Tesla Stinging Impulse Rays

[Hobby Eon]

Hollywood leaks ?

Tenaus wrote... My type of explanations there

Hollywood, Back to the future. Mad doc says .. 3.8 gigawatts with my flux capacitor...
And in X men, where the are in a metal dome ... Magneto says "...Electricity in a metal conductor ??
Do you learn nothing in school these days ?" And i got more of those examples.
That sort of stuff makes my day folks. It really does.

[Hobby Eon]

Because at page 4 down somebody tries to explain the universe with tiny billjart balls. Very interesting
discussion from there. And 2nd pain be it stinging is a reaction from the body to say "get away from there".
Yeah Tesla lived to 84 but... he had repairation techniques developed.

Back to the 'photons'. How can a photon give light since its dimensions are far smaller then the wavelenght of light itself ??
Unless it is self generating like nucliar molucules which it isn't.
Those are the questions i am interested in.

Teslasecrets How can you say that spinned space becomes solid since them in school tell that space is empty ?
I want 'them in school' to set them checkmate with their own nonsense. Thats my entertainment.

Space is not 3 dimensional. There is only one dimension of Space. Space = Space, a sphere if you will. The 3 dimensions you speak of are only co-ordinates in or of, the one dimension of Space.

With all of this theoretical talk, how does this directly relate to the topic of the thread, Tesla's Stinging Waves?

How do you suppose these stinging waves can be achieved practically on the work bench or Lab?

[Tenaus]

So we've gone back to giving space properties?

Didn't Tesla say that space can have no properties?

I hold with Tesla that space itself cannot be the cause of things, only a container, if you will, to put things in. The difference between space and your average container is that space has no boundaries. There is, however, just like an average container, something filling all space.

Just like a container contains air when we usually think of it containing nothing in every day life, space contains its own stuff. You could call this Aether or the E/M field, or the Zero-Point Energy field. Whatever you want to call it, it is the same thing.

The reason it isn't immediately evident, is that just as it is perceived that a container with nothing but air inside it is empty, so is space with nothing but its own everywhere permeating field or substance. If it did not have something to fill it, it wouldn't technically exist because it cannot be defined without something inside to define it.

With this thought in mind, space can easily be confused as the ambient medium when in fact it is no more than a container which holds the ambient medium.

I suppose, however, since space needs the Aether to be defined, either theory of space would work the same way.

[Sputins]

Space

Space is three dimensional, and so a whirlpool in Space, is not exactly the same as a whirlpool on a flat surface of a pool of water. In three dimensions, the whirlpool takes on a different form, it must feed back upon itself.

Space is not 3 dimensional. There is only one dimension of Space. Space = Space, a sphere if you will. The 3 dimensions you speak of are only co-ordinates in or of, the one dimension of Space.

With all of this theoretical talk, how does this directly relate to the topic of the thread, Tesla's Stinging Waves?

How do you suppose these stinging waves can be achieved practically on the work bench or Lab?

[TeslaSecrets]

@Hobby Eon

I apologize for my brief reply earlier, I know that image likely just raised more questions. Let me take a bit of time to explain this better for you.

Don't think of the blue dots as electrons or masses or anything like that. The concept I am trying to show you is more fundamental then that. Let me use the water analogy again, and I think it may make the concept easier to grasp.

We can think of empty space, devoid of mass and energy, as a completely still and perfectly flat pool of water. This is pure empty space or even could be called void in this case.

Now we can have some waves on the surface of this pool. Except for any positive wave, there must always be a negative wave, or opposites, so if at any point in time we added up all the waves on the surface of the pool of water, we would get our flat still surface again. All the waves are in balance around stillness.

Now under specific or certain conditions, the waves may combine in such a way, to produce a rotation or swirl or whirlpool in the water. This whirlpool is a unique and independent form, from the stillness or waves. The whirlpool can be a certain size, spin at a certain rate, it has a density and an energy of rotation or motion. Whirlpools could move about the pool, could collide and react with other whirlpools, combining into larger whirlpools or destroying each other to return back to the stillness or waves.

What we think of as mass, is exactly this, a swirl or whirlpool of Space itself. The mass comes from Space and thus can return to Space. What we call mass, is spin or motion of Space. Everything is always made of Space, it is the motion of that Space which determines exactly what we have, be it mass or wave or whatever.

What we call magnetic field, is the alignment or axis of the motion, not really a field in its own right. The magnetic field, is like the reference to the stillness, like the fulcrum or balance point. This concept of magnetic field is difficult to grasp in light of our current understanding, but this is the case.

Do not think of that diagram I linked, as an atom with electrons and fields per say, take it to a much more fundamental level. An electron, is nothing more than a whirlpool in Space, with which we can define an axis of rotation, a speed of rotation and other concepts, but there is no real need to think of smaller and smaller particles and so on. Any particle is simply motion in Space. If the motion ceases, the particle reverts back into energy. If the whirlpool collapses or looses its energy, the whirlpool simply disappears back into the water of which is was formed.

What connects all the masses, and forces, no matter what scales or sizes we are looking at, is they are all made of the same stuff, Space. What is between the electrons, and protons, Space is. What defines the motion, mass, fields of the electrons and protons, Space does.

Realize the motion of Space is the key. A spider web can cut through steel, if it is spinning fast enough. A jet of water can cut through steel, if the velocity of the water is high enough. Similarly, if we spin a whirlpool of Space fast enough, it appears SOLID.

In that diagram, it is not the lines or dots which are important, it is the motion which is important. Space is three dimensional, and so a whirlpool in Space, is not exactly the same as a whirlpool on a flat surface of a pool of water. In three dimensions, the whirlpool takes on a different form, it must feed back upon itself.

How can we create something in a still pool of water? We create a whirlpool.
The whirlpool is still made of water, is it not, yet it now has form, dimensions, axis of rotation and other qualities which still water does not have.

I hope this helps you better visualize what I am talking about Hobby Eon.

[Hobby Eon]

Other thoughts

Well i said 'flowing electrons' but.. if we take a vacuum glas bottle those magnetic fields, be it static
or alternating can exist in that bottle where there are no electrons.. ? Now i don't understand it anymore.
What happens at moleculaire level to matter in those magnetic fields ?
In basic talk, how can there be something present, magnetic fields in
this case in a total empty surroundings ?

[Hobby Eon]

magnetic fields.

In your drawing i see 'flowing' electrons ?? It could be. Imagine a ball at a piece of rope.
If you turn that rope the ball makes an orbit. The same as electrons do around a nucleus.
So there must be some link between the smallest particles.

About strong magnets. Say those new neodymium types. In my opinion this is some sort of nuclear energy.
Or even mini black hole. One input and a output. If we use an electro magnet like at the scapyard.
It uses energy to lift metals chunks. But if we use neodymiums it does the same job without the energy input.
So.. i think those magnets have energy. Can we discuss this please?

[TeslaSecrets]

@chainmailleman

None of this is my idea, so I can hardly claim it as such. If I did not want people to use and apply this information, I would not have posted it on a public forum under some random name.

The primary reason this information is not more widely known, is because people try to claim ideas as there own. I have no such ego. I want to see this information become common knowledge and trying to control it in any way prevents this.


@Hobby Eon

Yes, there is a graphic which shows how this all works. It is similar to the 2-D Yin/Yang symbol, but is applied to a spherical torus. Sorry I was unable to find an exact image of this on the net for you. This is close but the image I see in my mind is a much simpler version of this image:

http://www.ovaltech.ca/ovlpics/dualtorus.gif

This is not exact, but gives you a rough idea how space/time works.

[chainmailleman]

@ TeslaSecrets

I love how you brought up the limitations of EM velocity being dependent upon the medium, and used water as an analogy.

My earliest logic on the subject, as posted earlier, was a wave needed a medium to exist. My entire adolescent life was spent listening to science and physics teachers say "Space is a vacuum, an empty void". This cannot be accurate.

Do I have your permission to copy and use some of your material posted here for future lectures and presentations? It's very in depth and explains things overlooked by many.

[Hobby Eon]

How i see it.

The moon rotates around the earth. How come ? There must be some communication between
them that says how far/close that moon is. The electron is the smallest partical. It rotates
around neutrons and proton core. How those electrons know in what orbit to fly ? Or jump layers ?
There must be some communication between members. Well that must be smaller particles then the electron.
In fact matter is coupled by electrons only. So an electric field is only a lot of plusses or minusses.
Nothing else. But how looks a magnetic field ? Does anyone know simple grafics of this on a molecular scale ?
So that i can imagine that ? Because that is still a mystery for us and not taught in school.

[TeslaSecrets]

My account was restored, so I am going to revive this thread a bit specifically for chainmailleman

I can readily provide some simple evidence there is some form of ether.

We need only consider the relationship of the speed of light to the permeability and permeativity of free space.

http://ovaltech.ca/ovlpics/speedlight.gif

Realize current no-ether theory would have us believe the electromagnetic wave limits its own velocity, which is in fact completely ridiculous. The permeability and permeativity of free space, in no way depend on the electric nor magnetic fields. Permeability and Permeativity are properties of free space itself, and these properties do not change, according to the intensity or frequency of the electromagnetic energy passing through said space.

To say otherwise is like saying the inductance of a coil, or capacitance of a capacitor is dependent on only the flow of electric current or application of voltage, and not dependent whatsoever on the material, properties, shape or form of the coil or capacitor upon which current or voltage is applied. Inductance requires the current to flow through an inductor, the inductor is not the flow of current. Capacitance requires voltage applied to a physical capacitor, and voltage alone cannot have capacitance.

There is the electromagnetic field, and that upon which the electromagnetic reacts. It is complete nonsense to even suggest an electromagnetic wave, can create the permeability and permeativity of the space through which it passes. It is akin to saying a current flow through an inductor, actually creates the inductor. Or the voltage applied to a capacitor, is creating the capacitor.

An electric and magnetic field traveling through free space, does not and cannot self limit its own propagation velocity. The propagation velocity depends on the medium through which the wave travels. The propagation velocity of an electromagnetic wave depends on some external resistance or opposition to changes in electric or magnetic field, which are always properties of the medium, not properties of the wave itself.

Yes, it may be possible to mathematically model or represent the propagation of a wave, without regard to the medium through which said waves passes, and it appears many scientist believe in just such a model. However this is not an accurate nor helpful model by which to understand said process. Saying there is no ether, is akin to describing the velocity and propagation of water waves, without acknowledging the existence of the water. Sure it may be possible to create such a model, of water waves without water, but is not far simpler to just admit and except the existence and properties of the water, when discussing water waves?

The objections against ether, are specifically directed to specific types and models of ether, which themselves may not be adequate to explain all observations. However, I do not feel we should discount all concepts of an ether, because we simple do not fully grasp exactly what the properties of this ether may be. Assumptions were made about the ether, and what observations we should search for to disprove the ether, and those initial assumptions, may be incorrect. Because we do not fully understand the "water" through which these waves pass, we cannot make any assumptions or claim to have evidence this "water" does not exist.

There is an assumption by many the whole ether/no-ether argument has been put to rest, when in fact this is hardly the case. The subject of an ether, far different than the ether searched for by Michelson-Morley, has been the subject of many exciting new theories in physics and appears to provide a far simpler solution to the whole unification problem.

I say again waves cannot limit their own velocity. The limit on propagation velocity of a wave, depends on the physical properties of the medium through which the wave travels.

How can nothing, have permeability and permeativity? These are real physical properties of Free Space. These properties exist in free space, whether there is electromagnetic field traveling through said space or not. Electric or magnetic fields, do not show up at all in the above formula for calculating the velocity of light. Thus the velocity of light is dependent on these physical properties of free space, not on the electric or magnetic waves traveling through said free space. Thus all electromagnetic waves are limited to the same velocity, they are all traveling through the same stuff. If it were otherwise, we would expect velocity to change with frequency of the wave, which we know is not the case.

I hope this simplifies some of the techno-babble the so called experts will throw out when trying to disprove the concept of an ether. This explanation is simple common sense, and I think you will find no so called expert will be able to provide such a simple explanation for a no-ether propagation velocity limit nor explain how an electromagnetic wave can create the permeability or permeativity of the space through which it passes. Not without pages and pages of abstract reasoning, complex mathematics and numerous assumptions anyway.

When I think of water waves, I think of the water. Simple.

[Nick_Z]

Aether is NOT dependent on matter, it's the other way around.
If there was no Aether, there would be no matter, as that is what matter is made from.

Nick_Z

[Hobby Eon]

A billartball universe ?

Yeah i wanted to talk about those photons ideas. If a powerfull telescope on the moon would look at
a log of wood at the earth and makes a picture of this, does that mean that log of wood puts out
billions of photons in all directions indefinitly and at the same time not diminish ?
Were does all that energy come from ?
So that log of wood did space communication ? :-)

And about molecules. Take gold and lead for example they differ little in atoms.
But why do they appear so very differently ?

And what about the Thomas Young proof of waves experiment ?

[chainmailleman]

@GSM



You say science proves there is no Ether and I say, for now.

I wish I ran into this topic when this discussion was still alive.....

Anyone who refuses to accept the (A)ether as a real, tangible manifestation has not done their homework. Einstein's followers constantly quote the Michelson-Morley experiment. They completely neglect the Sagnac-Morley experiment. Both used the same apparatus, yet both came to different conclusions. Michelson being negative, Sagnac being positive.

The (A)ether, or ambient medium does exist, as waves (of any nature) cannot exist without a medium in which to propagate. If space was indeed an empty vacuum, void of all "matter", then a very creative explanation as to how we are able to communicate with probes/satellites/etc. using waves (of any kind) is needed.

Remember, light is a wave.

The only real "proof" of relativity is GPS satellites....however the same result of drift can be "proof" of the (A)ether as well.

Relativity is a joke. As are the 4+ generations of scientists/physicists wasting their lives trying to prove it as reality.

[TeslaSecrets]