Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

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

  • BroMikey
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • lamare
    replied
    Originally posted by Ernst View Post
    Remove those terms and replace them with what?
    We know that a changing magnetic field creates an electric field and vice versa. We use this principle in transformers. You cannot just throw that out of the equation.
    This is a good point, but it's not actually true.

    When you simply throw these terms out and don't replace them with anything else, you indeed loose the thight coupling between the time varying E and B fields. And it is said: "then you only have static fields", but the equations are exactly the same for fluid dynamics and the "static" Maxwell equations, so it's actually BS to state that these equations are static equations.

    The idea that a magnetic field creates an electric field an vice versa is wrong. It comes from experiments with coils and slow varying currents. However, 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. It is this explicit coupling in Maxwell's equations between the E and B field that causes only one resulting wave equation, even though there are three distinctly different wave phenomena:

    1) the "near" field;
    2) the "far" field;
    3) longitudinal waves.

    What happened is that Maxwell entangled Faraday's law with the medium model and that is the root of a lot of problems.

    What you are really looking at with respect to the magnetic field created by a coil is an "irrotational vortex", strange as it may sound:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex...ional_vortices

    And since Ampere's law without time dependent BS can be rewritten to:

    [J] = curl [H],

    We see that what we call "(spatial) current density" actually represents the vorticity ω, apart from a single constant e, the value for elemental charge. This way, all units of measurement make sense and match perfectly to the fluid dynamics domain, and we can actually understand what current IS and why Tesla's wave does NOT have "current".

    However, within a(n irrotational) vortex, you need a force to get the fluid to move in circles. This force is caused by differences in pressure, a pressure gradient. This relates to the electric field by means of a gradient in the scalar potential Phi. So, an electric field is there as well, but it follows from the physics of the vortex and is NOT a fundamental relation whereby the E and B fields are always at a 90 degree angle as forced by the equation curl E = -dB/dt.

    In other words: removing the time dependent terms from Maxwell leaves you with a fluid dynamics model for the medium, whereby the E/B relations associated with the presence of a magnetic field follow from vortex physics. This way, Tesla's longitudinal wave is simply the analogy of a sound wave, while the other two wave phenomena are also quite simple.

    The "near" field is a "transverse" surface wave, which does not radiate itself and is akin to a "water" surface wave, involving both rotational movements as well as longitudinal ones, as shown in this picture:

    WaterWaves.gif

    Elmore has shown that this wave can be guided along a wire and can be used to make a very low loss, very wideband communication system:
    http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Patents/Elmor...0Conductor.pdf



    The "far" field consists of vortex rings, in the case of radio waves these are expanding vortex rings, which is not hard to see from this picture showing the radiation pattern of a Hertzian dipole:

    ElectroMagneticRadiationFromOscillatingDipole.png



    In the case of "particles" and "photons" these rings are stable and do not expand. A number of these vortex rings can be "sticked" together to form "particles", which finally solves that "wave particle duality" mystery:

    dualtorus_big.gif


    Maxwell showed that he could derive the speed of light from the elasticity and density of the ether (the solid part). This has been "translated" into the electric permittivity and magnetic permeability of "the vacuum". Being decoupled from the ether it had to be the same everywhere and for everyone and that led to Relativity and the other madness. Going back to Maxwell's original work, one would immediately understand that there is no reason to assume an equal density of the ether throughout the universe and that variations in this density can easily explain gravitational lensing among other observed phenomena.
    Permittivity can be equated to the mass density of the ether.
    Permeability can be equated to the viscosity of the ether.

    Both are not universal constants, hence no fixed speed of light.

    I think we both are familiar with the work of Koen van Vlaenderen and how he derives two longitudinal wave equations from Maxwell's equations, one electromagnetic and one purely electric. Although I, and many more capable scientists have not been able to point out errors in Koen's work, it leads to things as magnetic potential and thus magnetic monopoles, things I am not willing to accept. The other thing is that he replaces the original Ampere's force law with Whittaker’s force law which is not based on the same ether model as the other equations.
    Maxwell started out with a model of the ether and he shows that all his equations follow from this model, and thus form a consistent unit.
    Yep, I know Koen's work. I was intrigued by the Helmholtz decomposition and noted that neither the scalar nor the magnetic potential have been uniquely defined. After quite some puzzling, I found that the Helmholtz decomposition is actually containted/hidden within the vector LaPlace operator, the second spatial derivative. All I did was take the definition for the vector LaPlace operator and labeled the terms in that equation, which is the fundamental theorem of vector calculus. Just as fundamental as Pythagoras' theorem. And from that fundamental theorem it follows that curl E = 0. So, that way one can mathematically prove that Maxwell is incorrect, because dB/dt is not the same as zero and therefore Maxwell's model is actually mathematically inconsistent. One cannot get away with violating fundamental mathematical theorems forever. This is like having Pythagoras:

    a^2 + b^2 = c^2

    and Maxwell writes:

    a^2 + b^2 = c^2 + db/dt,

    which is simply plain WRONG.

    My work is based upon Paul Stowe's and we describe the ether as a fluid, which results in a model whereby all quantities are expressed in just three fundamental ones: mass, length and time.


    I remember having read about the electron as a harmonic oscillator but I didn't quite get it at that time. Can you link to some papers/videos/websites describing that idea?
    It is included in my paper, but the idea comes from Paul Stowe:

    https://www.researchgate.net/publica...39;s_Equations

    In eq 16, I took Stowe's eq 25:

    https://vixra.org/pdf/1310.0237v1.pdf

    The important thing with this is that this way, the units of measurement around the Coulomb force map perfectly with those used within the fluid dynamics domain and it leads to an actual understanding of what charge IS. However, it does lead to a problem, namely that in our model charge is no longer polarized. There are no negative charges, which means that either our model is incorrect or that the attractive force measured with "static" charged objects is not actually caused by charge itself, but either the result of standing longitudinal waves (since all elektrons oscillate at the same frequency) or is the result of magnetic forces since electrons do have a magnetic field as well.

    Note that the solution F=0 in my paper is incorrect, because if your force field is zero, your derivatives are also zero. I found the correct solution, but have not yet written that all down, partly because it may be patentable for application in simulation software. Have not decided yet whether I want to apply for a patent before publishing or not.


    In a nutshell, our model starts with only two hypothesis to which we stick:

    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.
    Attached Files
    Last edited by lamare; 09-07-2020, 02:57 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ernst
    replied
    Remove those terms and replace them with what?
    We know that a changing magnetic field creates an electric field and vice versa. We use this principle in transformers. You cannot just throw that out of the equation.
    Maxwell showed that he could derive the speed of light from the elasticity and density of the ether (the solid part). This has been "translated" into the electric permittivity and magnetic permeability of "the vacuum". Being decoupled from the ether it had to be the same everywhere and for everyone and that led to Relativity and the other madness. Going back to Maxwell's original work, one would immediately understand that there is no reason to assume an equal density of the ether throughout the universe and that variations in this density can easily explain gravitational lensing among other observed phenomena.

    I think we both are familiar with the work of Koen van Vlaenderen and how he derives two longitudinal wave equations from Maxwell's equations, one electromagnetic and one purely electric. Although I, and many more capable scientists have not been able to point out errors in Koen's work, it leads to things as magnetic potential and thus magnetic monopoles, things I am not willing to accept. The other thing is that he replaces the original Ampere's force law with Whittaker’s force law which is not based on the same ether model as the other equations.
    Maxwell started out with a model of the ether and he shows that all his equations follow from this model, and thus form a consistent unit.

    I remember having read about the electron as a harmonic oscillator but I didn't quite get it at that time. Can you link to some papers/videos/websites describing that idea?


    Ernst.

    Leave a comment:


  • lamare
    replied
    Do note that a gaseous or liquid medium does also support vortices and vortex rings. That would be your ether swirls.

    That way, you can fully describe the ether as a gas/liquid, provided you remove the dB/dt and dE/dt terms from Maxwell's equations, which is what f***s the whole thing up and leads to both relativity as well as quantum magic.

    Interestingly, the Helmholtz decomposition shows that there is a fundamental difference between longitudinal compression/decompression movements (Tesla's waves and the electric field) and rotational (vortex, gyroscopic) movements (Hertzian waves and the magnetic field).

    Additionally, a charged particle such as an electron can be seen as a harmonic oscillator, emitting a longitudinal Tesla wave at a frequency given by it's charge/mass ratio. This way, a "charge" is simply a harmonic compression/decompression oscillator.

    For the electron, this works out to about 170 GHz which corresponds to a black body tempetature of about 2.8 K. Both numbers from the back of my head.

    These numbers are rather interesting when one takes a look at the observed Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), which has a peak at about 160 GHz. Red shift at play?

    Leave a comment:


  • Ernst
    replied
    So let's start with Maxwell's model of the ether, from which he derived his famous equations that have propelled science (but not necessarily in the right direction).
    We all know his equations but very few know how he arrived at these. According to his model, the ether consists of 4 components:
    1 - there is a fluid medium upon which ...
    2 - a force acts
    These are the first two components and you can read in Tesla's work that he also believed in this part of the model.
    Out of this interaction, 2 more components emerge:
    3 - ether whirls
    4 - tiny particles that move between these whirls.
    These ether whirls behave like a solid. Their axes of rotation are what makes up magnetic field lines.
    Although Tesla also mentions these whirls he does not say they behave like a solid, nor say anything that would relate them to magnetism.
    Finally, there are these tiny particles that cause electric effects.
    And this is where Tesla and Maxwell go in different directions.
    According to Maxwell, these particles are electrically charged. That does not provide us with a description of what electricity is. It is explaining electricity with electricity which is indeed what modern science is also doing. This is a dead-end, this could never explain all electrical phenomena because you are just assuming that at a fundamental level electric charge suddenly appears.
    Tesla's model is much more helpful in this respect. According to this, these particles form a gaseous medium that creates electric effects.
    Notice the difference! These particles are not charged but they can create an electric charge in 'matter' (most likely referring to those ether whirls).
    When I say 'electric effects' I refer to
    - electric charge
    which causes
    - capacitive effects (attraction and repulsion)
    and it can move creating an
    - electric current
    and its accompanying
    - magnetic/inductive effects
    As this is a gaseous medium it can ONLY support longitudinal waves. BUT you will immediately understand that these waves are very different from anything derived from Maxwell's model. Maxwell describes waves of electro-magnetic interaction, whereas these longitudinal waves are sound waves in the medium that causes electric effects.

    More later.


    Ernst.
    (read about it in my beautifully illustrated new book "Wardenclyffe")

    Leave a comment:


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

    Actually, it was Lamare's post that prompted me to write this post about my new book "Wardenclyffe".
    The title of Lamare's post describes quite well what I have also been working on and I have published my results in "The Science of Tesla's Magic". From the feedback I got from that book, I figured something more "entry-level" was needed. So I teamed up with Kyle dell'Aquila to do just that. I took bits and pieces of my earlier 4 books and combined those into this new book which Kyle then illustrated with over 300 illustrations.
    I honestly think, this book came out as a piece of art and is an excellent entry into Tesla's work. I think the added illustrations help keep the reader on the right track as our modern-day education has become a serious obstacle to understanding Tesla's theories.
    As I found that Lamare's conclusions differ significantly from mine, I didn't want to clutter up his thread with my view on the topic (and plug my latest book ).
    The book "Wardenclyffe" doesn't go as deep as "The Science of Tesla's Magic" but for many, it will be easier to understand and once you understand these basics it is not hard to extend it and see why Quantum Mechanics, for example, is wrong but does predict the correct outcome of experiments. Or why light bends under the influence of gravity etc.
    That said, what do I want to discuss in this thread?
    - my new book and ways to promote it as both Kyle and I are no experts in the field of book promotion.
    - my earlier books
    - the structure of the ether (as explained in my work) and experiments to verify this.


    Ernst.
Working...
X