Walter Russell - Understanding and applying his work

[Aha]

Start at the begining

[QUOTE=MonsieurM;170616]If you want to grasp fully Walter Russell's work...Start by decoding his table of Elements... ...angles, flow, positions etc...

Check out the following site

Walter Russell's Cosmology

[MonsieurM]

[QUOTE=Aha;219301]

If you want to grasp fully Walter Russell's work...Start by decoding his table of Elements... ...angles, flow, positions etc...

Check out the following site

Walter Russell's Cosmology

thank you

[m786]

Tesla & Russell

Tesla mentioned important numbers are : 3,6,9 .
Russell mentioned it is all about frequency and wave.

So what is common between them?

Solfeggio frequencies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[cplouffe]

Cosmic clock, Inert gases, and Elements

Hey guys... I posted this on my site but would love to hear your thoughts and comments.


So I have been really trying to understand the details of the chemical elements, locked potentials, and ratios of everything. I was talking with a new friend(a user on here) who is also a Russell fan and with our dialogue back and forth, a few light bulbs went off.

I looked back at the cosmic clock diagram in Atomic Suicide and noticed a few things. This is the one that has 2 arms on it pictured below.



From this I noticed how this can be used to explain the inert gas/element ratios and it shows how the male and female are mirrored in every step from inert gas 0 to wave amplitude 4 and back again.

I put this quick image together to show what I mean so you can follow the clock arms around during the cycles.



This helped me finally understand what the Russells meant by:

[morpher44]

[StweenyA]

Hey guys... I posted this on my site but would love to hear your thoughts and comments.

Thanks, do you have a higher res image for the cosmic clock you drew?

b) Walter Russell
Pseudo Science Extraordinaire

LOL

g) Albert Einstien
Theoretical Physics / Mathmetician

Einstein? but they were rivals.

[morpher44]

Einstein and Tesla

LOL
Einstein? but they were rivals.

Yeah. That is was makes it fun.
We only "think" they were rivals.

One guy believes in the Ether ... the other guy believes in space time.
On guys doesn't believe in speed-of-light being the limit.
The other guy does.
One guy makes stuff that works. The other guy never makes anything,
but his theories work.
They could be arguing about this on-screen as a running joke.
They both appeared to have worked on the Philedelphia Experiment:

True story about Philadelphia Expriment,Unified field Generators, Einstein & Tesla. PART 1 - YouTube

[MonsieurM]

)

your images kind of got me inspired and it dawned on me we can also overlap the Periodic Table :

just thought it worth to share :

[cplouffe]

Here is larger image of just the clock. Crude and quick in photoshop. But it shows how you can use the ratios of space/inert gas/stillness in relation to matter/motion/physical. More to come.

MM thanks for the overlays, I'll take a look at them in depth shortly.

[petar113507]

Hey guys... I posted this on my site but would love to hear your thoughts and comments.


So I have been really trying to understand the details of the chemical elements, locked potentials, and ratios of everything. I was talking with a new friend(a user on here) who is also a Russell fan and with our dialogue back and forth, a few light bulbs went off.

I looked back at the cosmic clock diagram in Atomic Suicide and noticed a few things. This is the one that has 2 arms on it pictured below.



From this I noticed how this can be used to explain the inert gas/element ratios and it shows how the male and female are mirrored in every step from inert gas 0 to wave amplitude 4 and back again.

I put this quick image together to show what I mean so you can follow the clock arms around during the cycles.

Very good. You are examining the relationship of "Matter body" versus "Space body". That is one way to use the cosmic clock.

The the nucleus/"dense matter body" exchange with the opposite mate -- the space body as you outlined.

If I could but add to your thought tangent -- in that the "space body" not only governs what the density of the forming nucleus (and therefore mass), but crystalization bond angles, and electrochemical valence.

If I could add onto that thought that the "space bodies" are governed by the E/W magnetic poles -- we would be cookin' with gas, my friend

It is not good enough just to have the theory. I will do my best to tie the theory together with practical application. Maybe we'll synthesize the gas that we'll be cooking with

In order to know how to utilize those two relationships -- we must not only understand the unwinding space body by the E/W poles -- but also the role of the N/S poles.


First, what you say. Then, what I say.

You could also say that the electron shells are inert gas rings, oblated into various spiral orbits...

And those solid metals are oxidized from gases who have an opposite "space body"



It's like two puzzle peices fitting together. One gap, one solid.

[petar113507]

If you are asking how you can take one gaseous substance of inert gas, and force them into unity with other substances -- it takes tremendous pressure.

The compounds are not created with them -- they are created around them, and cage them in. Water will form "clusters" around the inert gases if given sufficent pressure.
(matieralist)

If you are not asking about the substance itself -- and instead the pattern of motion which produces the inert gas -- Different crystaline structures, when on a sufficently small scale (nanoscale) -- can "simulate" the inert gases. What I mean, is that their structure.



In this picture I have circled the hollow rings which are the inert gases.
Notice that the red and blue waves intersect in the center of these rings.
Notice further, by following where they intersect -- that they follow until they are in the center of a crystaline looking strucutre.

Bedini uses gaps in the crystaline structure to conduct ions -- what if you had several of these "gaps" to form a "cage" like a bubble from within an element?

What if you selected two opposite mates on russell's table, and they oppositely balanced each other. If each imbalanced mate are divided from their parent inert gas -- and their opposite mate is the inverse of their solid body -- wouldn't the cubic crystaline structure "line up" of those two substances, where the inert gas would otherwise be, if it were not divided?



Inside out -- is space on the outside. Matter, surrounded by space.
Outside in -- is matter solids with space in the center.

And so, through crystalographic strucutres, by forming a "cage" and thus simulating inert gases -- might be able to progress up or down the octaves


I'm not going to pretend that I know exactly what I'm talking about here -- I've been reading this stuff like just about anybody else could -- but if you're willing to chew this stuff over, I'm down to share what I'm thinkin.

[petar113507]

I will be referencing these:
Documents | The Light Coalition

Download them
Print them out
Highlight them, draw on them.

This is a STARTING point.starting point to establish an "open source" for atomic transmutation.

Here are the things I beleive I have sufficently clear in my mind:

• I will overview the experiments -- because they are the practical application of russell's theory.
• Then, examine what russell thought an inert gas is, and why it is important.
  
• From examining what an inert gases wave feild seems to be, I would like to collectively propose experiments which might help us discern magnetic angles to synthesize inert gases.
  
• With the "space body" magnetic cycle clearly outlined -- we would collectively be a few steps away from establishing the required conditions to produce useful elements from atmospheric gas through experimentation. (New hydrogen elements, Hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen)
  
• If the principal of gas transmutation is understood in concept -- we would be close to testing the synthesis "new metals" -- steel produced from carbon and silicon.

If you are not familiar with russell's work -- this might confuse you. If you've read his work (New concept of the universe), and pondered on his gas transmutation -- we might get some practical application out of this.

If you think I'm wrong, this'll be a good discussion

http://lightcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/Experiments-%20Grotz%2CBinder%2CKovac.pdf

Overview:

http://lightcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/Fulcrum%20Magazine%20Articles.pdf

Overview

• Nitrogen turned into lithium 5, and helium gas. Not when the gas was heated or cooled -- but rather when the nitrogen was ionized.
  
• The commonality between the two tests:
• Ionization + dual polarity magnetic fields = transmutation of the parent gas into new matieral + inert gas

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

The concepts to take away here -- was that russell understood a relationship between magnetism and the elements evolution that I would like to investigate.

This ionization (I might go further, and say dielectric breakdown), when subjected to magnetic feilds in very precise ways -- results in transmutation.

With the goal in mind -- to understand the potential practical application of transmutation by understanding the mechanics behind russell's cosmogony -- we can begin by examining magnetism.

Again, I'm not perfect, but this should give you some ideas....

[petar113507]

Magnetism





I don't care what science says magnetism is. Russell could transmute gases, and science can't. So I'm willing to suspend whatever I think magnetism is to take on russell's perspective. I'd suggest you do the same.



What are the two electric workers?



Looks like the E feild of a magnet to me.



Magnetic poles are opposite polarities. Got it.



Opposite polarities void each other.



It seems to me, based on these pictures above -- that russell is talking about the intereference of the E feild and the B feild, and their relationship to each other.



Polarity, could be relating to the E feild, and how it divides -- or comes between two magnetic feilds of opposite polarities....



Annnnd.... The fulcrum could be the crossed B and E feilds. Isn't that the A feild?

Can someone give me a citation on that? Bearden referred to it, and I can't think of the guy who named the effect right now...

I think it sounded like baranov?

Anyways....

[petar113507]

[petar113507]