    1. J tot =J cond + ∂ D/∂t
    2. ∇ A=μH
    3. ∇H =J tot
    4. E=μv H−∂ A /∂t−∇ Φ
    5. D=εE
    6. E=R J cond
    7. ∇⋅D= ρ
    8. ∇⋅J +∂ ρ/∂t=0
    You'll see your "[J] = curl [H]," as equation 3. I think the time variance that you refer to is introduced in eq. 1 as the displacement current?
    You say:
    the actual relation between a magnetic field created by a coil and what happens at it's terminal is by *current*, not voltage. The induced voltage is a result of ohmic resistance of the coil wire and measuring equipment because a current flows.
    An easy experiment comes to mind: Replace the copper secondary of a transformer with zinc (higher resistance, non-magnetic) wire and you should get a higher voltage. Am I correct?

    I have a different way to solve the wave/particle duality which at the same time stays very close to modern QM concepts and ... Tesla's work. I will get into that later.


    Ernst.

    Leave a comment:


  • lamare
    replied
    Originally posted by BroMikey View Post
    This is the kind of read I enjoy. I feel that all these models in the text can be rearranged to find the perfect fit. This is the work of a lifetime. BTW this has been done on the inside of the secret projects, so keep at it as more sharing will be forced to the surface. When equations fill entire books for a single model you have a fraud. The true science of the nature of things has been deliberately clouded or hidden at key times in history.

    There are enough models in the collective to get answers, you know the way.
    Personally, I'm convinced that the discovery that the Helmholtz decomposition, the fundamental theorem of vector calculus, is hidden within the vector LaPlace operator will lead to a revolution in physics.

    This find also has tremendous consequences for fluid dynamics and it is indisputable, since nothing but substituting the terms in the definition of the vector LaPlace operator, the second spatial derivative, with 4 symbols. Two potential fields and two fields of force.

    Working it fully out is a work of a lifetime indeed and comes down to rewriting 150+ years of building upon a broken foundation.
    Last edited by lamare; 09-07-2020, 08:37 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X