Space / Counter-space & Electricity / Di(a)electricity

[Aaron]

counterspace

With the Cosmic Induction Generator for example - the actual experiments show that a lot of the RF literally disappears between the coils and cannot be accounted for - the desynthesis of energy or the destruction of energy.

Where did it go? It disappeared into "counterspace" or another "dimension" for simplicity - like subspace in Star Trek terminology where communications go through subspace and bypasses the need to travel a distance. So although the lines on the ruler could be an analogy to counterspace and the space between the lines is the space, in the context of the CIG, it is the opposite or perhaps the complement of space.

For example, yin and yang are not opposites, they complement each other so maybe it is a similar comparison.

My interpretation above could be incorrect but I did specifically talk to Eric about his interpretation of counterspace in regards to the energy that simply disappears between the coils with the CIG and he did bring it up that it could be considered going into a different dimension.

Keep in mind about the Steinmetz reference or something like this that if there is the CIG system and the coils are far apart that if you're at the location of one, you may find yourself simultaneously at the location of the other.

[Sputins]

Given that if the 240cm^3 of water could be placed within a conductive container (anode) and a (cathode) also placed within the water, whereas the anode and cathode supplied with a given DC electric flux, the water itself (being a dielectric in pure form) would a charge to the supplied voltage and retain some of that charge after the supply was removed. So it becomes a capacitor of sorts. Counterspace is related to dielectric materials and capacity. The Dielectric component of the Electric Flux has the ability reside in Counterspace.

[trahedron]

With regards to counterspace and the idea of dimensions, I no longer subscribe to the idea of "dimensions" as they have been presented hitherto. I think they are a complication and that everything exists in a so called "3D Space". I think that the concept of "counterspace" is the act of looking INWARD from our level of perception and otherwise we're just looking OUTWARD.

I believe that things can be greatly simplified once we start to go down this path.

Energy is infinite as far as the universe goes (bear with me, I know this sounds loaded at first). Measurements are contextual (by our nature of perception) within our "cycle" or universe (if we want to call it that; we could say at our level of scale).

We need to start looking at infinity as a circle representation rather than a number line representation as this will give us a more correct model and capacity to understand the nature of scale and what we perceive.

One thing I've been struggling with for a long time is the idea of an ether. I've come to accept that it is real (there are just way too many experiments that actually support it as well as the theorization and work of brilliant men), but it is hard to conceptualize it given our current scale-based perception.

However, after *beginning* to understand that what I just said, I can start to see that there is no singular ether or base/prime/beginning ether. There is an "ether" for each "universe" or cycle. (There may even be a universe in each ether "particle" (don't know about this yet). Understanding that energy is infinite while (what we call) "matter" (maybe better conceived as an aggregate of energy) is finite helps one to begin to understand how these confinements of universes works.)

For example, let's say we have a ruler, like Eric mentioned, we use it's markings to measure the macro level or our scale, but we CAN use the space in-between. As a matter of fact, the space in-between is infinitely subdivideable if we keep getting smaller and smaller. At some point it no longer makes sense TO US to subdivide the ruler, but it can be done forever (ie, it doesn't mean it cannot be done). The ruler can also be used to measure upwards as well by multiplying the ruler again and again and again ad infinitum. Now I agree that this ruler analogy doesn't make a lot of sense in reality, BUT when you say the ruler is energy THEN I can start to see what Eric is talking about (even if perhaps he hasn't explained it as clearly and as fully as possible).

Now I'm grappling with this next part, so please forgive me. I've not been able to work out really super clear analogies or details to paint this picture properly so I'm going to try to sling mud at the wall in hopes to get TOWARDS where I'm going (realizing that it's crazy imperfect and absurd).

Let's get a little goofy, while not being entirely off base as far as comparisons go, imagine for a moment that everything in OUR scale is at 1 Volt ( 1 Volt being entirely contrived since it's on our scale and completely making this up just to put it in context of electricity so pardon the absurdity of this comparison) - uhm, let's say maybe we're made up of simple particles that measure at 0.1 Volt per particle. 10 particles make up each thing in our universe. Then let's move down, can 0.1 Volt be subdivided? Well yes, we could say 0.1 Volt makes up some thing that makes us up, but then 0.01 Volt particles make up each of these 0.1 Volt things. This subdivision can keep going on infinitely because the idea of Volt or 1 Volt in the first place is made up and only really makes sense at OUR observational scale or point in existence. If we were to look at "infinity" as a whole (which again, doesn't make sense as we have to start seeing things in cycles), we might suddenly realize that we exist at 1,000,000,000,000 Volts or 0.0000000000000001 Volt. These measurements are all ultimately immaterial outside of our own context or point of perspective. The point is that intelligence, however it exists, and aggregates and so forth are all possible at any point in the scale up or down.

One problem we have presently is that we're pretty blind. Some of Eric's experiments are AMAZING and he's seen things happen that he cannot entirely explain. One reason for this is that we don't have a method to "see" these things at all levels of the spectrum at the same time. We have a very incomplete ability to observe what we're doing right now when we work with high or even very low energy levels and frequencies. If we could resolve our ability to see and perceive of more things I think this dimensionality question and the discussion we've been having would self-resolve.

At any rate, I have a lot more I could say, but I've blathered on long enough and I'm sure a lot of what I said will seem strange at first. I've spent a good number of years thinking about all of this and trying to pull things together in a unified fashion, but terminology and contextual understanding keep getting in the way when I work with various brilliant theorists. These are some humps we have to move over and pronto.

[Aaron]

spacial dimension

With regards to counterspace and the idea of dimensions, I no longer subscribe to the idea of "dimensions" as they have been presented hitherto. I think they are a complication and that everything exists in a so called "3D Space". I think that the concept of "counterspace" is the act of looking INWARD from our level of perception and otherwise we're just looking OUTWARD.

It is helpful to understand not just Eric's perspective on dimensions - it is the actual proper definition of dimensions in regards to space.

There is no 3D space, space is one single dimension. What you refer to as 3-dimensions are not dimensions but are coordinates. x, y and z are coordinates within the single dimension of space. If x y z are dimensions, that means you and I are in different dimensions and that would be ridiculous. You and I are obviously at different coordinates, but are in the same dimension of space.

[trahedron]

Right. I wanted to do away with the term "3D" in what I wrote but just went ahead and used it since I was already going on so much. Spot on and well stated, thanks.

[ricards]

....

Let's get a little goofy, while not being entirely off base as far as comparisons go, imagine for a moment that everything in OUR scale is at 1 Volt ( 1 Volt being entirely contrived since it's on our scale and completely making this up just to put it in context of electricity so pardon the absurdity of this comparison) - uhm, let's say maybe we're made up of simple particles that measure at 0.1 Volt per particle. 10 particles make up each thing in our universe. Then let's move down, can 0.1 Volt be subdivided? Well yes, we could say 0.1 Volt makes up some thing that makes us up, but then 0.01 Volt particles make up each of these 0.1 Volt things. This subdivision can keep going on infinitely because the idea of Volt or 1 Volt in the first place is made up and only really makes sense at OUR observational scale or point in existence. If we were to look at "infinity" as a whole (which again, doesn't make sense as we have to start seeing things in cycles), we might suddenly realize that we exist at 1,000,000,000,000 Volts or 0.0000000000000001 Volt. These measurements are all ultimately immaterial outside of our own context or point of perspective. The point is that intelligence, however it exists, and aggregates and so forth are all possible at any point in the scale up or down.

....

my take on that is you somehow is forming a concept of "Voltage Gradient".. I think that is true..
the ionosphere voltage gradient is higher than the voltage gradient here on the ground, that would mean there is a potential difference (voltage) exist from the ionosphere to ground.. that is why most lightning discharges protrude to ground.. but not all right?. some lightning discharges are from cloud to cloud.. it would mean that a point up there is of a higher voltage gradient than the voltage gradient at another point also up there... but it doesn't mean that if a lightning discharge was formed.. the voltage gradient up there was gone.. It only balanced its potential. there still exist a voltage gradient from ionosphere to ground.

i really can't help to relate to gravity.. most people who have experimented with high voltage would understand that there exist a current that attracts a charged plate to an uncharged plate and not just positive to negative terminals... to neutral objects as well.. this I believe is what maxwell called "Displacement Current" a current that displaces..

If the Ionosphere is of a higher voltage gradient than the ground/core. a displacement current should exist from the ionosphere to ground.. incidentally. we have a force that is the same exact downward force to earth called "Gravity".

what about "Aether"... it is a theoretical substance that is supposed to be the medium for gravitational force..

now isn't that an intriguing "Coincidence"?..

I don't think this is something new to you too since your also studying aether..

relating to the topic.. If someone who will use the term "Counterspace" to explain that, I doubt it would be this short and simple...

[Kokomoj0]

THE IDEA OF COUNTERSPACE | AetherForce

?Energy Defined? by E. P. Dollard ? Gestalt Reality

Way back in the very beginning wiht the male female analogy which does not take into account that she might have a headache

The preferable electron movement in the one direction from anode to cathode is determined by the degree of the filling in of the upper electron layers of the solid matter, which is taking place during the electron transition from anode into this solid matter until the outer electron sphere is saturated. Furthermore, one should assume the bonding type change and respectively expect the effect of the bonding type change on the scold matter conductance during the electron spheres of atom saturation (simpler speaking, it is a result of electron connecting to the atoms, bonded to the solid matters with different ore identical chemical bonds). It is supposed to expect in the semi-quantitative approximation, that the that conductance of the saturated with electrons atoms will increase with the increase of the affinity of atoms to electrons It is also expected, that the conductance decreases with the increase of enthalpy of the bond, broken during the electron attachment to one of the two atoms connected with this bond. Accordingly to the chemical bond theory, the enthalpy input in the bond energy of I2 molecule equals approximately a half of the bond energy, i.e. 0.72 eV. Iodine atom affinity to electron equals 3.06 eV. Respectively, the heat of reaction of the electron attachment to I2 molecule accompanied with the breakage of the co-valent bond in I2 molecule can be estimated by the value 2.34 of I2 (3.06 - 0.720= 2.34). Accordingly to the experimental data, the iodine molecule affinity the electron equals 2.55 eV. The analogous calculations for chlorine and bromine molecules gives the estimated values for these molecules affinity of 2.40 and 2.36eV, while the direct experimental determination gives the values of 2.38 and 2.55 eV respectively. For the additional verification of the affinity energy for the two-atom molecules, we estimated and compared with the experimental data the electron affinity to electron of Na2 and K2 using the identical methods. The comparison of the calculated and experimental data showed, that the calculated and experimental (in parenthesis) values of the electron affinity for those molecules is lower, than the ones for halogens molecules and are equal 0.2 (0.43) and 0.23 (0.5) respectively.

Theory of electrical conductivity

Every time I look at this counter space stuff I wind up back at the beginning, 'what for'? Immediately above is the way I was taught.

and then I suppose there is this:

Current
Electrical current is the rate of flow of charge in a circuit. Current (I) is measured in amps (A), using an ammeter.

Charge
Charge (Q) is measured in coulombs (C). Each electron carries a tiny amount of charge, 1.6 x 10-19 coulombs.
charge = current x time
(coulomb, C) (ampere, A) (second, s)

Power
Power (P) is the rate at which energy is transformed in a device, it is measure in watts (W). 1 watt means that 1 joule of energy is transformed in one second.

power = energy transformedtime

Power, potential difference and current are related by the following equation;

power = potential difference x current

The energy transformed is given by;

energy transformed = potential difference x charge

Current, Charge & Power – joules, coulombs, amps, volts, watts.

forces one to ask 'whats missing' anything?

[mikrovolt]

When we have only a pure sine waves and collision results in deconstruction
it is easier to visualize when there is a spectra of waves.

Since complex numbers are useful to grind out answers and we are considering CIG we find ourselves reverse engineering algorithms for a physical entity.
There are few authors on the subject of CIG is difficult to follow. So we switch to light and it's rainbow of spectra.
In this way when we crunch numbers we feel that there is only a dark spot in the diffraction of other colors.

Deconstruction of light wave band thru a slot has a "path difference"

https://youtu.be/-FSxZhBxmsU

The fancy method with laser interferometer with a beam splitter raises the question ...
where does the light go ?

https://youtu.be/RRi4dv9KgCg

[Kokomoj0]

When we have only a pure sine waves and collision results in deconstruction
it is easier to visualize when there is a spectra of waves.

Since complex numbers are useful to grind out answers and we are considering CIG we find ourselves reverse engineering algorithms for a physical entity.
There are few authors on the subject of CIG is difficult to follow. So we switch to light and it's rainbow of spectra.
In this way when we crunch numbers we feel that there is only a dark spot in the diffraction of other colors.

Deconstruction of light wave band thru a slot has a "path difference"

https://youtu.be/-FSxZhBxmsU

The fancy method with laser interferometer with a beam splitter raises the question ...
where does the light go ?
https://youtu.be/RRi4dv9KgCg

I dont think thats an appropriate question, since you cannot get constructive and destructive waves without interference. I think the better question is what is causing the interference is he over looking in his contraption.

[Kokomoj0]

Oh, for those interested, while looking for something else I stumbled across epd's description of what counterspace is. Its in the aarp talk that he did.

What the rest of us call a reciprocal '1/x' he calls counterspace. Hopefully this serves to help demystify it so its usable..

[mikrovolt]

I dont think thats an appropriate question, since you cannot get constructive and destructive waves without interference. I think the better question is what is causing the interference is he over looking in his contraption.

Good comment so then "what is causing interference"
Because white light is made up of ALL visible wavelengths, its colors can be separated (dispersed) by this difference in behavior. When light passes through glass, it encounters TWO interfaces--one entering and the other leaving. It slows down at the first interface and speeds back up at the second.

In a glass prism blue light refracts more than red light due to it's difference in wavelength. Red has a much longer wavelength than blue. Also when you combine the colors back together they appear white. https://youtu.be/uucYGK_Ymp0

The optical interferometer experiments measure the waves that are reflected back into the laser after being split shows that the dark spot is accounted for when both are the same frequency in which case we can look at amplitude of the resultant wave to either add or subtract depending on phase.

The quantitative method uses an imaginary unit. Whatever convenient form used, the i unit is useful for problem solving. Many people on this forum are familiar with both quantitative and the physical interference. They might consider the subject better taught in a more structured setting such as a classroom and would hesitate to comment but are not wondering where the wave went.

This is why Eric is humble giving these lectures. If a camera was pointed at the audience it might show
a variety of face expressions.

[Kokomoj0]

Good comment so then "what is causing interference"

lasers have 2 internal mirrors

[JenkoRun]

counterspace

With the Cosmic Induction Generator for example - the actual experiments show that a lot of the RF literally disappears between the coils and cannot be accounted for - the desynthesis of energy or the destruction of energy.

Where did it go? It disappeared into "counterspace" or another "dimension" for simplicity - like subspace in Star Trek terminology where communications go through subspace and bypasses the need to travel a distance. So although the lines on the ruler could be an analogy to counterspace and the space between the lines is the space, in the context of the CIG, it is the opposite or perhaps the complement of space.

For example, yin and yang are not opposites, they complement each other so maybe it is a similar comparison.

My interpretation above could be incorrect but I did specifically talk to Eric about his interpretation of counterspace in regards to the energy that simply disappears between the coils with the CIG and he did bring it up that it could be considered going into a different dimension.

Keep in mind about the Steinmetz reference or something like this that if there is the CIG system and the coils are far apart that if you're at the location of one, you may find yourself simultaneously at the location of the other.

Good evening Aaron, I've been browsing your posts on your perspective of Counterspace and I'd like to ask your opinion on Ken Wheeler's theory of it in relation to the Aether vs your own where Aether fills space. I'm unaware of how familiar you are with his theory so I will include a quick synopsis of it, and another question concerning Tesla's ideas on Radio waves and Light.

In Ken's theory the Aether and Counterspace are synonymous with each other as a non-cartesian dimension of pure potential (possibly composed of a non-composite gaseous structure that is not what we'd conventionally call matter), with space itself being an absence of Aether potential born from the after effect of a Magnetic field, the interior volume of the Torus, with matter being condensates of Aether present within that volume, this is in conflict with your theory where the Aether fills space in dimensionality. In your opinion what is the viability of this model in comparison to yours? What does and doesn't work about it?

The second thing concerns what Tesla believed, that Radio waves and Light were not Transverse Electromagnetic in nature, in the article The True Wireless he talks about this concerning the radiations of the transmitter passing along the earth's surface are quickly extinguished and the primary transmission factor being the electrostatic potential of the antenna influencing at range, and on the nature of Light being a longitudinal disturbance limited by the Aether's Physical properties of the medium, especially density and elastic force, liking the whole thing to being inside a condenser.

This relates to your model where Aetheric density determines these factors including the propagation rate of Light as it seems to provide support to Tesla's beliefs on this, in your opinion would you say this makes it a possibility that Light and above ground Radio waves are not TEM in nature as Tesla believed?

Kind Regards -R