gravity waves found

[enessilergo]

Malia Lawanna Rosemary

Holloway. Advanced Search in Search
ALTHA NICKIE LITA YOSHIKO WINIFRED LOIS EARLINE MARLENA PEARLENE

[Harvey]

For what it is worth my video of some photographic tests of the geometry involved. The HD recording was over 900MB and the supplied software converted it to a WMV file specifically for you-tube and it looks like it lost the HD features - but the video doesn't show much anyway.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITHnoV1vS_c

Cheers!

[SuperCaviTationIstic]

Guys, did you know that Tesla, along with Eric Dollard and orthers stated that there is no light in space from the Sun.....The waves emitted from the Sun strike the atmosphere and convert into visible waves.

[witsend]

Guys, did you know that Tesla, along with Eric Dollard and orthers stated that there is no light in space from the Sun.....The waves emitted from the Sun strike the atmosphere and convert into visible waves.

I think mainstream hold to this same idea. The fact is that space is dark and only three dimensional objects - of whatever size - can be seen. Therefore the thinking is that the photon first needs to become visible as a result of deflecting off matter. Else its frequency is in an invisible light spectrum as it travels through the vacuum of space.

[Psyclic]

Originally Posted by Aromaz
Back to photons: If photons have no charge, then why is it that light does bend around heavenly bodies; where we could see it in real life?

Originally Posted by witsend
This is the puzzle. Light is known to move in a straight line and yet it can only bend in what is seen as a gravitational field. I believe all scientists everywhere are trying to answer this question. If answered we'd know what the properties of gravity are.

This "bending of light" through a gravity field is actually well understood. In fact this was predicted by Einstein and he waited many years for a proper solar eclipse to prove that gravity warps space-time. You see, the light does indeed travel only in straight lines. Very massive objects warp the space which makes the light appear to bend as it travels in straight lines through curved space.

Astronomers "rely on the bending of light by gravity to make telescopes almost as big as the Universe" as described in this article..

Eclipse that Changed the Universe

[david lambright]

good stuff!

For what it is worth my video of some photographic tests of the geometry involved. The HD recording was over 900MB and the supplied software converted it to a WMV file specifically for you-tube and it looks like it lost the HD features - but the video doesn't show much anyway.

YouTube - Lambright Mock-Up Testing

Cheers!

harvey....good video....i know that schlieren photo method will help...i am taking mt 4" reflector apart now......david

[david lambright]

indys..

oday, 07:15 PM
david lambright david lambright is online now
Senior Member

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 169
keep it up!
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndianaBoys View Post
This demonstration video may be relevant:

MIT Physics Demo -- Dissectible Capacitor
YouTube - MIT Physics Demo -- Dissectible Capacitor

Best regards,

IndianaBoys
hi guys! you rock! your contribution to all of this is just cool! you KNOW where this going and you are "smoothing the pavement" so to speak, to further and advance this new tech.......many thanks....david

[Harvey]

harvey....good video....i know that schlieren photo method will help...i am taking mt 6" reflector apart now......david

Thanks David.

Yes that Schlieren method is really kewl - I'm certain it will show the vortex action I have described in my earlier post.

I found this article interesting as well: http://www.lle.rochester.edu/pub/rev...120_04_All.pdf

It would really be something if your photographs and videos turned out to be evidence of Lorentz contraction magnification rather than some shutter speed aberration.

Since my Mock-Up was specifically assembled to provide non-metallic comparisons (i.e. look for similar effects while using non-magnetic elements), if there is anything you want me to do with my rig to help you isolate the effects attributed specifically to magnetic flux interaction, just let me know.

After you put the Ink Cross on the HDPE, have you filmed that contraction effect again? I would be very interested in knowing if the line bends to align with the elements or if it simply shifts position in time.

It is interesting that the Lorentz Contraction will not be visible on circular or spherical objects and this may be why your device holds its perfect shape during the distortion. But the line on the circle does not have to conform to that rule and therefore could be bent (assuming of course the snapshot could properly frame it )

As I said in Post #7 "You definitely have our attention "

[Harvey]

Guys, did you know that Tesla, along with Eric Dollard and orthers stated that there is no light in space from the Sun.....The waves emitted from the Sun strike the atmosphere and convert into visible waves.

This would seem to be disproved by our probes (See Solar and Heliospheric Observatory Homepage) specifically designed to monitor the suns activity. The SOHO device has, among others, photo sensors designed to react to the particle nature of the photon.

If the photon did not already exist in space, then we would have to conclude that it is formed when the EM wave intersects the satellite. If this were true, then we should get different photons with different materials.

There is much evidence of the particle nature of light, even outside our atmosphere. But this does illustrate one of the primary quandaries of particle physics, 'how do you detect a photon when the act of detecting it negates the test?".

One thing I have learned is that the 'facts' often change because they are too often based on single viewpoints. When all of the viewpoints of a matter are fully explored, only then can the truth regarding the picture they create be fully experienced and unfolded. When I was younger and less experienced, I would use inductive reasoning and jump to conclusions without all the necessary information. This is a common mistake among many new to the scientific process. It is not easy to provide a test that ensures absolute conclusion to any hypothesis. In fact, almost any hypothesis with any value will be tested from many different angles before it is ever accepted. So we all mature as time goes on, and I must say that my sons are more mature than I when it comes to the true scientific process - so age has little to do with maturity. Maturity comes from wisdom and wisdom is properly applied knowledge. That is why the time spent taking in knowledge contributes to maturity. So, the fact is, the sun rises in the East - but the truth is, the sun doesn't rise at all but it is our viewpoint that changes. The fact is that water finds its own level, but the truth is that 'level' is spherical, not flat, on our planet (see asymptote).

So we gather as many facts as we can, from as many viewpoints as possible thus gaining knowledge as we work toward obtaining the truth.

[thekubiaks]

Demonstration of effects ideas

David,
I am going over your video

YouTube - potatoheadist's Channel

As you are holding a stone over the device, are you saying that you are changing the mass of the stone?? How about blowing a puff of smoke thru the vortex to see if the smoke reacts with the field. If you blew some smoke thru the vortex and shined a laser pointer thru the smoke and the light beam deflected, that would be impressive.

Also from this video

YouTube - potatoheadist's Channel

How about dropping the lead piece attached to the wire from the coil onto the other piece of different metal attached to the wire and see if there is a magnetic repulsion type interface. If the metal pieces repel each other, that would also be impressive.

[CatLady]

Hello?

Hmmmmm Which one might I be?

[Aromaz]

I think mainstream hold to this same idea. The fact is that space is dark and only three dimensional objects - of whatever size - can be seen. Therefore the thinking is that the photon first needs to become visible as a result of deflecting off matter. Else its frequency is in an invisible light spectrum as it travels through the vacuum of space.

Light and Photons: We are off topic here.
I think this tread is more direct "Experimental' rather than theory; though
the issue of photons might very well be in effect.

@Witsend, @Harvey, @Psyclic, et al:
For now I posted a reply on the more related "Energy and Polarity"

[witsend]

David,
I am going over your video

YouTube - potatoheadist's Channel
How about blowing a puff of smoke thru the vortex to see if the smoke reacts with the field. If you blew some smoke thru the vortex and shined a laser pointer thru the smoke and the light beam deflected, that would be impressive.

I don't understand the relevance of this test. The rotating disk also comprises 'fan like' structures in the 'legs' of that rig. Like any fan - the air will be 'moved' in the direction of that spin. At it's least it will describe a vortex of sorts. If one blows smoke into that general area one would certainly expect to see the smoke then follow the same general direction as the moving air which, presumably would explain that vortex that seems to be widely predicted. I'm not sure how one could argue that this would be the result of anything else. Unless of course one can isolate the rig inside a vacuum.

Also from this video

YouTube - potatoheadist's Channel

How about dropping the lead piece attached to the wire from the coil onto the other piece of different metal attached to the wire and see if there is a magnetic repulsion type interface. If the metal pieces repel each other, that would also be impressive.

And this point. Surely the two metal pieces that Dave is showing have some induced magnetic field precisely because they are paramagnetic? Are you suggesting that if there's an induced field in nonmagnetic material then this may indicate an anomaly? In which case I agree. It would be interesting indeed. My guess is that the nonmagnetisable material would remain unmagnetised.

I understood that the metal bar hanging over the rig was getting an magnetic field that was identical to the field generated in the solenoid. Not sure if it's the direction of winding in the solenoid that affects this. If the winding were reversed would one generate an attractive field at those metal plugs? Or would they still repel? It would be interesting to find this out Dave if you've got the time to test it.

[rave154]

David,

may i ask, 'why' you dont want to do the "3 boxes in a row , one of them has the rig inside it, you have to tell which one by feeling with your laser pointer"- test?

[Harvey]

Light and Photons: We are off topic here.
I think this tread is more direct "Experimental' rather than theory; though
the issue of photons might very well be in effect.

@Witsend, @Harvey, @Psyclic, et al:
For now I posted a reply on the more related "Energy and Polarity"

I'm not sure it is off topic - notice David's words in his very first post:

his wave is what heat and all EM spectra travel on. if 2 candles are placed 180 degrees apart on a disc, the flames point towards the center of axis, away from the artificial gravity created by spinning. an energized PMH [leedskalnin] is spun,and artificial gravity over 1G will push the orbit of force out and since magnetic current flows to metal , dense metal like gold held at plane,now this force streams off bending light like a heat wave!...i will post a video as soon as i can. i have unlocked the mystery! check this out..if you hold a metal weight over the center of mass, its weight increases! this model works...more soon. p.s. i do have the only working model, i need to share this with the world!

(bold mine)

So I think a discussion regarding the nature of light is on topic. It is important however not to get caught up in the semantics of what the word "Bend" means, that is just some members trying to bait arguments. We all have been taught that light travels in straight lines and that when we read of it being 'bent' it either refers to refraction or spatial distortion. There is absolutely no need to debate those issues here.

But what we can discuss, is what is David's rig doing to change the direction of photon travel in such a way that he sees it as similar to a heat wave. We know that heat wave refraction is caused by air density differentials. So the question at the moment is whether we are seeing air density differentials or spatial distortion, or both?

I think this is why David asked the question as to how much heat it takes to cause these air density differentials that cause photon paths to be altered. Especially since there is no evidence of heat - in fact, in my experiments just the opposite is true - I feel cool air being fanned out from the device. BTW - I did some more experiments last evening that proved to me that there is a suction on top of the elements - enough to hold a piece of paper in place during fast speed spins where the centrifugal force would normally have ejected it. Like wise, I did the 'mirror' test with a sheet of thin paper and confirmed that there is a 'pushing out' of air (or something like air) from the spinning device. I think in a lot of ways the geometry resembles a squirrel cage fan but with bidirectional elements and a top draft instead of center draft flow.