Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube 2020 ENERGY CONFERENCE - PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!!

2020 Energy Science & Technology Conference
PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!
http://energyscienceconference.com


Go Back   Energetic Forum > >
   

Renewable Energy Discussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.

* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #571  
Old 05-17-2016, 02:29 AM
BroMikey's Avatar
BroMikey BroMikey is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldrancer View Post
...................... i guess or is it again parroting ken?

so your comment wasnt needed

cant you spell comment?

i dont think we should talk

Today's quiz is to find the cooling vortex tube. Never mind I
should have known better than to ask a half wit.

It's right on his belt. Now don't say I never helped you out.

The helmets would work for you seeing you are such
a hot head. You want me to find you a size XXL model?

I guess we will have to bring you up to speed, hell and
everybody else. Don't worry I believe you will
catch on well before you retire?

This post maybe over your head.





__________________
 
Reply With Quote

Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann
Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets

  #572  
Old 05-18-2016, 01:54 PM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamnuts View Post
I think it's worth looking at the bigger picture. For a start the Earth
has a field, so does our Sun. Apparently magnetic bubbles break off
from the Sun.
There are fields associated with galaxies and also inter- galactic fields.
I think magnetism really wants to do nothing, it is always other things
that the magnet arranges into the lowest possible energy state.
So folks think of a way to see the vortex which the Earth itself must
have. It'll obviously be in everyone's garden!

Scientists discover new form of light - UPI.com

Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #573  
Old 05-18-2016, 11:59 PM
ldrancer ldrancer is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 302
I got a reply for this. I was referring to the diagram the other guy showed, it looks like a rope. It probably is functioning as long as you arent expecting the ridiculous out of it. conratulations.

Heres my response to the picture. Heres a picture.





Attached Images
File Type: jpg vortexes.jpg (80.6 KB, 0 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #574  
Old 05-19-2016, 01:38 AM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Idrancer...I am Fed Up with You bro!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ldrancer View Post
I got a reply for this. I was referring to the diagram the other guy showed, it looks like a rope. It probably is functioning as long as you arent expecting the ridiculous out of it. conratulations.

Heres my response to the picture. Heres a picture.





Idrancer,

READ ME HERE BELOW, AND DO IT WELL

I have let you post and post indefinitely on this Thread, and I have even tried to respond to you in my best of best of Patience.

I HAVE NOT WRITTEN TO AARON, and get YOU and ALL your Insulting and Spamming Comments out of my Thread ONCE AND FOR GOOD, just because I have been, (and still am) , VERY BUSY WORKING ON THIS DEVELOPMENT.

You make comment after comment without making absolutely NO SENSE WHATSOEVER.

I DO NOT LIKE, TO USE THE "IGNORE" BUTTON

SO, I WANT TO ASK YOU A FAVOR, PLEASE.

STOP POSTING HERE, UNLESS YOU ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE DATA EXPOSED ON THIS THREAD.

NOT TO KEEP REFUTING ABOUT VORTEXES OR WHATEVER!

IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH KEN WHEELER, THIS IS NOT HIS THREAD BUT MINE!

SO, GO THERE TO HIS THREAD AND POST THERE ALL YOU WANT ABOUT HIS THEORY, I COULD CARE LESS.


TAKE THIS POST AS A FINAL NOTICE.

OR I WILL WRITE TO AARON, AND IF YOU INSIST YOU MAY BE BANNED FROM THIS FORUM.


BELIEVE ME, THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE HERE WHO DO WANT YOU OUT OF HERE.

I NEED TO MAKE SOME SEVERAL POST OF EXTREME IMPORTANCE, SO, IF YOU INTERRUPT ME WITH JUST ONE MORE COMMENT, I WILL WRITE TO AARON, PLUS ASK MORE PEOPLE TO WRITE TO HIM AS WELL.
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-19-2016 at 02:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #575  
Old 05-19-2016, 03:35 AM
BroMikey's Avatar
BroMikey BroMikey is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ufopolitics View Post
Idrancer,

READ ME HERE BELOW, AND DO IT WELL

I have let you post and post indefinitely on this Thread, and I have even tried to respond to you in my best of best of Patience.

I HAVE NOT WRITTEN TO AARON, and get YOU and ALL your Insulting and Spamming Comments out of my Thread ONCE AND FOR GOOD, just because I have been, (and still am) , VERY BUSY WORKING ON THIS DEVELOPMENT.

You make comment after comment without making absolutely NO SENSE WHATSOEVER.

I DO NOT LIKE, TO USE THE "IGNORE" BUTTON

SO, I WANT TO ASK YOU A FAVOR, PLEASE.

STOP POSTING HERE, UNLESS YOU ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE DATA EXPOSED ON THIS THREAD.

NOT TO KEEP REFUTING ABOUT VORTEXES OR WHATEVER!

IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH KEN WHEELER, THIS IS NOT HIS THREAD BUT MINE!

SO, GO THERE TO HIS THREAD AND POST THERE ALL YOU WANT ABOUT HIS THEORY, I COULD CARE LESS.


TAKE THIS POST AS A FINAL NOTICE.

OR I WILL WRITE TO AARON, AND IF YOU INSIST YOU MAY BE BANNED FROM THIS FORUM.


BELIEVE ME, THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE HERE WHO DO WANT YOU OUT OF HERE.

I NEED TO MAKE SOME SEVERAL POST OF EXTREME IMPORTANCE, SO, IF YOU INTERRUPT ME WITH JUST ONE MORE COMMENT, I WILL WRITE TO AARON, PLUS ASK MORE PEOPLE TO WRITE TO HIM AS WELL.
Yeah man I'll tell Aaron right now. When I was in school if
I threw spitballs I got suspended. One time I a pulled a long
hair from a girl in front of me and tied it around the neck of
a lazy fly for kicks and a bunch of us laughed ourselves silly
as I could fly the fly like a tiny kit.

But this Idrancer person is hateful and purposely disruptive.

I have a hard time concentrating as it is with your post UFO
the posts must be studied and compared with the old school
and so far our exchanges have been very limited as we are
consumed with correcting belligerent insults.

This person might be a Muslim, I have lived around them
in Dearborn MI. Some of them hate without a cause if they
find out you like Jewish people.

This was a targeted subject by idrancer. I know it sounds
out of the normal but I have no use for any person who
hates others based on their ethnic status.

I am truly an intercity warrior and the hair of the dog is standing.
I hate pit-bulls and lawless people and have always had to
pack some form of iron. I didn't like it but it is a means to
an end. One for each hand sometimes.

This person has no love/dignity/kindness inside of them, no fun,
no nothing but pure hatred. it is not my job to convert this person
to a human being nor would I force that task onto anyone else.

Now if I left anything out I can always finish up later
but it won't be pretty, better to cast them out first.

I write these things out of cold intellect.

It is cold outside. When I detect that a person has a murdering
spirit, I mark them off right away and proceed to answer a fool
according to their stupidity.

It's about damn time.


__________________
 

Last edited by BroMikey; 05-19-2016 at 07:07 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #576  
Old 05-19-2016, 05:18 AM
ldrancer ldrancer is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 302
ok ok ok.



That better?

you guys get mad at me in a religious thread if you want to.

here ill go backto, this : "I have been extremely busy making this coming video so everybody will have a UNIFIED MAGNETISM THEORY based on Ken's Concepts."

posted by ufopolitics, here, http://www.energeticforum.com/285412-post283.html

So based on what the topic is about its a concept. Its religion and i have the right to tell you you're wrong. I have the hell yea.

You said his concepts; of his theory. It's ramblings if theyre based off of concepts. They are not based on a working model, so they cant be nothing more than ramblings. Youve made your own. I am totally in the clear on what my intent in this topic is. You make a lot of accusations that are not true. Answer discrepancies. I mean ive asked good questions here. go back bromikeys trying to, jump on an invisible bandwagon after all he'd done anyway, and you have made it insanely appear for him now. This is crazy. anyway you need a point to the topic, not yell at me im on topic. Ive asked questions but rather than answer them you've claimed i m speaking about someone else, or have beef here, or something else other than to answer my questions.

The middle of that picture is indecipherable, its a concept. not an object. The same thing about a galaxy anyones ideas that arent a working model are concepts.

you guys are trying to end all thought. Watch a video about black holes and see how much just garbage they can go on about in an hour funded by your money too.

edit: that is not a picture of anything real by the way.
__________________
 

Last edited by ldrancer; 05-19-2016 at 05:19 AM. Reason: hey
Reply With Quote
  #577  
Old 05-19-2016, 05:57 AM
BroMikey's Avatar
BroMikey BroMikey is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldrancer View Post

............. a religious thread



posted by ufopolitics................

Its religion and i have the right ........... I have the hell yea.

It's ramblings ........ theyre based off of concepts.

go back bromikeys trying to, jump on an invisible bandwagon,

..................................and you have made it insanely

appear for him now.

This is crazy.

......trying to end all thought. ............ how much just garbage

Now this hater has cooled off a little so he can dig in and disrupt
at the next interval. As can be seen above just ripping and tearing
like a killer dog does.

It is almost as if he is being paid to break the continuity of thought
in this very complex and highly intellectual endeavor.

The person is not here with good intentions. The person does
not realize that the rest of us have a unity within our ranks of
discussion that transcends the menial. Is in the dark to the fact
that we all see right through the scam to divide.

Anyone who has displayed this level of divisiveness has disqualified
themselves as a rational free thinker having no place with us big
boys, and this is why you will hear me say that so many times.

No i wasn't just joking around about that. I am completely serious
slash honest without reservation. Adolescent attacks prohibited.

If it sounds like blowing in the wind, so be it.
__________________
 

Last edited by BroMikey; 05-19-2016 at 07:11 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #578  
Old 05-19-2016, 06:26 AM
ldrancer ldrancer is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by aljhoa View Post





No "kament"


Al
so you guys, write wrong and I get insulted when i asked you what ou meant? and bromikey can spam his picutres and oh yea thats OK but when i put a picture i get chewed out.

ok. back to the religion thread which i can call out since you claim frreedom of religion and i claim speech. you can have your religion but i can speak all i want.

And once again you free at any time to state what the topic is besides the many things i have said and quoted you on saying it is. because you refuse to answer any discrepancies your supposed to debate me on your standing but you just call me an agitator or whatever the rest of it.

you dont want to debate cause its religion becuase you cant keep your definitions consistent.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #579  
Old 05-19-2016, 10:15 AM
BroMikey's Avatar
BroMikey BroMikey is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,157
Remember

Quote:
Originally Posted by ldrancer View Post
I got a reply for this. I was referring to the diagram the other guy showed, it looks like a rope. It probably is functioning as long as you arent expecting the ridiculous out of it. conratulations.

Heres my response to the picture. Heres a picture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by admin View Post
Please refrain from posting in Ken's thread anymore. You're very antagonistic towards his views in his own discussion so if you disagree this much, post elsewhere. You're welcome to start your own thread and discuss your own viewpoints, but plenty of members are interested in the conversation here with the exception of your repetitive disagreements.
...................... Same Ole.............
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #580  
Old 05-19-2016, 10:43 PM
Iotayodi's Avatar
Iotayodi Iotayodi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 322
Quote:
hold one end and someone else hold the other, now spin it. one person looks at it, and sees it spinning cw the other sees it spinning, in the opposite direction. Thats the theory, it is a model. It is a working model. Your asking whats in the middle of a magnet so you can confuse people. just know that it works. who cares its there, a magnet does what a magnet does. dont worry about, it
..

This evening, I would like to have your attention.
My celebrated opponent has proposed The rope theory which I dispute. I will briefly feign affection and respect for him. By taking a position opposing such a luminary, I will appear to elevate my inferior status nearer to his.
I will begin by contorting my opponent's proposal, creating a straw-man argument, easy to destroy but not so flimsy that decimating it will lack challenge or entertainment value.
I will follow by defaming my opponent's character thereby implying that his arguments, regardless of their content, do not hold.
Finally I will present my own position, in three parts:
First I will convey wrong ideas that will nevertheless appeal to persons with below-median intelligence. This aims to secure the favor of half the audience.
Second, I will reformulate my opponent's proposal in terms favorable to myself, using his very proposal, distinguished only by inflections and tone of voice. I will pepper this paraphrasing with polysyllabic and obscure diction, employing supercilious terminology and playful ironic bourgeois malapropisms to ensnare pseudo-intellectuals who otherwise hold a cynical position toward a charismatic personage such as myself.
Third, I will reinforce the claim that these ideas are superior to my opponent's, simply by repeating that claim several times.
I will conclude by taking questions and using each one to congratulate myself for my success and, if the occasion permits, to make hilarious jabs at my sad opponent.
I look forward to your attention..
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #581  
Old 05-21-2016, 02:26 AM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Hermann Minkowski....Part 1

Hello to All,

Please, allow me to introduce on the next series of Posts the works from Hermann Minkowski (1864-1909), (A. Einstein Mathematics Professor) resumed in a full text book called Space and Time

According to my research, the best translation from the German language of the Two Main Chapters (to be discussed next) was done by Meghnad Saha in 1920. And is free to download at:

1-Space and Time (1908, translated in 1920 by Meghnad Saha) Only Pages 77-88 but enough to analyze them here.

2-The Fundamental Equations for Electromagnetic Processes in Moving Bodies (1907, translated in 1920 by Meghnad Saha)

You can also find a more recent book translated by Fritz Lewerto and Vesselin Petkov from the Minkowski Institute at Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

However, I have found -some how- different interpretations from the original statements by Minkowski, done by Petkov versus Saha translations, which I consider essential for a clear understanding of the complex formulations, basically in the Second Volume (Equations for Electromagnetic Processes in moving bodies) on the High Level Algebra and Integers based on Vectors of the II Kind.

At the same token, I found many excellent statements on the above work by Lewerto and Petkov (basically the later one, also the editor, Vesselin Petkov)...I will quote some below:

Quote:
Not only the general public, but even students of physics appear to believe that the physics concept of spacetime was introduced by Einstein. This is both unfortunate and unfair.

It was Hermann Minkowski (Einstein's mathematics professor) who announced the new four-dimensional (spacetime) view of the world in 1908, which he deduced from experimental physics by decoding the profound message hidden in the failed experiments designed to discover absolute motion. Minkowski realized that the images coming from our senses, which seem to represent an evolving three-dimensional world, are only glimpses of a higher four-dimensional reality that is not divided into past, present, and future since space and all moments of time form an inseparable entity (spacetime).

Einstein's initial reaction to Minkowski's view of spacetime and the associated with it four-dimensional physics (also introduced by Minkowski) was not quite favorable: "Since the mathematicians have invaded the relativity theory, I do not understand it myself any more.“

However, later Einstein adopted not only Minkowski's spacetime physics (which was crucial for Einstein's revolutionary theory of gravity as curvature of spacetime), but also Minkowski's world view as evident from Einstein’s letter of condolences to the widow of his longtime friend Besso:

"Now Besso has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion."

Besso left this world on 15 March 1955;
Einstein followed him on 18 April 1955
Quote:
May the hope be fulfilled, through this dissertation, that a wider circle of people become motivated so that participants,
who immerse themselves in Minkowski's ideas and the theory of relativity, may each and all contribute their part to promote and spread this theory in accordance with Minkowski's bold dream and that, hence, future generations of mankind will be consciously aware that space and time recede completely to become mere shadows and only the space-time-transformation still stays alive.


Aachen, May 1910
Otto Blumenthal;
As we all know, Einstein based his whole Special Relativity Postulate inspired by the works from Hendrick Lorentz about Magnetism.

On a further note (Post) I will show how Minkowski, gathered all the LINEAR TRANSFORMATIONS from Lorentz on Electromagnetism, Electric Fields and EM Induction, etc,etc...and based on a High Level Algebra, Curls Vectors and Lor Operators approach (Calculus III on Spatial Geometries) He was able to demonstrate Graphically and Mathematically that Lorentz Transformations is nothing but a rotation of the coordinate system in the four-dimensional space, also confirmed by Einstein himself below:


Quote:
In 1946 in his Autobiography* Einstein summarized Minkowski's main contribution:

Minkowski's important contribution to the theory lies in the following: Before Minkowski's investigation it was necessary to
carry out a Lorentz-transformation on a law in order to test its invariance under such transformations; he, on the other hand,
succeeded in introducing a formalism such that the mathematical form of the law itself guarantees its invariance under Lorentz-transformations. By creating a four-dimensional tensor-calculus he achieved the same thing for the four-dimensional space which the ordinary vector-calculus achieves for the three spatial dimensions. He also showed that the Lorentz-transformation (apart from a
different algebraic sign due to the special character of time) is nothing but a rotation of the coordinate system in the four-dimensional space.

*A. Einstein, \Autobiographical notes." In: Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist Paul A. Schilpp, ed., 3rd ed. (Open Court, Illinois 1969) pp. 1-94, p. 59.
Above quoted text was taken from P 26 in the free E-Book Space Time Free Book from Petkov

Note: I will be editing all this posts as I want to keep them all in one Sequence...

THIS IS PART 1

Appreciate your patience...


Regards


Ufopolitics
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-21-2016 at 04:00 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #582  
Old 05-21-2016, 02:27 AM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Minkowski Spacetime...Part 2

MINKOWSKI'S SPACETIME...

[IMG][/IMG]

Quote:
I think the proper understanding of Minkowski's spacetime physics (which requires more effort than learning its four-dimensional formalism) is crucial not only for deep understanding of modern physics, but more importantly such understanding is a necessary condition for making discoveries in the twenty first century physics.

V. Petkov (Spacetime)
[IMG][/IMG]

Quote:
The best proof that the experimental evidence against the existence of absolute motion (reflected in the relativity postulate) implies that the Universe is an absolute four-dimensional world is contained in Minkowski's paper itself. As discussed in Section 2 Minkowski first realized the important hidden message in the experimental fact that physical phenomena are the same in all inertial reference frames (which Einstein merely stated in the relativity postulate without explaining it) -physical phenomena are the same in all inertial reference frames because every inertial observer has his own space and time and therefore describes the phenomena in his reference frame (i.e. in his own space and time) in which he is at rest. For example, the Earth is at rest with respect to its space and therefore all experiments confirm this state of rest. Due to his excellent geometrical imagination Minkowski appears to have immediately realized that many spaces are possible in a four-dimensional world. In this way he managed to decode the physical meaning of the experimental fact that absolute motion cannot be discovered
[IMG][/IMG]

"the Earth is at rest with respect to its space"...Later on Minkowsky demonstrates mathematically -based on this perfectly well based confirmation- the reason why, Lorentz disregarded the Æther to build his Theory:

Quote:
In particular, Lorentz's theory gives a good account of the non-existence of relative motion of the earth and the luminiferous "Æther"; it shows that this fact is connected with the covariance of the original equation, at certain simultaneous transformations of the space and time co-ordinates; these transformations have obtained from H. Poincaré[4] the name of Lorentz-transformations. The covariance of these fundamental equations, when subjected to the Lorentz-transformation, is a purely mathematical fact; I will call this the Theorem of Relativity; this theorem rests essentially on the form of the differential equations for the propagation of waves with the velocity of light.

Now without recognizing any hypothesis about the connection between "Æther" and matter, we can expect these mathematically evident theorems to have their consequences so far extended — that thereby even those laws of ponderable media which are yet unknown may anyhow possess this covariance when subjected to a Lorentz-transformation; by saying this, we do not indeed express an opinion, but rather a conviction, — and this conviction I may be permitted to call the Postulate of Relativity. The position of affairs here is almost the same as when the Principle of Conservation of Energy was postulated in cases, where the corresponding forms of energy were unknown.

H. Minkowsky (The Fundamental Equations for Electromagnetic Processes in Moving Bodies (1908) Saha 1920)

Quote:
Now if hereafter, we succeed in maintaining this covariance as a definite connection between pure and simple observable phenomena in moving bodies, the definite connection may be styled the Principle of Relativity.

These differentiations seem to me to be useful for enabling us to characterise the present day position of the electro-dynamics for moving bodies.

H. A. Lorentz has found out the Relativity theorem and has created the Relativity postulate as a hypothesis that electrons and matter suffer contractions in consequence of their motion according to a certain law.

A. Einstein[5] has brought out the point very clearly, that this postulate is not an artificial hypothesis but is rather a new way of comprehending the time-concept which is forced upon us by observation of natural phenomena.

The Principle of Relativity has not yet been formulated for electro-dynamics of moving bodies in the sense characterized by me. In the present essay, while formulating this principle, I shall obtain the fundamental equations for moving bodies in a sense which is uniquely determined by this principle. But it will be shown that none of the forms hitherto assumed for these equations can exactly fit in with this principle.

We would at first expect that the fundamental equations which are assumed by Lorentz for moving bodies would correspond to the Relativity Principle. But it will be shown that this is not the case for the general equations which Lorentz has for any possible, and also for magnetic bodies; but this is approximately the case (if we neglect the square of the velocity of matter in comparison to the velocity of light) for those equations which Lorentz hereafter infers for non-magnetic bodies. But this latter accordance with the relativity principle is due to the fact that the condition of non-magnetisation has been formulated in a way not corresponding to the relativity principle; therefore the accordance is due to the fortuitous compensation of two contradictions to the relativity postulate. But meanwhile enunciation of the Principle in a rigid manner does not signify any contradiction to the hypotheses of Lorentz's molecular theory, but it shall become clear that the assumption of the contraction of the electron in Lorentz's theory must be introduced at an earlier stage than Lorentz has actually done.

In an appendix, I have gone into discussion of the position of Classical Mechanics with respect to the relativity postulate. Any easily perceivable modification of mechanics for satisfying the requirements of the Relativity theory would hardly afford any noticeable difference in observable processes; but would lead to very surprising consequences. By laying down the relativity postulate from the outset, sufficient means have been created for deducing henceforth the complete series of Laws of Mechanics from the principle of conservation of energy (and statements concerning the form of the energy) alone.
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-21-2016 at 05:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #583  
Old 05-21-2016, 02:28 AM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
The Fundamental Equations for Electromagnetic Processes in Moving Bodies/Part 3

The Fundamental Equations for Electromagnetic Processes in Moving Bodies

Quote:
If the field caused by the electron be described in the above-mentioned way, then it will appear that the division of the field into electric and magnetic forces is a relative one, and depends upon the time-axis assumed; the two forces considered together bears some analogy to the force-screw in mechanics; the analogy is, however, imperfect.

H. Minkowski (SpaceTime-Saha)
A brief account and conclusion for this Chapter after I have reviewed extensively (You could do it yourselves here, which is also linked as #2 in Part 1 post)

However, I will try to save you some time...in this Analysis.

Minkowski uses all the same exact formulations from Lorentz, which are all written in "Linear Fashion" (Linear Algebra, Singular Vectors of the First Kind) and single particles for one single time, then Minkowski transcend them all, into Complex Vectors of the Second Kind within a 4D World.

Minkowsky incorporates Classical Mechanics methods to obtain a Geometrical View of Lorentz Transformations. In order to achieve Geometries he went back to Maxwell Formulations which includes Curl Vectors of the Second Kind, plus all the related Differential Operators (Lor, Del, etc)

[IMG][/IMG]

With Curl Vectors of the II Kind he incorporates rotations from different points (variable turning axis) from different forces acting within its respective "proper time" enclosed within his Four Dimensional Grid, to furthermore be able to understand from a very clear way...why Lorentz charged particle makes this 90º turn, based on a simple linear displacement through a "Uniform" Magnetic Field...seemingly forces coming from nowhere...

Some illustrations about the Curl Vector Geometries (here, of course in 3D Only, not in Minkowsky 4D World Coordinates)

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

Quote:
§ 5. Space-time Vectors. Of the 1st and 2nd kind.

If we take the principal result of the Lorentz transformation together with the fact that the system (A) as well as the system (B) is covariant with respect to a rotation of the coordinate-system round the null point, we obtain the general relativity theorem. In order to make the facts easily comprehensible, it may be more convenient to define a series of expressions, for the purpose of expressing the ideas in a concise form, while on the other hand I shall adhere to the practice of using complex magnitudes, in order to render certain symmetries quite evident.

H. Minkowski (Saha)
Quote:
§ 6. Concept of Time.

By the Lorentz transformation, we are allowed to effect certain changes of the time parameter. In consequence of this fact, it is no longer permissible to speak of the absolute simultaneity of two events. The ordinary idea of simultaneity rather presupposes that six independent parameters, which are evidently required for defining a system of space and time axes, are somehow reduced to three. Since we are accustomed to consider that these limitations represent in a unique way the actual facts very approximately, we maintain that the simultaneity of two events exists of themselves. In fact, the following considerations will prove conclusive...

H. Minkowski (Saha)

Quote:
APPENDIX. Mechanics and the Relativity-Postulate.

It would be very unsatisfactory if the new way of looking at the time-concept, which permits a Lorentz transformation, were to be confined to a single part of Physics.

Now many authors say that classical mechanics stand in opposition to the relativity postulate, which is taken to be the basic of the new Electro-dynamics.

H. Minkowski (Saha)
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-21-2016 at 08:27 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #584  
Old 05-21-2016, 02:28 AM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Quote:

SPACE AND TIME

A Lecture delivered before the Naturforscher Versammlung (Congress of Natural Philosophers) at Cologne — (21st September, 1908).

Gentlemen,

The conceptions about time and space, which I hope to develop before you to-day, has grown on experimental physical grounds. Herein lies its strength. The tendency is radical. Henceforth, the old conception of space for itself, and time for itself shall reduce to a mere shadow, and some sort of union of the two will be found consistent with facts.


Now I want to show you how we can arrive at the changed concepts about time and space from mechanics, as accepted now-a-days, from purely mathematical considerations. The equations of Newtonian mechanics show a twofold invariance, (i) their form remains unaltered when we subject the fundamental space-coordinate system to any possible change of position, (ii) when we change the system in its nature of motion, i. e., when we impress upon it any uniform motion of translation, the null-point of time plays no part. We are accustomed to look upon the axioms of geometry as settled once for all, while we seldom have the same amount of conviction regarding the axioms of mechanics, and therefore the two invariants are seldom mentioned in the same breath. Each one of these denotes a certain group of transformations for the differential equations of mechanics. We look upon the existence of the first group as a fundamental characteristics of space. We always prefer to leave off the second group to itself, and with a light heart conclude that we can never decide from physical considerations whether the space, which is supposed to be at rest, may not finally be in uniform motion. So these two groups lead quite separate existences besides each other. Their totally heterogeneous character may scare us away from the attempt to compound them. Yet it is the whole compounded group which as a whole gives us occasion for thought.
In above paragraph, Minkowski demonstrates a simple fact derived from Mechanics typical procedures...which keeps Geometrical Axioms bound together with the the Axioms of Mechanical Equations...

It is very obvious that Lorentz Transformations do not offer a full Geometry of Magnetic Fields, since it uses linear, flat and single equations dedicated to fulfill the trajectory of a single "particle" into a very complex and uniform magnetic field.

There are more Lorentz Transformations disadvantages mentioned by Minkowski, however, He recognizes the great advantages as simplicity of its whole equations...

1-There are some problems if we add accelerations to the electron particle, since it is conceived/supposed to travel at a uniform speed.

2-There are some restrictions when it comes to simultaneous events, since it does not have Minkowski flexibility of "Proper Time".

3-The Lorentz Electron "reduction of Mass" as it travels at v=c contradicts the Newtonian Postulate of "Conservation of Mass, which goes hand by hand with the Conservation of Energy Postulate.

Minkowski Equations became the ones adopted by Einstein in the later years after his sudden death (1909), about a year after He wrote Spacetime Book and Conferences (1907-1908)...

4-Lorentz "disregarded the Aether completely" from all his Transformations...

Minkowski brought the Aether back, and demonstrated that Aether new transformed equations are "now compatible" to Lorentz now transformed Equations by Minkowski...to the point that in 1946 Einstein recognized the existence of the Aether...some analysts call it "The New Einstein Aether"...I will cite that reference work later on...is free to download.

But out of all the above restrictions and errors repaired by Minkowski Equations to H.A.Lorentz Transformations...there is only one I really want to bring out as directly related to the discussion here...

And actually, H. Poincaré in 1906 exposed this fact before Minkowski did:

Quote:
Poincaré's paper Sur la dynamique de l'electron, published in 1906 (but received by Rendiconti del Circolo matematico Rendiconti del Circolo di Palermo on July 23, 1905) since he quoted it in his previous lectures given in November and December 1907. In his paper Poincaré first published the important result that the Lorentz transformations had a geometric interpretation as rotations in what he seemed to have regarded as an abstract four-dimensional space with time as the fourth dimension.

From Spacetime by V. Petkov
Except that Poincaré did not paid that much attention to his discovery mentioned above...therefore never develop it so beautifully as Minkowski did...

Now I will cite Einstein (again):

[QUOTE]
Quote:
In 1946 in his Autobiography* Einstein summarized Minkowski's main contribution:

Minkowski's important contribution to the theory lies in the following: Before Minkowski's investigation it was necessary to
carry out a Lorentz-transformation on a law in order to test its invariance under such transformations; he, on the other hand,
succeeded in introducing a formalism such that the mathematical form of the law itself guarantees its invariance under Lorentz-transformations. By creating a four-dimensional tensor-calculus he achieved the same thing for the four-dimensional space which the ordinary vector-calculus achieves for the three spatial dimensions. He also showed that the Lorentz-transformation (apart from a
different algebraic sign due to the special character of time) is nothing but a rotation of the coordinate system in the four-dimensional space.


*A. Einstein, \Autobiographical notes." In: Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist Paul A. Schilpp, ed., 3rd ed. (Open Court, Illinois 1969) pp. 1-94, p. 59.
I will repeat above bold statement:

He also showed that the Lorentz-transformation (apart from a different algebraic sign due to the special character of time) is nothing but a rotation of the coordinate system in the four-dimensional space.


FINAL CONCLUSION from all of this Posts above.

It is that simple now Lady's & Gentlemen...Lorentz "Transformations" Reduced, Compacted, short cut so much the whole original Electron/Magnetic Field Interaction Equations, which derived into the way we all look at Electrodynamics, Electromagnetism, Magnetic Fields (of moving ,rest bodies, etc,etc) Hence EM Induction, Generators and then more and more..to the point that we all, no longer notice, realize, see, observe, then never accept, understand... that a Magnetic Field is nothing more than a simple and plain Vortex/Spiral of Forces acting upon any charged particle, traveling at any speed (V) and following any linear or curve path(s), etc, etc and etc...

Minkowski recognition is huge towards Einstein's SR, and that is where he gets most of credits...he, simply went "back to Maxwell" Equations (before Lorentz transform them), which originally contained the Spatial Vectors of the II Kind..,Curl, High Level Algebras, Differential Operators...plus all other disregarded by Lorentz Non-Linear Formulas...and "Re-Expanded" them all beautifully...except that now through a more complex, wider Grid...A World Grid of Four Dimensions instead of just Three.

However...be honest here now...how many of you knew about Minkowski's existence??

It's name definitively not mentioned in any "Official Classic Electromagnetism Text Book" learned in EE or Physics school...coincidentally...something very similar to the Nikola Tesla case.


Regards



Ufopolitics
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-24-2016 at 12:55 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #585  
Old 05-21-2016, 05:09 AM
Ernst Ernst is online now
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iotayodi View Post
..

This evening, I would like to have your attention.
My celebrated opponent has proposed The rope theory which I dispute. I will briefly feign affection and respect for him. By taking a position opposing such a luminary, I will appear to elevate my inferior status nearer to his.
I will begin by contorting my opponent's proposal, creating a straw-man argument, easy to destroy but not so flimsy that decimating it will lack challenge or entertainment value.
I will follow by defaming my opponent's character thereby implying that his arguments, regardless of their content, do not hold.
Finally I will present my own position, in three parts:
First I will convey wrong ideas that will nevertheless appeal to persons with below-median intelligence. This aims to secure the favor of half the audience.
Second, I will reformulate my opponent's proposal in terms favorable to myself, using his very proposal, distinguished only by inflections and tone of voice. I will pepper this paraphrasing with polysyllabic and obscure diction, employing supercilious terminology and playful ironic bourgeois malapropisms to ensnare pseudo-intellectuals who otherwise hold a cynical position toward a charismatic personage such as myself.
Third, I will reinforce the claim that these ideas are superior to my opponent's, simply by repeating that claim several times.
I will conclude by taking questions and using each one to congratulate myself for my success and, if the occasion permits, to make hilarious jabs at my sad opponent.
I look forward to your attention..

We're at page 20 now without anything that can even remotely be thought of as proof.
But this thread certainly keeps its entertaining value!

Ernst.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #586  
Old 05-21-2016, 05:58 AM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernst View Post

We're at page 20 now without anything that can even remotely be thought of as proof.
But this thread certainly keeps its entertaining value!

Ernst.


BRAVO!!...

OMG, You are SO smart Ernst!...so clever!...and so "analytic"!...that can not even realize that :

In order to Fully Prove a Theory beyond a mere Book, I must go into a series of Graphic-Visual Experimentation and Developments in order to arrive at the Final Stage (the Physical Built Machines Proof)...which is the end, finito...then, this Thread would be closed.

Anyways, I really could not care less about your insignificant opinion than this short and final response deserves...but taking the time to execute it...
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci
Reply With Quote
  #587  
Old 05-21-2016, 06:09 AM
BroMikey's Avatar
BroMikey BroMikey is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernst View Post

We're at page 20 now without anything that can even remotely be thought of as proof.
But this thread certainly keeps its entertaining value!

Ernst.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iotayodi View Post
..

I will begin by contorting my opponent's proposal,

defaming my opponent's character

First I will convey wrong ideas

I will reformulate my opponent's proposal

toward a charismatic personage such as myself.

.........make hilarious jabs at my sad opponent.

Good grammar but makes you look bad when it comes to
thinking outside the box, really bad.

To be an opponent you have to have a case. You must make
a case, you must put energy into explaining your position
which clearly the record shows for years now that neither
of you are able.

No one here has said anything outside of the box of conventional
rhetoric besides a few who hardly ever post with the exception
of UFO.

Unless you can come up with more than a few words that are
repeated over and over and or post a picture to clarify statements
you all sound like children arguing in the street about who makes
the right chalk pattern in hopscotch.

I see UFO pour his heart out with very concise thought complete
with diagrams and extended long play expressions of his favorite
notions that thrill all who are willing to travel outside conventional
ideology. I get his teachings.

As a person who feels like i have come in late for class just looking
on to each answer or idea, I will say no one here has made any
sense in their view, largely because no one seems able.

When people are unable to teach their particular views it is generally
because they don't have a complete picture in their own minds yet.

So my suggestion is that people coming to a thread for years and
disagree with it should make another thread similar to the one they
think is stupid as has been stated, to set the record straight.

No one has made a duplicate thread after years of hurling insults
so the conclusion is that the intent of the argumentative behavior
is rooted in bitterness as well as a thirst to be revered as the ultimate
brainiac on your part, none of which are the character flaws of my
main man UFO.

Run on UFO, your stuff is real. Thanks for taking the time to
dynamite the rhino's fraudulent system of smoke and mirrors
cult of personality look at big me encampment.

The rest are all just linguine. Get a life hopeless.

All these screen names that sound just alike makes a person
wonder, doesn't it? All these one liners.

Kind-a-pee's you guys off that UFO is way past your pathetic
nursery rhyme doctrine, who would-a-thought?

:
__________________
 

Last edited by BroMikey; 05-21-2016 at 06:27 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #588  
Old 05-21-2016, 12:39 PM
Iotayodi's Avatar
Iotayodi Iotayodi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 322
Quote:
Good grammar but makes you look bad when it comes to
thinking outside the box, really bad.
That was my point. Not thinking out of the box.
Trust me, I am outside of the box! Ill Pm you and show you how far out of the box. Im probably further out of the box than what people think Ufo is. You can draw your own conclusions and do your own experiments If you want. But it takes thinking outside of the box. I wont post it here though. Theres way too much negative rhetoric here.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #589  
Old 05-21-2016, 07:51 PM
BroMikey's Avatar
BroMikey BroMikey is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iotayodi View Post
That was my point. Not thinking out of the box.
Trust me, I am outside of the box! Ill Pm you and show you how far out of the box. Im probably further out of the box than what people think Ufo is. You can draw your own conclusions and do your own experiments If you want. But it takes thinking outside of the box. I wont post it here though. Theres way too much negative rhetoric here.

That's okay go ahead and explain yourself, the aimless attack
drones do. Sorry, I will not lump you in with the drones anymore.
Thanks for the Private post. You really should show that viewpoint
and if for some reason the drones attack, now that I see you
are for real, well "they'll get handled.

Thanks for the informative behind the scenes exposure. I like
your stuff so that is why this thread exists.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #590  
Old 05-21-2016, 09:48 PM
BroMikey's Avatar
BroMikey BroMikey is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iotayodi View Post
That was my point. Not thinking out of the box.
Trust me, I am outside of the box! Ill Pm you and show you how far out of the box. Im probably further out of the box than what people think Ufo is. You can draw your own conclusions and do your own experiments If you want. But it takes thinking outside of the box. I wont post it here though. Theres way too much negative rhetoric here.
Thanks. Explain when you have time. I am sure you
are one of the wizkids who type fast and can get your message
across thats what this is all about, sharing what you have
found through experiment, how it relates to another man's
argument. You are outside the box for sure.

plus you can take a punch too.





__________________
 

Last edited by BroMikey; 05-21-2016 at 09:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #591  
Old 05-23-2016, 08:35 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Space, Time and Spacetime Book...

Hello to all,

I have almost completed all four posts above about Minkowski...except for some minor details.

I mentioned before about a Book where it is discussed some aspects of Minkowski work...plus some analysis and related experimental tests...

The Book is free to download from below link:

SPACE, TIME AND SPACETIME

There is an interesting Chapter which I mentioned before when Einstein changed his mind and recognized Aether again...called:

Ether, the Theory of Relativity and Quantum Physics
by Eduardo V. Flores

I will quote its Abstract below:

Quote:
Abstract
In this paper we revisit some of the reasons given by Einstein that resulted in his change of mind about the ether from denying to defending its existence. The ether proposed by Einstein we call Einstein’s new ether. We consider the potential use of Einstein’s new ether in quantum mechanics. The standard model of elementary particles reveals the existence of at least one component of Einstein’s new ether.
In this work we explore additional properties of Einstein’s new ether. In particular, we consider a recent experiment known as the Afshar experiment due to its implications for the wave particle duality paradox. The Afshar experiment is perhaps the first experiment that provides clear evidence that wave and particle aspects of the photon have some sort of physical reality beyond the limits imposed by complementarity. We propose that the physical reality of the wave aspect of the photon has its origin in Einstein’s new ether. Here, we report on consequences of the Afshar experiment for Einstein’s new ether.
Hope you enjoy it...


Regards


Ufopolitics
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-23-2016 at 08:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #592  
Old 05-24-2016, 05:21 AM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Contemporary Developments from Minkowski 1908 Papers...Part 1

Hello to All,

I will present below a free pdf (Title is the Link) which will clear many doubts related to the Differences between Contemporary Lorentz Transformations (existing in all University textbooks up to now) versus the original Minkowski work: The Fundamental Equations for Electromagnetic Processes in Moving Bodies

Electric and magnetic Fields: do they need Lorentz covariance?

By: Zbigniew Oziewicz

I will quote below main and relevant aspects discussed in this excellent article related to this Thread discussion. From there you guys could expand the reading and analysis...As I have also corrected some errors in English grammar and arranging some sentences...however, am sure you will find more on the way

Quote:
1. Introduction: symmetry group of Maxwell equations

In 1904 Lorentz and Poincaré showed that a system of four Maxwell's differential equations(observer-dependent) has a symmetry group the same as a symmetry group of metric tensor.

This was the Lorentz and Poincaré isometry* group.

In 1909/1910 Bateman and independently Cunningham, showed that Lorentz and Poincaré were wrong, because they discovered only a subgroup of actual symmetry group of Maxwell equations. In fact symmetry group of Maxwell equations of electromagnetic Field is conformant group of dimension 15, this is actual symmetry group of massless radiation.

What does it mean to be a symmetry of differential equation? Symmetry act on solutions of differential equation and maps solutions into solutions. Therefore a symmetry is iso-morphism of a manifold of solutions.
*Isometry: A transformation that is invariant with respect to distance. That is, the distance between any two points in the pre-image must be the same as the distance between the images of the two points.


Quote:
Misinterpretation of Minkowski's terminology grows into three-dimensional and four dimensional quantities, 3-dimensional vector, 3-space vectors, 3D versus 4D quantities, 4-vectors, four-tensors, etc. (e.g. Rindler 1969, x5.4 Four-vector, x5.10 Three-Force and Four-Force;Landau & Lif****z, 1975, x6. Four-Vectors).
A vector does not have dimension. It is a manifold** and a vector-space that possess dimension.

The source of misinterpretation is a concept of a vector field. Many authors denote by E time dependent electric field strength , i.e. not static electric field, E(r; t); and of course such electric field is a vector field on four-dimensional space-time, independently of a choice of a basis. This notation assume silently that derivative of some time coordinate (a parameter t) in direction of E is zero, Et (dt)E = 0: This means that this 4D vector field E on spacetime is tangent to three-dimensional super-surfaces t = const: This condition could be equivalent to stressed many times by Minkowski, that electric field E must by orthogonal to time-like observer-vector field P; i.e.E P g(P E) = 0; for some Minkowski's metric tensor g: To be Minkowski' s metric tensor g does not means here that curvature and torsion of connection must be absent, we emphasize only that this non-Euclidean spacetime metric was recognized by Minkowski (and early by Henri Poincaré).
Quote:
4. Herman Minkowski

In 1908 Hermann Minkowski published his last paper, entitled "The foundations for electromagnetic phenomena...[...]The 1910-paper, of almost the same title, was written by his pupil Max Born, and sometimes is referred as Minkowski and Born paper, although was published under the name of Hermann Minkowski alone. When comparing the Minkowski 1908-paper with Born's 1910-paper, it is clear that Born's 1910-interpretation was different from 1908-paper by Minkowski.
Born put full emphasis on Lorentz-group covariance, whereas Minkowski in Part II x11.6 of his 1908-paper defined electric and magnetic fields in a covariance free way.

[...]
  • A tensor is said to be a concomitant tensor, if it is build-from/dependent-on other primary tensors. Minkowski defined group-covariance, and in particular at the beginning of x11.6, defined Lorentz-covariance of concomitant tensors. Minkowski's definition of Lorentz covariance does not appears in contemporary University textbooks on electromagnetism.[...]
  • The entire x11.6 of Minkowski's 1908-paper is devoted to ingenious invention of definition of electric and magnetic fields, as concomitants of absolute electromagnetic field. These concepts are covariance-free, and do not need at all Lorentz-isometry group.

[...]

An alternative point of view, different from Einstein's in 1905, is axiom that physics (observers, measurements, etc.) is coordinate-free, and basis-free.

If physics is coordinate-free and basis-free, then, mass-irrelevant old coordinate kinematics as presented for example in [Whittaker 1952], is useless, and must be replaced by Leonard Euler's material fluid introduced in 1754 as a vector field in spacetime. Euler's fluid was reincarnated by Minkowski in 1908: physical material reference system is identified with a time-like fluid vector field in a space-time, known also as a monad, and abbreviated in the present note as observer monad, or as observer-vector. Within this view mathematical bases are irrelevant for physics.
Clearly, a time-like vector field cannot describe a massless radiation, and therefore is related to some non-zero mass-density as in Euler's approach. Mass-density `p' enter to energy-momentum tensor of a perfect fluid, and it is indispensable for two-body kinematics of center-of-mass and for reduced mass.

The monad-observers, time-like fluids, were re-invented independently by Eckart in 1940, Ehlers in 1961, and by Abraham Zelmanov (1913-1987) in his PhD Dissertation in 1944, and in his publication in 1976. Minkowski's first invention of monad-observer (time-like fluids) in 1908 went to oblivion.
For discussion of Einstein's tetrad, versus Minkowski's monad, we refer to [Mitskievich 2006, Chapter 2]
Quote:
in Vector Analysis [1901]. However, Maxwell differential equations needs physical intensive and extensive vector fields on four-dimensional spacetime, and spacetime was 'not known' explicitly before Minkowski in 1908. Clifford-Gibbs cross product in three dimension is totally irrelevant for electromagnetism, have nothing to do with the subject matter of electric and magnetic fields, and it darkens ideas. Electromagnetic laws, four Maxwell's differential equations, ponderomotive force (called the Lorentz force), and relativity transformation of electric and magnetic fields, with Gibbs cross in three dimensions, become a thoughtless mechanical set of strange formulas, and this is mortal for electromagnetism and radiation in spacetime.

[...]

In four-dimensional spacetime, binary cross XP depends on a choice of an auxiliary vector field P: This vector-field-dependence of binary-cross in a spacetime, is of crucial importance for understanding. It is either not realized or thoughtlessly suppressed, when presenting Lorentz transformations of electric and magnetic fields, and when presenting ponderomotive (Lorentz) force as a tensorial concomitant of the electromagnetic field and electromagnetic spin-charge density.

Quote:
8.5 Clarification. One can define Lorentz isometry group either as:
  • Acting on observers-frames-tetrads with Lorentz `passive' action on scalar components [Einstein 1905], for postulated absolute-vectors.
  • Acting on individual covariant-vectors in Minkowski spacetime (when a basis is physically
    meaningless), with a Lorentz `active'-action on the Lorentz-covariant tensor fields.
  • Lorentz isometry group, as every isometry, does not act on manifold** of events. This means that all scalar fields are GL-invariant, and in particular they are Lorentz-invariant.
**3D Manifold definition (not exactly Euclidean Geometry) is a Geometric Volume given by either rotating spatial vectors, points, spatial curves or combinations thereof, which generate either extrusions,(3D Simple Manifolds Examples: a cylinder is a 3D manifold generated by extruding a curve circle along a specific axis) or revolving surface volumes (a Sphere is a closed 3D manifold generated by revolving a circle curve around a given diametrical axis), and could be either open or closed, regular or irregular surfaces depending on primary generators. Minkowski's Dual Time Hyperboloids derived from Past and Future Cones are Manifolds. (Wikipedia definition is not "perfectly suited" as for this meaning here.)


EDIT: I am still working on this post...and I will either add a part 2 or keep here depending on # of character's length...


Regards


Ufopolitics
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-24-2016 at 06:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #593  
Old 05-24-2016, 06:14 AM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Possible extension from previous post...Part 2

This is a possible extension from previous post...Part 2

If I don't need it... I will delete it

just reserving the space
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-24-2016 at 06:32 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #594  
Old 05-25-2016, 09:08 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
We need some Pest Control on this Forum, definitively!!

An example of a RAT, and an A$$HOLE ONE...

A Couple of Ernst Posts on the Flat Earth Thread...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernst View Post
aljhoa,

Why keep this insanely idiotic thread alive?
We now have a new hilarious entertainment channel here filled with the most ridiculous nonsense by our hot but empty headed master UFO and his oxyurian mouse who is now giving certificates of 'out-of-your-box'-ness after a secret examination.

Don't miss out.


Ernst.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernst View Post

Today we have the internet where many gullible witless drop-outs waste their already useless time and it is these nitwits that would go for these idiotic notions, because with their single cell brains a flat Earth is easier to grasp than a spherical one. And now they have a tool, which they can wield against the rest of the world who talk about things they can't comprehend. They can now say, "You are wrong", and think, "that is why I didn't understand a word of any of you". And feel good about themselves because now they are "out of the box".

This thread about the flat Earth is about the base line (for now). It is as low as anyone dares to go (for now). The Ken Wheeler case is slightly more advanced but it is based on the same principles. And there a couple more that I could mention, but won't.

Good luck Al!

Ernst.
A real man, don't behave like this at all...going around spreading gossip and BS in THE BACK of other Members here just like Bítches do.

A real MAN comes right in front of WHOEVER he is BADMOUTHING and do it right there, with BALLS!

Only came here to "complaint" about not showing any proof as of now..what an A$$ HOLE!!

Particularly, I DO NOT TRUST anyone that "says" he or she is in the "search" for Free Energy, then spend his/her time running to the Patent Office all the time...!

I Would NOT TRUST anyone who says He/She has found WHATEVER related to ANY Discovery which could better Mankind, and keeps his mouth shut, because of EITHER an NDA Agreement...OR just Because He/She has to FIRST RUN to the Patent Office.


Like is the "case" of the Guy above, Ernst "The Walking Dutch Disease"

Could He be another Paid Shill...or just a cheap Patent Troll??

Because A RAT We all know He definitively IS!!


We definitively need some Pest Control CLEANING on this Forum...


Ufopolitics
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-26-2016 at 12:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #595  
Old 05-26-2016, 12:17 AM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Being Out of the Box...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernst View Post

Today we have the internet where many gullible witless drop-outs waste their already useless time and it is these nitwits that would go for these idiotic notions, because with their single cell brains a flat Earth is easier to grasp than a spherical one. And now they have a tool, which they can wield against the rest of the world who talk about things they can't comprehend. They can now say, "You are wrong", and think, "that is why I didn't understand a word of any of you". And feel good about themselves because now they are "out of the box".
Ernst,

Have You ever thought that your statement/concept above... about "Out of the Box" could be just a "Psychological Mirror Imaging" of Yourself?...

I mean...ever thought about doing a "Self Psychoanalysis"?

I am pretty sure it would help you get out from the Psychotic World you're living in...

You seem very desperate...

My question to you is...


WHAT are You doing Here, on this Forum?

Just because you have presented some images about an Igloo-like house, which you say it does whatever?...when that "whatever" (supposedly transmitting energy through the "thin air"...LOL) and how it was done (details) have never, EVER been revealed on your thread...nor on any part of this Forum?

Definitively...Your position would never be neither "In nor Out of any Boxes"...


THIS POST HAVE ALSO BEEN UPLOADED AT THE FLAT EARTH THREAD.


Ufopolitics
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-26-2016 at 01:49 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #596  
Old 05-26-2016, 01:19 AM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
About this "Entertainment Thread"...:)

Hello to All,

Due to some comments on this Forum related to this Thread...I would be (again) very specific about the purpose of this Thread.

First than all, I want to reveal my findings IN FULL that took place when I was developing Ken's Theory, However, that would be/happen at the very end/conclusion of all rendered material...like some pending paperwork (posts), as other related CAD, Videos, Documents... etc, etc. that still have not finished/produced.

I still have at least Two more videos to upload in my YT Chanel, then here...

I am still in the process to post all related bibliography with every single link in the net.

Then discuss all of the above here.

I could "drop that bomb" (show machines running) here anytime...However, NONE of You All...would be able to "Digest" what's going on there.

My purpose is NOT to entertain this Thread by showing a "Black Boxed" Apparatus,(like it has occurred before in our "Race to Free Energy" History) then playing the "smart a$$" and not revealing all details, by just saying "I can't"...because I have signed an NDA Contract...or that I am still in the process of a Patent Application...

And YES, Definitively I am protecting My Discovery, it has been uploaded in many Public Domains around the whole Planet...and in MAIN and "Not that Hot" places as well related to Open Science...

Plus other ways to protect that are VERY DIFFICULT TO PROVE OTHERWISE...which includes VERY COMPLEX Scenes of 3D Animated CAD'S...CGI's, etc, done with VERY COMPLICATED AND VERY EXPENSIVE SOFTWARE not that simple to be reproduced as a proof in any short period of time...no matter how much money is spent...etc,etc


Why?

Just because if there would be any, any Patent Troll...I would be sending just "links" directly to the Patent Examiners and that Application would be rejected/denied "iso facto"...no matter even if such copycat Patent has been granted...it will be void...simple as that.

Plus other "goodies" am not to reveal at all now...which "may" include violations of International Laws...Legal Demands, etc, etc,etc

And...In the case I receive the slightest Threat on any of my personal correspondence/e-mail/sites/channels etc,etc...then you guys would just see a very brief post with some links...in that case...just download them and spread them as much as you could...they would lead you directly to each doc.

I will try to make it back, and then explain all in detail...and as some of you may know...the BEST INTELLECTUAL PROTECTION is the one that is written in the MOST GENERAL WAY...meaning, no spec's, no material's descriptions...no specifics at all...then it becomes unbreakable...but then...No One could ever build anything specific...without any specifications available on Documents...

I could tell You here, right now...all about my discovery...and first...many will not believe me...while others that do believe me...still would not be able to put them together...unless I give the specific details about their construction.

And we are talking about different kind of windings...different kind of ferromagnetic cores architecture and set up, use of Magnetic Deflectors,core and field specific gaps, etc,etc...and then more and more and more...

One thing you all need to do...is just to be "a little open minded"...just a little...

Magnetic Fields are ABSOLUTELY NOTHING like You All have ever learned in your lifetime, NOT EVEN CLOSE!!...And I do not care how much experience or degree of knowledge you all have...that would not help you at all...am VERY SURE about that statement am writing here!.

What we all have learned and practice with...is exactly what is keeping Us all apart from making the Discovery I did...

And I guarantee it will NOT just be the two machines I would present here ...but many, as your already opened imagination would lead you all to build...

I want this FULL knowledge to be Open Sourced...not owned by absolutely NO ONE, WITHOUT EXCEPTIONS!!


Ufopolitics
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-26-2016 at 01:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #597  
Old 05-26-2016, 02:44 AM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
And then it comes the "Absolute Truth"...

Just some more "Entertainment"...

This time is about some personal experience...

Have any of You ever heard of the Philosophical Term..."Absolute Truth"?

Want to find out?...it is a clever explanation on that link above...depends on the "Observer's point of view", as what their roots/foundations are based on...so you will find some different opinions on just one page.

For example...The first time I read about it, I was about 30 years younger...was in "Das Kapitál" by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels..."A Communist Manifesto"...anyways...They compare the Communism to the "Absolute Truth"...the "Final Frontier"...

[IMG][/IMG]

And then... In such huge Book...when they describe their concept about that absolute truth (Dialectical Materialism)...is equivalent to the "Optical Illusion" we observe when we look at Railroad Tracks ending in the horizon...they seem to be finally touching each others...but is not true...because the more we approach... trying to verify they are touching each others ...the further out that illusion comes to our eyes...so, no matter how much we all walk or run...they will never meet together as a reality.

So, the same way as those railroad tracks...is their absolute truth...and so...by indirect assignment...The Communism, which they call "Absolute Truth"....

So, even as young as I was...I realized I was living in a pure and absolute lie...it just don't exist!...Communism is a lie...it is just some entertainment with hopes for the poor people, for the working lower class...with their endless hopes that "something, somehow" will change sooner or later...but it never does...

And then we die...and many more younger generations will keep trying and trying without success... until one day that wall came down...once and for all.

However, I never swallow it...so I left before that Wall was taken down...many, many years before.

Well, the reason why of above comment...is because something pretty similar to what I am going through right now about searching for magnetism...-do not laugh-...is real...I am as serious as a heart attack- .

The more I look for the real truth about magnetism...the more I find related material that reinforces my beliefs, my work...so, I feel I have to document it...and make a Video about it...then, the more I search...the more I find...

If I would not be as persistent and stubborn as I am...I would have given up on this whole thing a long time ago...just because it seems like "the never ending saga"

What give me the strength...actually the only Solid thing that does...besides my personal desire to search and search...is the fact that I hold that Truth in my hands "materially built"...and it is awesome, and I do want to share it as it would be a huge release as a heavy load taken off my back.

I will give you an example...I was looking for an "Intuitive Explanation" about why that darn charged electron particle takes such a "distinct turn" when passing by a uniform magnetic field, so much different reaction as it does with an Electric Field...And by "Intuitive" meaning I mean no complicated algebra, no heavy calculus...no space dimensions abstract descriptions, and definitively NOT the right or left hand rule BS, which is NOT an explanation but a mere and rude "Reference Method" to be followed like a sheep follow their Pastor...I was just looking for a simple, plain answer that would satisfy my search...

Then I found this Scientific Forum...where they wrote about this "Screw Analogy" written by a guy named "Minkowski" in a Book called Spacetime...then, I complicated myself even more, on top of all am working on...but happy, very happy that I found his papers from 1908...it gave the perfect and definite answer...then I shared it with all of you...so we could develop it or understand it a bit further...

I really knew the answer...it lies on Ken's Book definition of a magnetic field, and I had posted here as well...but I was searching for a possible already existing explanation...maybe buried/hidden somewhere in history...and I did, I found it...simple enough and not necessarily for the well educated University person required to have learned Calculus III...nope, anyone with high common sense and simple reasoning could realize... it is all there.


Sorry that I wrote too much by now..must get back to work...to the real work, not the "Philosophical" one..


Take this post as some kind of "Entertainment" if you would...is up to you


Cheers


Ufopolitics
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-26-2016 at 03:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #598  
Old 05-26-2016, 03:36 AM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroMikey View Post

The "I Toed Ya so Monster" Did I get it right?


THIS MESSAGE IS SUBJECT TO DELETION>

Oh, please ...don't delete it yet!!...it makes me laugh...

But is ok now...you could delete it if you like...by quoting it...it will stay on Forum memory...


Thanks Mikey...and don't pay attention if He called you "oxyurian mouse"



You are a heck of a guy no matter what they say about you!...and not exactly because you "reinforce" my ego...like he mentions...


Regards


Ufopolitics
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-26-2016 at 03:39 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #599  
Old 05-26-2016, 06:05 AM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Abraham-Minkowski Controversy_Part 1

Hello to All,

Well, like I wrote before...this Material keeps expanding...on the positive way though, and getting more and more interesting by the minute...

There was a controversy (back in the Minkowski times, 1907-1910) between another gentleman called Abraham...

"The Abraham-Minkowski Controversy"...It reads in simple and brief paragraph:

Quote:
The Abraham–Minkowski controversy is a physics debate concerning electromagnetic momentum within dielectric media. Related theories have been put forward that, should their principles be demonstrated to be true, they may allow the design of a reactionless drive.
The Contradiction lies between two different formulas related to the Electromagnetic Momentum in a Dielectric Material (do not confuse with Dielectric Field counterspace here!...just dielectric material, different deal)

But what is a Reactionless Drive?

Quote:
A reactionless drive (also known by many other names, including as an inertial propulsion engine, a reactionless thruster, a reactionless engine, a bootstrap drive or an inertia drive)[citation needed] is a device to generate motion without a propellant, presumably in contradiction to the law of conservation of momentum.[1] The name comes from Newton's third law, which is usually expressed as, "for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." A large number of infeasible devices, such as the "Dean drive", are a staple of science fiction, particularly for space propulsion. To date, no reactionless drive has ever been validated under properly controlled conditions.
So, it means it is some kind of "Dream Machine"...or another Machine that so far, it only belongs to the Science Fiction Vault...along with the MPM...it contradicts Newton's Third Law...already discussed here before...remember?...which is "indirectly related" to a "Qualitative Law" that obeys...Newton's which is completely "Quantitative"...

But please, allow me to keep moving further on...

This Controversy has been going on for over 100 years up to now...and very, extremely recent results (last year 2015) proved:

Quote:
Experiments

The results through the years have been mixed, at best. However, a report on a 2012 experiment claims that unidirectional thrust is produced by electromagnetic fields in dielectric materials.[26] A recent study shows that both Minkowski and Abraham pressure of light have been confirmed by experiments, and it has been published in May 2015 (27). The researchers claim:

“we illuminate a liquid … with an unfocused continuous-wave laser beam … we have observed a (reflected-light) focusing effect … in quantitative agreement with the Abraham momentum.”

“we focused the incident beam tightly … we observed a de-focusing reflection … in agreement with the Minkowski momentum transfer.”

In other words, their experiments have demonstrated that an unfocused laser beam corresponds to a response of Abraham momentum from the liquid, while a tightly-focused beam corresponds to a response of Minkowski momentum. But the researchers did not tell what the response will be for a less tightly-focused beam (between “unfocused” and “tightly-focused”), or whether there is any jump for the responses. The researchers concluded:[27]

We have obtained experimental evidence, backed up by hydrodynamic theory, that the momentum transfer of light in fluids is truly Janus–faced: the Minkowski or the Abraham momentum can emerge in similar experiments. The Abraham momentum, equation (2), emerges as the optomechanical momentum when the fluid is moving and the Minkowski momentum, equation (1), when the light is too focused or the container too small to set the fluid into motion. The momentum of light continues to surprise.

(27)Zhang, Li; She, Weilong; Peng, Nan; Leonhardt, Ulf (2015). "Experimental evidence for Abraham pressure of light". New Journal of Physics 17: 053035. Bibcode:2015NJPh...17e3035Z. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/17/5/053035.
Therefore, for an "Unfocused Beam of Light" (Abraham) is Positive Result...and so with a "Tightly Focused Beam" (Minkowski) is also positive... There are more positive tests than the one shown above(27)...concluding that both formulas worked out ok...

But this keeps going on and on...

This Controversy, by insisting on who was correct...lol...derived into some kind of other discovered "Effects"...

1-Aharonov–Casher effect

The Aharonov–Casher effect is a quantum mechanical phenomenon predicted in 1984 in which a traveling magnetic dipole is affected by an electric field. It is dual to the Aharonov–Bohm effect, in which the quantum phase of a charged particle depends upon which side of a magnetic flux tube it comes through. In the Aharonov–Casher effect, the particle has a magnetic moment and the tubes are charged instead. It was observed in a gravitational neutron inferometer in 1989(Cimmino et al.) and later by fluxon interference of magnetic vortices in Josephson junctions (Elion et al.). It has also been seen with electrons and atoms.

2-Aharonov–Bohm effect[/QUOTE]

In this Effect #2 Aharonov- Bohm...they write it is directly related to the Dirac Strings Monopole :OMG!! ...I really do not want to upset Bistander by talking here about monopoles anymore...so, no monopoles, no unicorns!!...

Let's focus on the significance of both Effects (I call it instead a "New Contradiction", this time with the Classic Lorentz Force Law we are all familiar with (No Minkowski Spacetime Transformation)

Quote:
Significance

In the 18th and 19th centuries, physics was dominated by Newtonian dynamics, with its emphasis on forces. Electromagnetic phenomena were elucidated by a series of experiments involving the measurement of forces between charges, currents and magnets in various configurations. Eventually, a description arose according to which charges, currents and magnets acted as local sources of propagating force fields, which then acted on other charges and currents locally through the Lorentz force law. In this framework, because one of the observed properties of the electric field was that it was irrotational, and one of the observed properties of the magnetic field was that it was divergenceless,
But...let's expand a bit more on the Aharonov-Casher Effect when it comes to magnetic vortices in Josephson junctions.

IMO, this part below is a very determinant one as to understand from the Micro to Macro structures, related to the study of Vortexes in Magnetic Fields/Charges relations:

My pdf search note...there are many, many different pdf's about this Experiment...however, the only one I have found, that really, really free, without special log in-registration from specific sources or institutions9not available for individuals login accounts)... is the one linked below...However, if any of you finds another one, please feel free to upload link.

Quote:
Charge-Vortex Duality in Josephson Junction Arrays

Authors: R. Fazio, , A. van Otterlo, Gerd Sch , H.S.J. van der Zant, J.E. Mooij

Abstract.

In arrays of Josephson junctions vortices are important collective excitations. A Kosterlitz-Thouless-Berezinskii transition characterized by the unbinding of vortex dipoles separates a superconducting and a resistive phase. In small capacitance junctions the charging energy gains importance. In suitable arrays a KTB transition characterized by the unbinding of charge dipoles separates an insulating from a conducting phase. We present an effective description of Josephson junction arrays in the quantum regime in terms of charges and vortices. In suitable systems there exists a duality relation between both and a superconductor-insulator transition at low temperature. We present the phase diagram, investigate the effect of a magnetic field, and compare theoretical and experimental results. We also discuss further physical properties of quantum vortices, such as the vortex mass, the Aharonov-Casher effect of vortices moving around a charge, forces acting on vortices and the dissipation of the vortex motion due to quasiparticle tunneling.

Now going back to the Abraham-Minkowski Controversy...we will for sure find those "Lorentz Soldiers"...who blindly ignore Minkowski when discussing Minkowski...lol...or even worst...when drawing conclusions about this matter which is completely between Minkowski and Abraham??!!

Below is an example of one of those Lorentz Soldiers:

Resolution of the Abraham-Minkowski Controversy by Masud Mansuripur

I will quote his Conclusions:

Quote:
6. Concluding remarks (Page 9)

While the momentum of light inside material media is ultimately tied to the inertial and elastic properties of the media, we have shown that, in circumstances where the media are sufficiently rigid and massive, the momentum of a light pulse can be described in terms solely of the electromagnetic properties of the media. The question then becomes one of the consistency of the equations of classical electrodynamics, not only among themselves, but also with the conservation laws of energy, momentum, and angular momentum. This question has now been answered in the affirmative, provided that Eqs. (14) of the macroscopic Maxwell-Lorentz theory are applied consistently across the board, within the volumes of the material media as well as at their surfaces and interfaces. Any changes in the total linear (or angular) electromagnetic momentum of a closed system, obtained by integrating the momentum density of Eq. (3b) (or Eq. (3c)) over all space, will result in a corresponding mechanical force (or torque) in accordance with the Lorentz law of Eq. (4a) (or Eq. 4(b)). This back and forth exchange between electromagnetic momentum and mechanical force can be shown to conserve the total linear and angular momenta of the system, irrespective of the specific properties of the media, i.e., whether or not the media are homogeneous, absorptive, dispersive, isotropic, linear, magnetic, etc.
After I read all the above, honestly, feel like standing really straight up, knocking the back of my military boots...then making a very firm "Military Salute"..."YES SIR!!...while I can hear the drums in the background...

So we have above a whole discussion about a Minkowski work compared to Abraham...without Minkowski nor Abraham work??!!...and that to me is completely non sense, totally dogmatic, authoritative and then some more insults I will not write here...

Therefore, He never even mentions the Aharonov-Casher, Nor Aharonov-Bohm Effects...much less the Josephson Vortex junctions experiments...Oh My God...here you have the complete dogmatic Model impregnated into some brains.

To continue on next post...run out of characters number in one post.
__________________
 

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-26-2016 at 08:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #600  
Old 05-26-2016, 08:01 AM
nathan97 nathan97 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 14
Charge-Vortex Duality in Josephson Junction Arrays

Authors: R. Fazio, , A. van Otterlo, Gerd Sch , H.S.J. van der Zant, J.E. Mooij

Here ETH - e-periodica

nathan
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
magnet, dielectric, output, conductors, tests, displacement, video, magnetism, fields, move, moving, ether, difference, measurement, part, polarization, testing, piece, field, opposite, contact, directions, attraction, middle, top

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

Choose your voluntary subscription

For one-time donations, please use the below button.


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers