LOS CONSEJOS DE NIKOLA TESLA PARA PRODUCIR ENERGÍA ELECTRO-RADIANTE O FLUJOS ETHERICOS PERPENDICULARES AL AVANCE DE LOS ELECTRONES:

*El pulso debe de ser creado de la forma mas contundente y de caracter unidireccional.
*El pulso debe de ser "creado y roto" de la forma más rápida posible.
*El pulso debe de empezar con la máxima presión electrica posible.
*Se deben de evitar las oscilaciones del pulso o el efecto no se manifiesta.
*El evento "electro-radiante" se manifiesta perpendicularmente al avance de los electrones.
*El evento "electro-radiante" desaparece cuando los electrones empiezan a correr.
*El spark gap magnético dicen que es capaz de disociar los electrones y la electro-radiante, todo esto que he expuesto es fruto de la traducción de documentos que tengo en mi poder que deberán de ser comprobados empiricamente, de momento solo son hipótesis.

================================================== =========================
Os voy a explicar como creo que se produce el evento electro-radiante después de todo lo que he leido al respecto:
El evento electro-radiante descubierto por primera vez gracias a N.Tesla en la inaguración de una central hidroelectrica de corriente continua se manifiesta de forma perpendicular al avance de los electrones en una línea conductora, esto sucede cuando se pretende conectar de una forma muy rápida y contundente una ELEVADISIMA PRESIÓN ELECTRICA (30-50kv c.c) a una línea de distribución mediante 2 o 4 conductores que se juntan a gran velocidad para evitar fogueos como en el caso de un seccionador de alta tensión con muelle de carga, si la línea de distribución posee en sus extremos a cientos de km cargas inductivas correspondientes a subestaciones reductoras de voltaje e incrementadoras de intensidad para adaptarlas al alumbrado público de la época como por ejemplo motores de alta tensión cuyos ejes están unidos mecánicamente a dinámos generadoras de baja tensión gran amperaje (estamos hablando de finales del siglo XIX cuando aun no se había puesto de moda la corriente alterna y no se podian utilizar los típicos tranformadores de las subestaciones de hoy en día) estas poderosas cargas inductivas al final de la línea en el instante "0" cuando el circuito es cerrado de ipsofacto, representan una impedancia infinita,es decir un muro insalvable o una "asfixia" por parte de los portadores de la energía (los electrones) puesto que las bobinas retrasan 90º la corriente electrica, es decir que si tu conecta una bobina a una pila en función de la inductancia de la bobina y de la diferencia de potencial de la pila la bobina tarda mas o menos tiempo en ir creando su campo magnético e ir reduciendo paulatinamente su impedancia inductiva "XL" hasta convertirse simplemente en una resistencia pura en función a los metros de hilo bobinado, es entonces en el instante "0" cuando muy brevemente la energía radiante (quizas flujo etherico sin masa) se desacopla de lo que comunmente llamamos corriente electrica y se proyecta perpendicularmente a la línea de transmisión electrica, en base a esa propiedad Edwin gray construyo su famoso tubo capaz de canalizar la energía radiante para mover motores que se llenaban de escarcha al trabajar, todo lo contrario a lo que ocurre con la corriente convencional que genera calor (perdidas)

En mi vida he notado algo similar a esa "asfixia" cuando hace años me dedicaba a reparar motocicletas a mis amigos, cuando tenía que cambiar el aceite, a veces por no tener otro a mano le ponía uno mas espeso y me sorprendía un fenómeno muy curioso, para introducir el aceite en el deposito utilizaba una aceitera metalica con un largo tubo curvado y me sorprendí cuando por las prisas intenté empujar de golpe y con toda la fuerza de mi dedo pulgar el embolo que comprime y empuja el aceite a través del tubito, me quedé atónito al comprobar que si operaba de esa forma el aceite no salía, lo intenté muchas veces y al final comprendí el porque, si empezaba a imprimir una PRESIÓN de forma suave e iba aumentandola la presión paulatinamente al máximo de fuerza de mi dedo pulgar conseguía hacer correr bien el aceite, pero si aplicaba de golpe toda mi fuerza el aceite no corría..... Pues Amigo mios, lo mismo pasa con la energía electro-radiante, si intentamos meter de ipsofcto un golpe muy duro con una presión electrica muy elevada (mientras mas elevada mejor) los electrones se asfixian como el aceite en el enrejado cristalino del conductor y no avanzan, es justamente en ese intante cuando se desacopla MOMENTANEAMENTE la energía electro-radiante del sistema, el efecto desaparece cuando la corriente empieza a fluir, es por eso que hay que "cerrar-abrir-cerrar-abrir-cerrar-abrir" de la forma mas eficaz y rápida para obtener las "olas de presión electricas" que hipoteticamente Tesla llegó a fabricar, tiene toda la lógica.... si este evento no es conocido es porque se precisan de unas condiciones muy muy estrictas para producirlo.



=================================================
=================================================


ADVICE OF NIKOLA TESLA ENERGY TO PRODUCE OR ELECTRO-FLOW HEATING ADVANCE ETHERICOS perpendicular to the electron:

* The pulse must be created in the most forceful and unidirectional character.
* The pulse must be "created and broken" the fastest way possible.
* The pulse should start with the maximum possible electrical pressure.
* It should avoid the oscillations of the pulse or the effect is not manifest.
* The event "electro-radiant" manifests perpendicularly to the advancement of the electrons.
* The event "electro-radiant" disappears when electrons start to run.
* The magnetic spark gap can say dissociated electrons and electro-heating, I have stated this is the result of the translation of documents I have in my power to be, if proven empirically, are currently only hypothesis.

================================================== =========================
I will explain how I think the event occurs electro-radiant after everything I've read about:
The electro-radiant event first discovered by N.Tesla at the opening of a hydroelectric DC manifests perpendicular to the advance of the electrons in a conductor line, this happens when trying to connect to a very fast and forceful a very high electrical pressure (30-50kV cc) to a distribution line using 2 or 4 conductors coming together at high speed to avoid scrimmages as in the case of a high voltage disconnector spring load, line distribution at its ends has hundreds of miles for inductive voltage substations and reducing intensity-boosting to fit the lighting of the era such as high-voltage motors whose axes are mechanically to dynamos generating high current low voltage ( we're talking about the late nineteenth century when it had not yet become fashionable AC and could not boot typical substation transformers today) these powerful inductive loads at the end of the line at time "0" when the circuit is closed ipso facto, represent an infinite impedance, ie a wall insurmountable or "choking" by the carriers of energy (electrons) since the coils delayed 90 electric current, which means that if you connect a coil to a stack as a function of inductance of the coil and of the potential difference of the battery the coil takes more or less time to create the magnetic field and gradually reduce its inductive impedance "XL" to become simply a pure resistance according to the meters of yarn winding, is then at time "0" when very briefly radiant energy (perhaps etheric without mass flow) disengages from what is commonly called electric current and projecting perpendicularly to the transmission line Electric, based on that property Edwin Gray built his famous pipe capable of channeling radiant energy to crank an engine filled with frost at work, on the contrary to what happens with conventional current that generates heat (lost)

In my life I have noticed something similar to that "choking" when years ago I used to repair motorcycles to my friends, when I had to change the oil, sometimes for no other hand have made him one thicker and I surprised a phenomenon curious, to enter the oil in the oil tank used a long metal tube with a curved and was surprised when he tried to push the rush hit and with all the strength of my thumb the piston that compresses and pushes the oil through the tube I was stunned to see that if you operated that way the oil is not coming out, I tried many times and finally understood why, if I started to print a pressure went smoothly and gradually increasing it to the maximum pressure of my finger force thumb getting oil to run well, but if suddenly applied all my strength not run oil ..... Friend of mine Well, the same goes for electro-radiant energy, if we try to get in a blow ipsofcto a very high electrical pressure (The higher the better) electrons as oil suffocate in the crystal lattice of the driver and not advance, it is precisely in this intante when momentarily disengaged electro-radiant energy of the system, the effect disappears when the current starts to flow, that is why we must "close-open-close-open-close-open" the most effective and fast way to get the "electric pressure waves" hypothetically Tesla came to manufacture, has all the logic .... If this event is not known is because they require very strict conditions to produce it.

The effect of feeling the sting of HF is what it is. Just relaying what I felt.

You can believe that there is a movement of light, as in the so called "speed of light". I don't. There is NO movement of anything in the polarization of light, such as in a lightning bolt to ground. If you think that there is, please state what is "moving" or "traveling"? The fact that this polarization effect has a known rate that can be seen and calculated, does not make the cart pull the horse.
You are mentioning that there is NO Aether. ... Well, again that is your opinion, along with current science.
Do you also believe in the theory about the Big Bang? Everything came from nothing, in one instant??? Current science is not very accurate concerning many things.

Have you heard or read about the Vortex Theory??? Aether does exist... just because you can't see it, feel it, and can't meassure it, does not mean it is not there. As It is the source of everything, physical matter and well as the non physical. Tesla was not wrong...

I am not trying to argue with conventional theory. Just mentioning that there is much more to it...
Time will tell... just as with the Earth not being flat.

Hi

Please find rough translation of diagram

Regards

John

Thank you for posting that video, (gracias, por el video). Very interesting...
Some people say that the spark gap is not needed to produce an effect. What do you think?

creo que el boquete de chispa es capaz de hacer que la energía entre de golpe y tambien pueda ser extinguida muy rapidamente por imanes, segun gerry vassilatos, la electro energia radiante se consigue cuando una tensión electrica muy grande desea entrar de golpe en un sistema, en ese momento se produce un stress en los portadores de la carga (electrones) esto se puede conseguir utilizando bobinas electricas las cuales retrasan 90º la corriente, las bobinas en el primer instante de tiempo poseen una resistencia al paso de los electrones infinita, la cual gradualmente va bajando a medida que se a formando el campo magnético, podemos primeramente aprovechar esta cualidad para crear el efecto de stress en el circuito y en segundo lugar aprovechamos la fuerza contraelectromotriz devuelta por la bobina para reingresar la energía otra vez en el sistema, os voy a dejar mi idea de FRACCIONAMIENTO INDUCTIVO

============================================

I think the spark gap can cause energy between hit and also can be extinguished very quickly by magnets, according to Gerry Vassilatos, electro radiant energy is achieved when a large voltage suddenly want to get into a system, then there is a stress on the charge carriers (electrons) that can be achieved using electric coils which retard 90 ° the current coils at the first instant of time have a resistance to the passage of electrons infinite, which gradually drops as that to form the magnetic field, we first take this quality to create the effect of stress on the second circuit and took the back emf in the coil to reenter the energy back into the system, you I'll let my idea INDUCTIVE fractionation:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us


in this sketch drawing the hypothetical fault propagation perpendicular to the radiant energy along the upper conductor

Note that it is splitting "Positive"

It would appear from viewing the video, that the magnets are able to stop the flow of voltage across the spark gap. So, that method proves that it does work. But, is there really an advantage that can be seen by an increase of the output energy levels. How does blowing the spark out in that way help?

I am at a stand still on my Exciter circuits, due to not being able to improve the amount of light intensity that can be obtained from them. This is due to not being able to use higher voltages, without burning up the transistors. This limits the possibility of seeing higher output levels, especially when using CFL bulbs for lighting. The use of transistors as the on/off switch is the bottleneck, and at this point I don't know how to proceed. The use of higher power output transistors has not worked well for me on the Exciter type circuits.
Any ideas are welcome.

Gentlemen, I will soon start experimenting with these possibilities, my website:
TEMAS RELACIONADOS CON LA "FREE-ENERGY" Y PROYECTOS SIMILARES

you through the transistors opens and closes the power input in the coil, after the coil is responsible for generating a counter electromotive force of high voltage, the transistors only switch act as energy input to the coil when the coil is open circuit their energy returns quickly, try to redirect that energy through a spark gap coil to raise the tension, and second to extinguish by blowing magnetic'll soon experience this story you will see if it is true, greetings from Spain.

==================================================

usted mediante los transistores abre y cierra la entrada de energia en la bobina, despues la bobina se encarga de generar una fuerza contraelectromotriz de elevado voltaje, los transistores solo actuan como interruptor de entrada de energía a la bobina, cuando el circuito es abierto la bobina devuelve su energía rapidamente, hay que intentar reconducir esa energía a traves de un boquete de chispa para que la bobina eleve la tensión, y segundo para poder extinguirla mediante soplado magnético, en breve voy a experimentar esto que le cuento a ver si es verdad, un saludo desde españa

Hi Nick,

Maybe use the transistor exciter to trigger/ ionise the earthy side of a gap in the same way as when triggering a flash tube ?

Also just came across this relevent link -

Light Speed

Hi Antigravitysystems.

So relevent. And Tesla knew this 100 years ago !?
Conventional electronics and Hertzian technologies always align the electrons transferring charge/ energy.
Ditto causing electron charge flow within inductors for magnetic induction - takes a finite time.

Capacitor spark discharge can change electron energy faster than matter related electron spin orbits can become current flow/magnetic field influenced, thus impulsive electron orbit induced radiation may be longitudinally generated without light speed magnetic transverse alignment limitation.

Cheers .......... Graham.

Thanks for the reply guys.
Somehow it does make sense. Especially when watching videos of how the "Kacher" system works, which is similar to Exciter devices, when using a spark gap.
The problem with using a spark gap is the noise that is emitted from it, which is not what I would want to have in my house. As they are noisy as are the whine from some transformers and E-cores that are used for Joule Thief/Joule Ringer set ups. Open ended air core Tesla Type single layer wound coils are very silent.
I would still like to see how the magnetic quenching of the spark can be incorporated to produce a much higher output. Some spark gap devices are silent. Those types would be more to my liking, but for experimental purposes, anything that works is worth trying.

Let me apologize for being a bit childish. Just let me say I get frustrated trying to explain this sometimes, the ideas can hurt my head too. Let me say too, I would be lying if I said I understood everything about Tesla's work, but I can go further in my explanation and connect some more dots for you, as it were. I do think it is important for me to try and do so, even if only one person gets it.

First @antigraviticsystems1

Believe it or not, I have been trying to follow your work. I have seen your comments on other forums and watched people dismiss your ideas, primarily because they were not in english. I guess that is too bad for them, because your understanding is very correct and your drawings and explanations are great. So if anyone here has assumed antigraviticsystems1 does not know what he is talking about, solely based upon his first language and crude drawings, you better think again. Seeing you on here antigraviticsystems1 was one of the reasons I decided to keep posting, Glad to have you in this discussion.

You point out a very important detail about Tesla's stinging rays I remembered reading as soon as you mentioned it; the Stinging Rays were perpendicular to the electric arc. An extremely important key to the whole mystery and in fact, provides the solution to GSM's comments, although the connection is far from obvious.

Now @ GSM

I am not sure how you do the repost thing on a forum to be honest.
GSM you have definitely gone and brought out the BFG now. Good job.

I had to go back to some books, to refresh my memory on the physics you bring up, specifically "Einstein's Theory of Relativity" by Max Born. There is an entire section within chapter 4 "Fundamental Laws of Optics" called "The Ether". What GSM has brought up here is the age old debate, Ether or No Ether. GSM has pointed out that according to modern physics, we do not need an ether, and experiment has never successfully detected this ether. GSM speaks the physicists truth here. Against this I can make no argument. Some physicist could quickly overwhelm me with the scientific data, formula and mathematics which proves the facts and reasoning behind this conclusion. If you would like to understand the logical process which led the scientist to conclude there is no Ether, than I would strongly suggest plugging your way through the chapter mention above.

However, we know Tesla and many others, do not agree with the modern physicists. For most the modern physics, is a massive, ugly, monstrousity of complexity and confusion. These people see that the concept of an Ether leads to a great simplification and union of many currently separate concepts and principles in Physics. The concept of an Ether gives our minds something simple, we can actually see or visualize, to comprehend what is occurring. In contrast to the abstract concepts within relativity and physics in general. This is why the Ether idea still hangs around as it were, because it makes sense to people and for me the end goal has always been simplification, generalization and unification.

So what if I told you, their both right, and took some time to point out how they can both be right without contradicting each other either. Yes, I am going to try to make everyone happy. I heard a good saying once;
"Your science has divided and separated that which is neither divided nor separate."
This is a good saying and the key to resolving many of physics most fundamental questions.

So my next post will try to explain how the modern physics dispenses with the need for an Ether and why we can still use the concept of an Ether to visualize the workings of the Universe. Realize though your asking me to lay down the framework for the UFT, which is a pretty big mouthful, so there is going to be some failure to communicate. I will do my best.

Ether or No Ether, that is the question.

If we really want to answer this question, we need a solid foundation upon which to build an understanding. I am going to do this, by coming at the problem backwards. Rather than leading up to the solution through a bunch of examples, I will give just give the solution and then show how it matches both the Ether and No Ether models.

The solution is the Unified Field Theory. So how can I use a theory which supposedly doesn't exist, easy. Its all in the name Einstein chose. Unified Field.
Realize what a Unified field actually means, in English. Uni = "One". Unify = "to combined into One". Unified = "Combined into One". Einstein chose this word for a reason.

Einstein spoke of Space/Time. 3-Dimensions of Space and One of Time. Space has some volume, Time is changes in Space. We think of matter as being something separate from Space/Time, like the idea of a planet moving through Space and Time. However, this is incorrect. Matter is within and composed of Space/Time, not something unique in its own right. Anything in our Universe is made of Space/Time. You have to see, the fundamental and key notion of a Unified Field theory, is everything is made out of the same stuff, all is one thing. Mass is made of Space/Time and the Dimensions of Space/Time can be reduced to One Field or One dimension.

I am not disagreeing with you with these next statements GSM, just pointing some things out. We must be careful saying EM energy always requires mass and there are no waves or fields, because the evidence says otherwise. EM energy, specifically the forces between two charged masses, appears at some distance from the masses involved. Charge appears to be a physical state of Space. Space has physical states or properties. The masses do not touch physically, and yet there is some force or effect in the Space surrounding the mass, which acts just like a physical contact to another charge.

It is wrong to associate Void with Space, they are not the same thing. Void has no volume, Space has volume. Nor can matter exist independently of Space.

Indeed, what we consider as a physical solid, like an atom is something like 99.9% Space, is it not? What we think of as contact or collision between two solid physical bodies, on an atomic level occurs long before any physical contact between atoms ( or the protons, electrons ) can ever occur. The sphere of influence of an physical solid, extends far beyond the physical surface we would ascribe to that solid. The scientist even found, an electron will produce interference patterns, a wave effect. So this boundary between mass and space, is not so "solid" as many would like to believe. You could write volumes on the subject of "Touch" alone. But I digress.

Now to put this together for you. Realize that modern physics, doesn't understand the Unified Field Theory, they currently have a bunch of separate fields. effects and forces, electric, magnetic, mass, inertia and gravity and so on. Realize that modern physics does not need an Ether nor understand the Ether,simply because they have taken the Ether and divided and separated it into its component parts. The one, was divided and separated first into Space and Time and then even further divided and separated into 4 dimensions or components, each with unique physical states of properties.

Realize the Ether proponents are talking about the Unified Field, the One, whereas the physicists are talking about many separated and divided components of the one field. Upon Unification of all fields, the physicists will realize this One field, matches all these concept of an Dynamic Ether.

So yeah I can show how the Unified Field theory resolves this Ether or No Ether issue, but those of scientific bent will surely point out, I give no real explanation as to How the separate fields are combined into a Unified Field. That my friends is a subject for another post. you must see though how the details of the unified field theory are not really required to make this connection. Thus in a sense the concept of a Unified Field is more important than the actual details.

A full and complete Unified Field theory, would involve a nearly impossible amount of mathematics. To be complete, it would have to demonstrate applicability to all fields and concepts in science, even biology. Rewriting all of physics would be, to say the least, a tremendous undertaking. Thus the details were never completed, only the general concept was published. This was done as a small appendix to Einstein's relativity, a few pages at most, showing the connection between gravity, electric and magnetic fields. This appendix was subsequently removed from future reprints of Relativity theory. Not a rumor, as references and papers discussing the Unified Field theory exist, some from Einstein himself.

So just to repeat this in some different words, The Ether is Space/Time or One Field or a Unified Field. Modern physics is looking at the pieces or structure of the Ether, without seeing the Whole, the gestalt. The physicists will find their three forces electric, magnetic and gravity/mechanical/related to mass are 3 components of a single entity, obeying a specific interrelationship amongst each other. This relationship is 3-dimensional, changing in time. Each force or field is perpendicular to each of the other two fields. It is the combined nature of each of these fields, which defines the nature of the Ether, not any one or 2 but all 3. Space has physical states which correspond to the physical forces. The interactions of these 3 physical states or forces lead to the forms, interactions and patterns we think of as solid reality.

I hope I haven't got too technical or too simple here.

First I want to apologize to you because it is hard to understand, use google translator but it's still difficult for me to understand in your language, however I am happy to be surrounded by great people struggling to discover something new

This all brings me to this point... so please forgive me if I bore some of you. I'll make this short.

In order to understand the idea of an Aether, we can't simply explain it by what we can see, or weigh, or can meassure with our instruments, as current science is still trying to do, or not do.
As an "Aether Meter" (dark matter meter) has not yet been invented.
And there is no physical "Matter" in the Aether to look for. Non physical "matter", does not exist. Things such as light are not "physical", in fact. although you may have heard or read differently.

The way I understand it is: that there are two main things, the seen univers, as well as the unseen one. As in multidimensional space and time.
There exists the material or physical worlds, but, there also exists the unseen Etherical worlds. The cause of the existence of the material worlds is due to the existence of these unseen Etherical worlds and realms, and not the other way around. The Aether creates the physical, in other words, from which it is made. I know that this is not an easy concept to grasp...
The cause of causes is to be found in the Aether, but, as nothing can create itself, and as current science give no credence to a "Creator" so therefore, it is missing out and blind on the most important point. Until we realize that we are not self made men, and that there is an underlying cause for all of life and existence, nothing our current science has to offer will really make much sense, as it is not a whole unified theory, but a partial one at best. Ignoring for the most part the true reason that things function as they do, and the why and how it is all happening.

I am not a religious man, so please don't take me wrong.
I do believe in a true and real cause of things, not in the current fragmented version.
As mentioned previously, Tesla was/is right... he did not make up those ideas and concepts that we still don't quite comprehend, entirely on paper, only. He is still one of our best examples of scientific truth.

NickZ

Hi TeslaSecrets and Nick_Z.

EM radiation is via matter (of excess charge or excitation).
EM transduction is via matter (inducing charge or excitation).
Once radiated, EM propagates without need for any specific type of aether or medium between radiation and transduction, and individual 'photons' or their stream will continue until impinging or influenced by other material relationships .

Free space is occupied by matter in gravitational and nucleonic relationships and additionally permeated by a myriad of EM propagations.

Relationships can involve cyclic, random, transient or manufactured effects, but EM radiation from afar does not propagate via a field or waves; any field or wave is associated with either the instant of radiation or transduction only, and that radiation or transduction is via matter only, irrespective of other gravitational, nucleonic or EM radiations coincidentally constituting any local ambient.

Has anyone ever seen PROOF of the existence of these travelling EM waves; especially a magnetic one; for a magnetic field is irrefutably inseparable from either charge flow or electron spin alignment, both aspects being matter related, and which simply do not exist in worthwhile consistent density through the deep space through which we telescope distant stars ?

Once emitted, photon quanta (light or radio) are not affected by a magnetic field, also, no matter how long you make the ferrite rod within a radio antenna coil it does not transduce more of the 'magnetic wave component' within any given radio 'field strength', because there is not any 'magnetic wave component' nor a 'field' in the first place; not until the transducing matter generates it, and with an antenna that matter relates to the free electrons in the wire of the antenna coil !

To claim some form of a magical aether, without providing evidence for same and stating exactly what it is, or by couching 'scientific' reasoning in Unifying Relativity, is a Belief based cop-out which blinkers our Real World vision !


Cheers ............. Graham.


PS. No matter what we write, there is not any overunity through longitudinally emitting EM via discharge impulse instead of transversely via current flow; the radiation merely has different characteristics. However, whether those characteristics might then be used to release excess energy from 'transducing' matter is worth investigating.

Notese el sistema de condensadores a base de tubos concentricos de cobre y separadores plasticos ideados para la ocasión, mediante este sistema se puede aumentar muy facilmente la capacida enseriada del circuito, de esta forma se podrá ajustar los tiempos de carga y descarga en función de la duración de los pulsos a través de los boquetes de chispa.

The vortex theory is what I am talking about. Also Tesla's ideas, concepts and inventions, and not current science based on fairy tales like the Big Bang. You can believe that theory, and what it implies, but I never will.
There is an Aether, and that is what all of what you see and don't see is coming from, made from, and is depending on.
Read some of Tesla's work, if you really want to know what I'm talking about. Do You? NO? Not really...
There is No need to repeat what we have already heard many times, as many of us have been educated and taught false theories in school.

We are still being taught conventional electrical and electronic theory, to make us slaves to their closed ended systems. Instead of showing us how to have freedom from having to buy their pay to have energy, which only they can legally provide. If they could sell you air to breath, they would.

A closed-ended system will never provide you with "free energy", and that is what we are here to promote, learn, and use. Even solar panels are being limited to have and provide less that 20% efficiency.

If you don't believe that there is a "sea of free energy" all around us, that we can tap into, then you'll never get the point of an alternative free energy forum, or device.
That free energy is the Aether, in conjunction with a Vortex.
I am NOT trying to convince you or anyone else, as that is your choice.

About 10years ago Time magazine did an article on the EMP's. Electro Magnetic pulse weapons. In that article they said if a high explosive was detonated inside a magnetic field the field would be compressed and thrown outward. Would this be the proof?

just asking..

jake

@GSM

"To claim some form of a magical aether, without providing evidence for same and stating exactly what it is, or by couching 'scientific' reasoning in Unifying Relativity, is a Belief based cop-out which blinkers our Real World vision !"

You and Nick_Z both completely mis-understood what I was trying to say. I have pointed out exactly what this Ether is and why science does not recognize it, but obviously not well enough for the readers here to grasp it. I am not couching scientific reasoning, I require it for this explanation.

What you are talking about GSM is a billiard ball type of model. The mass creates a photon, which you are stating is independent of Space, travels through Space, until it hits another mass. Yes, in this model, the Space plays no role in the propagation. However there are many issues with this model, as I will point out in some detail.

I earlier brought up the "Missing mass model", which cannot be readily solved using your model. Thus the scientists have come up with ideas as equally magical an an Ether, such as ideas of Dark Energy and Dark matter. Nor can this model explain the origin of matter itself.

Using this model, we can smash atoms, and find these particles are made of smaller particles. Then we smashed sub-atomic particles, and found these are too composed of smaller particles. So the basic explanation for matter according to this model, is mass is made of smaller mass, which is made of even smaller mass. There is no doubt, if we keep smashing mass, we will get smaller and smaller mass, but this doesn't really tell us what mass is.

The same properties which apply to atoms, likely apply to sub-atomic particles and smaller, as well as the huge macroscopic effects we see in Deep Space. There are not separate laws in our Universe, for different scales. That would go against some of the founding principles of science itself. Yet again, this is where modern science stands, we have quantum theory for microscopic scales and relativity for macroscopic scales. Both fail at the opposite scale. If we understood what mass really was, we would know the reason for mass on all levels and not have this divided way of thinking. If we do not even know how mass is created and defined on an atomic scales and how this applies to cosmic scales, then by going deeper were only confusing the issue, complicating the issue with data not required to solve the problem. Instead of one jigsaw puzzle, we now have 3 or 4, but they all have a similar picture.

The explanation of Suns, pressing matter together into new combinations is a great idea and part of the process, however it too misses the final mark as it were. For there is no way we can just press a hydrogen atom into being. The whole nuclear creation process of matter, never really explains how the first building block is formed. Gravity alone cannot form a hydrogen atom. Nor can gravity alone explain how a single point of infinite mass in the big bang, became a bunch of hydrogen atoms in Space. There are innumerable objects and events being viewed in deep space, which cannot be explained solely by gravity and mass interactions. The explanations in modern physics for some of these effects has gone way beyond common sense, logic and reason.

Your mass model cannot explain mass diffraction, as I pointed out. How can a particle, diffract? Nor can it explain Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle, where we cannot know simultaneously the position and velocity of an electron. These experiments completely contradict the idea, an electron is only a particle.

What is mass made of( surely not more mass )? What is a photon made of? According to this model, charge is due to an electron, the mass. But in a photon we have no electron, no mass, so what is transferring the charge? We know we can charge objects just with photon energy, photoelectric effect. If charge is excess electrons, and photons are charging, where are the electrons coming from? Clearly something has been transfered from point A to point B, you say a photon, but what is a photon? It's not mass, we know that, but it can behave like mass, increase mass, decrease mass. Effect charge, and yet it can exist in free space. How?

How can gravity act at a distance through free space? This model requires Gravitons which so far are still a pretty magical idea Realize that in the Big Bang theory, Space was not outside the Big Bang, they do not know what was outside the Big Bang. All Space/Time was inside the big bang. The Space and the Mass was inside the Big Bang. They do not know the cause nor anything about the initiation which proceeded the Big Bang, nor anything about the environment within which the big bang formed, nothing. Only theories.

Gravity is related to mass, can you except that. What you seem to be saying is that EM is related to mass as well, if it must start and end on such and depends on mass only for its existence. This contradicts your own physics, because according to modern science, EM fields cannot be related to gravity thus they cannot be easily related as you say "just to mass". If mass is responsible for EM waves in the manner you say, then it should be easy to relate gravity to EM, but it is not.

How can electric action or gravitational effects, propagate through free space? Why is there a limit on how fast this can happen? If free Space were completely Empty and Void, there should not be anything to slow anything down, whether mass or photon. You yourself admit Space has impedance, how can nothing have impedance? Ridiculous.

We know space has both magnetic permeability and electric permeativity, which are both related to the velocity of light. These are physical properties of Space!! How can nothing have physical properties such as permeativity, permeability, K, impedance?? This model requires the physical characteristics of some medium and then claims there is nothing physical there. Rubbish.

Let me re-explain where the Ether lies, in terms of modern physics. We have three primary forces we should be concerned with. I am talking about forces with which we can have everyday direct practical experience. We call these forces Gravity, Electric and Magnetic. We need 3 forces, because a volume in Space is three dimensional. If we only had 2 forces, Space would be flat. We need three forces or dimensions or dimensions of action to define a volume. If your talking about gravity, your only talking about one component of the three, not the whole volume. Same if your only talking about the EM, your only talking about 2 out of the 3 then. If you want to grasp what the Ether really is, you have to combine all 3, period. Physics as of yet, cannot do this, thus they can form no concept of an Ether.

Modern physics is as incomplete as Tesla's dynamic theory of gravity. It does not and cannot provide the full solution. Having a bunch of separate parts of a clock working, is not a complete working clock.

You can see the Sun rise and Set each day, and we learned this was rotation of the Earth. You can get a compass and measure the direction of the magnetic field. You can raise a wire high into the sky and draw some electrical power. Each force along 3 separate axis,3-Dimensions, defining the space within which you are standing at that very moment. Observable and real, right now, where you sit. Gravity alone cannot define 3 dimensions.

You do not and cannot talk about the ether in terms of just EM actions, nor can you talk about the Ether in terms of just gravitation or mass. Neither alone fits the bill.

The evidence for the Ether, is in the combination of your gravity, electric and magnetic forces. You can split the Ether up into these three components, and discuss interactions, effects, actions of the components, or you can discuss the whole. Modern science doesn't understand the whole, so they can only talk about the components. The components are not the whole. Gestalt says the whole is more than the sum of its parts. You could know everything there possibly is to know about the component parts and still not grasp the whole picture. Is this not exactly where modern physics stands, a billion parts, with no idea how to put it all together? They have all the parts to build a clock, but cannot see it is a clock.

You say science proves there is no Ether and I say, for now. Science cannot explain so many things or provide the solution. From your point of view, science knows all and has already solved all the riddles, but we know this is not true. Be careful how firmly you stand on modern science, for modern science itself has been one retraction after the next. If we apply scientific method to science itself, we will observe the method has not been so perfect as you think it has. It has been one error after the next, with long periods of stagnation. Always though, the simplest solution for the greatest number of problems will win.

You can argue about which part of the clock is more important, or you can talk about the whole clock.

Science is supposed to be about simplification, and it is obvious that it has strayed very far from this goal. A unification theory is useless, if he has no practical, common sense, understandable and useful application of this knowledge in an everyday life. We need a solution which simplifies our lives, provides direction and answers, not one which adds complexity, divides and separates, asks only more and more questions. Modern science is all about compartmentalization, specialization and internalization which are means for suppression and control of information, not education. The right hand never even knows what the left hand is doing.

If someone is content to wander is such darkness and confusion, then all the power to them, I however prefer real answers, and am willing to stray from the group if that is what is required to get them.

+1 for Aether theory

And Tesla was wrong... how boring this is... Where does it get you.
Keep paying your bills.

"... how boring this is... "
So go play with your toys while the men talk or contribute something interesting. I'm not here to entertain you. I had someone complain to me once this was too complicated and I should be able to explain it in 5 minutes.
Do people really think they are just so smart, they can learn physics, EM theory, or relativity in 5 minutes. Give me a break. I already said as far as I was concerned, trying to explain this on a forum is a complete waste of my time.

I quote again from wiki, because wiki is quoting the sources of this information and the source is the man himself. I would say that is pretty reliable in this instance.

Source:
Lorentz ether theory | Ask.com Encyclopedia


Quote:
"
Ether

Poincaré wrote in the sense of his conventionalist philosophy in 1889: [A 17] "Whether the ether exists or not matters little - let us leave that to the metaphysicians; what is essential for us is, that everything happens as if it existed, and that this hypothesis is found to be suitable for the explanation of phenomena. After all, have we any other reason for believing in the existence of material objects? That, too, is only a convenient hypothesis; only, it will never cease to be so, while some day, no doubt, the ether will be thrown aside as useless."

He also denied the existence of absolute space and time by saying in 1901:[A 18] "1. There is no absolute space, and we only conceive of relative motion ; and yet in most cases mechanical facts are enunciated as if there is an absolute space to which they can be referred. 2. There is no absolute time. When we say that two periods are equal, the statement has no meaning, and can only acquire a meaning by a convention. 3. Not only have we no direct intuition of the equality of two periods, but we have not even direct intuition of the simultaneity of two events occurring in two different places. I have explained this in an article entitled "Mesure du Temps" [1898]. 4. Finally, is not our Euclidean geometry in itself only a kind of convention of language?"

However, Poincaré himself never abandoned the ether hypothesis and stated in 1900: [A 14] "Does our ether actually exist ? We know the origin of our belief in the ether. If light takes several years to reach us from a distant star, it is no longer on the star, nor is it on the earth. It must be somewhere, and supported, so to speak, by some material agency." And referring to the Fizeau experiment, he even wrote: "The ether is all but in our grasp." He also said the ether is necessary to harmonize Lorentz's theory with Newton's third law. Even in 1912 in a paper called "The Quantum theory", Poincaré ten times used the word "ether", and described light as "luminous vibrations of the ether".[A 19]

And although he admitted the relative and conventional character of space and time, he believed that the classical convention is more "convenient" and continued to distinguish between "true" time in the ether and "apparent" time in moving systems. Addressing the question if a new convention of space and time is needed he wrote in 1912:[A 20] "Shall we be obliged to modify our conclusions? Certainly not; we had adopted a convention because it seemed convenient and we had said that nothing could constrain us to abandon it. Today some physicists want to adopt a new convention. It is not that they are constrained to do so; they consider this new convention more convenient; that is all. And those who are not of this opinion can legitimately retain the old one in order not to disturb their old habits, I believe, just between us, that this is what they shall do for a long time to come."

Also Lorentz argued during his lifetime that in all frames of reference this one has to be preferred, in which the ether is at rest. Clocks in this frame are showing the "real“ time and simultaneity is not relative. However, if the correctness of the relativity principle is accepted, it is impossible to find this system by experiment.[A 21]

"


This theory is in complete agreement with Relativity and is argued by some to proceed Einstein's relativity. It is upon this theory I am basing many of my arguments. Furthermore, this theory explains the connection between EM and gravity better than relativity, and in a way people can understand. The electron spin issue doesn't come up, mass diffraction is explained and we end up not needing quantum theory either. Not to mention the greater ease with which we can engineer real applications. Good stuff. But no, all everyone ever talks about is the Rock Star of Physics.

In simple terms, Poincare discovered( co-discovered - whatever ) relativity and still believed in an Ether. So I am with Poincare.

Let me just summarize:
I do not want to debate the Ether.
My point is:
It does not really matter if Ether exists or not.

The point remains:
Space has physical properties or states and behaves as if there was an Ether.

Either way we have a way to send longitudinal and transverse waves through free space.

It is not a great leap to "apply the analogy of a shock wave in such a space", or "to consider the possibility of reacting with such a space" or " discover new properties within such a space" or even "apply old principles in unique ways using a simpler concept of space".

@Nick_Z

Actually, aliens told me all this

Does that make it more exciting?

What happened to the "Tesla stinging impulse rays", all BS? He was all wrong, and didn't know what he was doing?

Ok, that's it for me... I wanted to discuss what this thread is about.
This other stuff, I'll leave that up to you guys to hash out.

@Antigraviticsystem1:
Thank you for your posts and information. I wish you the best with your experiments, and hope to hear more of your work....
Pura Vida,
Nick_Z

If you read what I posted, you will find I have pointed out in some detail the requirements, nature and mechanism of Tesla's Stinging Rays.

The basic idea of what I have just discussed is Space has physical properties which can not only propagate transverse waves but can likewise propagate longitudinal waves. thus Space can very likely propagate a "Shock Wave", which is likely what Tesla's Stinging rays actually were, some kind of intense, electrostatic like, shock wave in Space.

We need a rapid rise in high voltage to generate this shock wave. You can find some excellent information about the specific waveform which creates a shock wave and properties of a shock wave here:

http://www.eng.bu.edu/~robinc/pubs/C...teerSTEU06.pdf

Most interesting is that a shock wave actually increases the density of the medium through which it is passing, and thus in this region of increased density, the wave velocity is increased. Thus a shock wave can travel faster through a medium, than a normal wave. Which, if applicable to Space, is truly remarkable.

All this seems to support what Tesla was describing and provides the theoretical framework within which to discuss Tesla's discoveries.

Here is an excellent video almost completely replicating what Tesla was doing when he discovered his stinging rays.

They call it a "Thumper" and it is an "Impulse generator"

The only difference between this and what Tesla was doing is the current voltage ratio. This "thumper" uses about 1800 V but unleashes a very high current 80,000 Amps. Tesla was doing this with low current and very high voltage.

Note this isn't a cheap experiment to reproduce.

Geek Group Impulse Generator Demonstration – Project Thumper - Hacked Gadgets – DIY Tech Blog

About ether theory I agree with TeslaSecrets. Current science can measure, describe, allow to build some devices but cannot give us understanding or nature. It's a artificially created magic wand - you can be taught how to use it but you will never know why it works.

Back to stinging waves because they seems to be important.