Why Einstein's relativity theory is plain wrong

[MonsieurM]

I think this diagram explains sunspots, not sure though.

https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=32a91...1808&sc=photos

Seems plausable

I'll have to see if there are some more of his interveiws, he makes some sense to me.

Those guys at CERN annoy me. They should have read walters book they could have saved a lot of money.

3...6...9

I highly recommend that you read this blog, very interesting:

The Philosopher Stoned sums it up very well

All truth passes through 3 stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer

ps:Farmhand, awesome diagram collection

[lamare]

I think you underestimate Tesla. I read JJ Thompsons work and he in 1893 said that matter was swirls in the ether. He stole this from Tesla I believe since the paper was in regards to Faraday's tube of force that transfered momentum through the ether.

Tesla was also a proponent of Walter Russell who said the same thing about vortexes in the ether.

I also believe Tesla said that all things are derived from the ether and will return to the ether.

So I think you are wrong in saying Tesla was never considered vortex swirls in the ether.

All these ideas that seem so new now are actually old ideas.

Yes, they are old ideas and that's why the best textbooks you can find were written before WW-II.

I am aware that Tesla liked Russels work and that he advised Russel not to go public with it. So, he must indeed have considered vortex swirls in the ether at some point and he also was aware of Einstein's relativity theory at some point and surely was also aware of Quantum Mechanics at some point.

However, "The True Wireless" was written in 1919, while in WP quoted in my post, it says: "In 1924, Louis de Broglie proposed the idea that just as light has both wave-like and particle-like properties, matter also has wave-like properties." That suggests Tesla did not know about wave-particle duality at the time he wrote "The True Wireless" and therefore considered matter as vortexes, but EM waves, or as he called them at the time: "Herzian waves", as classic transversal waves.

And Russel wrote "The Universal One" in 1926 ( Walter Russell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ), which is also later than 1919.

So, it may very well be that he did not consider EM waves (in the far-field) as being vortexes in the ether at the time of writing this article, because if he did, he would not have completely rejected Herz theory, but would have written something along the lines I explained....

[SilverToGold]

I think you underestimate Tesla. I read JJ Thompsons work and he in 1893 said that matter was swirls in the ether. He stole this from Tesla I believe since the paper was in regards to Faraday's tube of force that transfered momentum through the ether.

Tesla was also a proponent of Walter Russell who said the same thing about vortexes in the ether.

I also believe Tesla said that all things are derived from the ether and will return to the ether.

So I think you are wrong in saying Tesla was never considered vortex swirls in the ether.

All these ideas that seem so new now are actually old ideas.

-------------------------------

The double-slit experiment has also been performed using electrons, atoms, and even molecules, and the same type of interference pattern is seen. Thus all matter possesses both particle and wave characteristics.
So, there you are. Tesla was right in that there cannot be classic transversal waves trough the ether, but it appears he simply never considered the possibility that EM waves could actually consist of some kind of vortex-like structure along which standing electro-magnetic waves can and do propagate trough the ether."

[lamare]

If any of you guys want to really understand Tesla, you better understand one thing.

TESLA DID NOT BELIEVE IN ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES!


Until you can understand this simple fact that goes against most of modern science, you can NOT understand Tesla.

Read his article here that goes over this.

"The True Wireless" by Nikola Tesla

To quote the editor:

In this remarkable and complete story of his discovery of the "True Wireless" and the principles upon which transmission and reception, even in the present day systems, are based, Dr. Nikola Tesla shows us that he is indeed the "Father of the Wireless." To him the Hertz wave theory is a delusion; it looks sound from certain angles, but the facts tend to prove that it is hollow and empty. He convinces us that the real Hertz waves are blotted out after they have traveled but a short distance from the sender. It follows, therefore, that the measured antenna current is no indication of the effect, because only a small part of it is effective at a distance. The limited activity of pure Hertz wave transmission and reception is here clearly explained, besides showing definitely that in spite of themselves, the radio engineers of today are employing the original Tesla tuned oscillatory system. He shows by examples with different forms of aerials that the signals picked up by the instruments must actually be induced by earth currents—not etheric space waves. Tesla also disproves the "Heaviside layer" theory from his personal observations and tests. EDITOR.

This is where people like Bearden get it wrong. Smart guy for sure but too brainwashed by modern "science" to really convey the truth about Tesla.

In the end, Tesla didn't buy into Hertzian waves. When people try to combine EM wave theory with Tesla, they are showing a lack of basic understanding of Tesla.

First of all: May I kindly request you guys to take it easy with the font size button? There's no need to yell, I hear ya....

Let's first make one thing clear: Tesla was a human being as far as I know, not a saint. And human beings do make mistakes, including Tesla. As much as I like Tesla's theories and as much as I regard him the greatest scientist and teacher in recorded history, I can not and will not regard his theories as infallible and perfect in every way.

Having said that, I am afraid I have to disagree up to a certain extent with Tesla on his complete rejection of the Herz wave theory. As it happens, I just read part of his article on the True Wireless in the train home.

As far as I can tell, Tesla regarded EM waves as being "just" transversal electro-magnetic waves, just like the kind of waves that travel on a pond when you throw a rock in there. If that is what he was rejecting, I totally agree with him, because you cannot have transversal waves inside a fluid. Not in water and also not in the ether. Only at the border of two media with a different density you can have classic transversal waves, IMHO. So, in that sense I agree with Tesla.

However, there is a third way waves can occur, both in fluids as in the ether, which are waves that literally run in circles, or, around the surface of some kind of vortex. So, you cannot have actual transversal waves inside the ether, but you can have localized standing waves making some kind of bubble inside the fluid. And such bubbles, vortexes, are actually what we call particles and which are the cause for the well known wave-particle duality, which forms the basis for Quantum Mechanics:

Introduction to quantum mechanics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1924, Louis de Broglie proposed the idea that just as light has both wave-like and particle-like properties, matter also has wave-like properties. The wavelength, λ, associated with a particle is related to its momentum, p. [...] The relationship, called the de Broglie hypothesis, holds for all types of matter. Thus all matter exhibits properties of both particles and waves.

In the double-slit experiment as originally performed by Thomas Young and Augustin Fresnel in 1827, a beam of light is directed through two narrow, closely spaced slits, producing an interference pattern of light and dark bands on a screen. If one of the slits is covered up, one might naively expect that the intensity of the fringes due to interference would be halved everywhere. In fact, a much simpler pattern is seen, a simple diffraction pattern. Closing one slit results in a much simpler pattern diametrically opposite the open slit. Exactly the same behaviour can be demonstrated in water waves, and so the double-slit experiment was seen as a demonstration of the wave nature of light.
The diffraction pattern produced when light is shone through one slit (top) and the interference pattern produced by two slits (bottom). The interference pattern from two slits is much more complex, demonstrating the wave-like propagation of light.

The double-slit experiment has also been performed using electrons, atoms, and even molecules, and the same type of interference pattern is seen. Thus all matter possesses both particle and wave characteristics.

So, there you are. Tesla was right in that there cannot be classic transversal waves trough the ether, but it appears he simply never considered the possibility that EM waves could actually consist of some kind of vortex-like structure along which standing electro-magnetic waves can and do propagate trough the ether.

And actually, in the area just around a transmitter antenna the fields have different characteristics than further away from an antenna. Remember what I said about the possibility of having transversal waves at the border of two media? How about the border between antenna and the air?

This distinction is known as "near field" versus "far field":

Near and far field - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The "far-field", which extends from about two wavelengths distance from the antenna to infinity, is the region in which the field acts as "normal" electromagnetic radiation. The power of this radiation decreases as the square of distance from the antenna, and absorption of the radiation has no effect on the transmitter. By contrast, the "near-field", which is inside about one wavelength distance from the antenna, is a region in which there are strong inductive and capacitative effects from the currents and charges in the antenna, which do not behave like far-field radiation. These effects decrease in power far more quickly with distance, than does the far-field radiation power.

Now re-read Tesla's paper with that in mind.....

So, in essence, Tesla did not realise that there was such a thing as a near field and a far field. And actually, modern science literally makes "things" known as "virtual photons" up in order to hide the fact that they don't have the slightest idea what they are really talking about:

In the quantum view of electromagnetic interactions, far field effects are manifestations of real photons, while near field effects are due to a mixture of real and virtual photons. Virtual photons composing near-field fluctuations and signals, have effects which are far shorter range than do real photons.

Yes, that's what it says. Near field effects are due to a mixture of something real and something completely made up aka "virtual", which is literally another word for "imaginary" or "not real".

Update: Prof. Meyl shows this very nicely in his "Wireless Tesla Transponder":

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Meyl/wireless-tesla-transponder.pdf

In the text books one finds the detachment of a wave from the dipole accordingly explained. If we regard the structure of the outgoing fields, then we see field vortices, which run around one point, which we can call vortex center. We continue to recognize in the picture, how the generated field structures establish a shock wave, as one vortex knocks against the next [see Tesla: 1].
Thus a Hertzian dipole doesn’t emit Hertzian waves! An antenna as near-field without exception emits vortices, which only at the transition to the far-field unwind to electromagnetic waves.

However, the accompaning explanation sucks, because IMHO the far-field actually consists of vortices, "particles" with that mysterious wave-particle duality, so he may have to re-do some of his homework.

Update 2: here's a nice page on Vortexes:
VORTEX
With thanks to Cherryman:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6779-great-resource-ether-theory.html#post146810

[wizofid]

So in essence - Tesla - never found proof in his experiments, of the mathematical ideas that were being flaunted as proven.

To read it, tells me that he was frustrated with what he saw in experiments, verses what was said in Tech journals of the day. This kept troubling him!

[SilverToGold]

When trying to replicate the experiment, he couldn't prove it, and actually discovered something far greater...

Yes, it's called the truth!

[StweenyA]

When trying to replicate the experiment, he couldn't prove it, and actually discovered something far greater...

[SilverToGold]

"I considered this so important that in 1892 I went to Bonn, Germany, to confer with Dr. Hertz in regard to my observations. He seemed disappointed to such a degree that I regretted my trip and parted from him sorrowfully. During the succeeding years I made numerous experiments with the same object, but the results were uniformly negative. In 1900, however, after I had evolved a wireless transmitter which enabled me to obtain electro-magnetic activities of many millions of horse-power, I made a last desperate attempt to prove that the disturbances emanating from the oscillator were ether vibrations akin to those of light, but met again with utter failure. For more than eighteen years I have been reading treatises, reports of scientific transactions, and articles on Hertz-wave telegraphy, to keep myself informed, but they have always imprest me like works of fiction."

[SilverToGold]

Tesla was not able to reproduce Hertz original experiment and he pointed out to Hertz that his results were a result of error in Hertz's measurement technique. So Hertz's experiment that "proved" Maxwell's theory never worked as stated.

So where does this leave room for Hertz's proof as valid? It has never been proved by experimentation according to Tesla.

[Farmhand]

I don't want to get into another argument but at the risk of that I don't think in that artical Tesla says he doesn't believe in Hertz waves at all. Just that his system did not use Hertz waves. And they they have little or nothing to do with his system, not that he didn't beleive that they exsisted, i don't think anyway.

He says this.

"Nothing is more important in the present phase of development of the wireless art than to dispose of the dominating erroneous ideas. With this object I shall advance a few arguments based on my own observations which prove that Hertz waves have little to do with the results obtained even at small distances. "

And in the next paragraph I point to the bolded text. The radiations he mentions here are the Hertz waves.
"

In Fig. 13 a transmitter is shown radiating space waves of considerable frequency. It is generally believed that these waves pass along the earth's surface and thus affect the receivers. I can hardly think of anything more improbable than this "gliding wave" theory and the conception of the "guided wireless" which are contrary to all laws of action and reaction. Why should these disturbances cling to a conductor where they are counteracted by induced currents, when they can propagate in all other directions unimpeded? The fact is that the radiations of the transmitter passing along the earth's surface are soon extinguished, the height of, the inactive zone indicated in the diagram, being some function of the wave length, the bulk of the waves traversing freely the atmosphere. Terrestrial phenomena which I have noted conclusively show that there is no Heaviside layer, or if it exists, it is of no effect. It certainly would be unfortunate if the human race were thus imprisoned and forever without power to reach out into the depths of space.

He was trying to point out that his system because it exibited "Action at a distance" did not utilize Hertz waves because if it did the effective distance would be very short.

I don't see any evidence that Tesla denied the very Exsistance of Tranverse Electromagnetic Waves.

In my opinion A Scalar wave is like a wave of people it does not go up and down just forward. But it is still a wave, in my opinion the term Scalar wave is valid. Don't ask me to explain my reasoning in any more detail than that though. I just see it as a longways push. I don't get hung up on the term wave. But I use it.

Cheers

[MonsieurM]

as the saying goes: To understand a man, you've got to walk a mile in his shoes, whether they fit or not.

[SilverToGold]

That is why the EM theory is pushed so hard. With this false idea of how things work, people are not able to really understand Tesla and what his ideas were on the ether. How can you understand Tesla's patents or words when you don't even know what his understanding about the fundamentals were?

When guys like Meyl and other degreed gentlemen try to explain Tesla using Maxwell's equations, they are showing how little they understand.

If Tesla held that Hertz was wrong and his waves does not exist, he is also saying Maxwell is wrong. How many people do you see trying to talk about Tesla and in the same breath try to tie Maxwell and Hertz into that "understanding"? How can that be when Tesla said EM waves don't exist and that they are just longitudinal waves in the ether?

And Scalar waves? Come one guys, scalar is not a wave. Scalars are a constant in an equation and they do not change in time.

I do agree with SilverToGold of his statement:

as long as we don't think as Dr Tesla did, we won't understand how he managed to transfer wireless energy:

FYI: did you know that Sir William Crookes was a mentor to Dr Tesla

[MonsieurM]

Tesla saw the world probably the same way, a stack of fractally arranged resonant circuits, and all he needed was to know the right combination of

Cycles and Fractal patterns/Fractal Frequency to trigger the exponential effect...

also:

That from a 2002 article. Unlike so many other promising breakthroughs this is one that has been widely implemented.
To further quote from the article: "The innovation, called Fractal Structure Circuit(TM) (FSC), uses fractalized conductor paths to replace the capacitors, inductors, and resistors in "RLC" circuits."
And another quote: ""Virtually every electronic device uses coils and capacitors to form RLC circuits. These discrete components are arranged by tried and true rules to get the circuit to perform as needed. What we've done is ask: can a fractal pattern, with its self-capacitance and self-inductance, be used to eliminate components and still get the equivalent RLC circuit? We've found that the answer is yes; and in most uses, especially at microwave frequencies, all components can be replaced by conductive fractal patterns or 3D structures."
And one more blurb from that article: " Looking at the Fractal Structured Circuit(TM) one sees, for example, a beautiful etched copper pattern replacing the usual traces connecting button or canned shaped capacitors and coils (or their SMT counterparts). "
Here is the link to that article.
Fractal Antenna Systems, Inc.
Apparently it is in wide use in cell phones, their antennas and some microwave circuits.
People are making homemade fractal HD antennas using coat hangers as one instance of using a common material.
I think this feature; fractuals should be used in some builds to take advantage of a wideband of frequencies and resonance. Maybe it will be useful in the Muller/Romerouk build.
For those that be interested google fractal circuits and fractal antennas.
I do not have the resources/space/knowledge to do any builds at the moment but I am curious enough to verify if a HD antenna can be made simply using fractals and common materials.
Any way something to consider.
-RG signing off

YouTube - ‪Fractals: frequency, the heart, and cancer‬‏

You cannot invent, you can only discover

see also: http://www.energeticforum.com/psychi...antenna-2.html

[MonsieurM]

If i may venture a little on this:

First of i would like to say that I am a proponent of the Unifying Fractal Theory (or as i call it the Super-Hologram Theory). Based on this theory, and as some of you are well aware in all of my post i try to point that out, I consider that everything that surrounds us is a Fractal/Coil/Capacitor Adaptive Antenna, and all resonate following the Phi or Law of Octave. now read this:

An electrostatic spatial resonance model for coaxial helical structures with applications to the filamentous bacteriophages.

It is found that coaxial helices (as fractal as nature is) with optimally mated symmetries(see definition of fractal:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal) can lock into spatial resonance configurations that maximize their interaction(all the element in the universe). The resonances are represented as vectors in a discrete three-dimensional space[

An electrostatic spatial resonance model for coaxial helical structures with applications to the filamentous bacteriophages.

from http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...llector-7.html

Ah, that would be a good way of discovering the potential energy

To incorporate trees (fractal pattern ), I have wondered for some time about what may be termed pinging, first tree transmits, other tree bounces back the energy, yet increased due to the child on a swing analogy(exponential function ). The switching time (cycle)of the transistor being the time interval that creates the push effect of the swing, rather than an immediate bounce back again. In such a case, the first tree is the sender Tesla tower (roots being Ground and trunk being tower), the receiver tree is resonant with it. Trimming the tree trims the frequency to match the first tree.

If I May put it in other words:

If you want to understand the world as a system then you need to investigate three key components.

Cycles your 3
Fractal patterns your 6
Exponential functions your 9



If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla:






FYI

Electromagnetic Wave Localization in Photonic Fractals

http://www.jwri.osaka-u.ac.jp/publication/trans-jwri/pdf/341nmscp-takema.pdf

Fractal structures have no periodicity and no translational symmetry like crystal structures.

remember Walter Russell's Law of Crystallization (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...-crystals.html)

--------

I do agree with SilverToGold on his statement:

TESLA DID NOT BELIEVE IN ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES!

as long as we don't think as Dr Tesla did, we won't understand how he managed to transfer wireless energy:

FYI: did you know that Sir William Crookes was a mentor to Dr Tesla

see post: http://www.energeticforum.com/145702-post58.html

[Farmhand]

I appologise I didn't link this it is from Monsieur's post in the time travel thread I thought it was relevent here too.

My other links above are related to this.
YouTube - ‪MrSuperpotatotomato's Channel‬‏

Sorry i'll link it in my first post above too. My Bad. The interveiw's a goodie.