Peter, whatever happened with Eric P. Dollard?

[lessismore]

DC Transmission Line II (3 of 4)

The energy w in joules from capacitance C in farads and potential e in volts
My belief is that the force is the derivative of w with respect to s (in cm) However, to be consistent with e remaining constant while C changes, the source of e in the circuit must do work. So once again I wing it:


Find C in terms of s. Use the capacitance of circuit from above


Now take the derivative with respect to s


Substituting into the Force equation from above:



Convert Newton-meters (joules) per cm to Newtons and then Newtons to ounces

[lessismore]

DC Transmission Line II (4 of 4)

Balance?

.



Set the magnetic and dielectric forces equal to each other:







Solve for e

[Raui]

Thanks Eric and Dave for that transmission. I will give it some time before giving my thoughts, right now my mind is a bit clouded with uni work =/

Lessismore,
Great to see you contributing towards answering this question. I wish I could tell you if you were right or wrong. I can tell you the feedback he gave me on my answers and what my answers were.

"The magnetic force equation lacks a space coordinate that is the distance between the conductors.

The dielectric force equation has a problem in the other direction... there is no length of line, it is probably unit value such as 1 metre or etc. hence the equations don't really provide a proper answer but it look like you're heading in the right direction."

The problem is as far as I am aware I have taken into consideration these factors, check them out yourself and see what you think. Anyway here is the PDF I sent Eric with the solutions I'm talking about. Bare in mind Eric doesn't seem to think they are correct.

[handyandy]

Doing a search on hysteresis of the aether there came up these 2 items:

dallyhorse's Channel - YouTube

Mr. Dollard will have to verify time and place of the recording

Journals + Newsletters - Journal of Borderland Research - Vol. 44, No. 01 | Borderland Sciences Research Catalog (Powered by CubeCart)

On the transmission line problem if one delved into Gauss' work one would find a longitudinal force between 2 wires related to distance and not distance squared. There seems to be something sacred about the distance squared thing in mathematics and physics.

Regards,
Andy

[madhatter]

Highly informative post
This has been a complaint of mine within the quantum framework. This is was the launch point for QM and if one goes back to DeBroglie you'll find that Schrodingers equation needs an interpretation and this interpretation needs to correlate with experimentation. This has been the problem that experimental results are questioned as they don't fit the math and since relativity has to be correct, the results are tossed or errors are assumed to maintain a relativistic hold.

QM is a strange strange world and this is why there is so much confusion. take wave mechanics, Einstein and the rest used this classical form and then transformed it into a probability. the physical relationship is completely lost, there is no longer a physical model but a 'probability' model that has to instantly -zero time- collapse into a physical point. space and time are forced together and this causes all sorts of problems as Eric is pointing out. the entire framework of reference frames is based purely upon this.

I do know for a fact that there is grumblings in QM to where this paradigm shift of C being a constant needs to be changed, how it's going to be done will be interesting as over a century of work needs to be adjusted and the current regime is not going to do this. I suspect there will be a splintering as there are a number of physicists who are going back and starting over, myself included. there is at the moment work on some very interesting projects.

the circular reference of space time is why when one says that light isn't the limit it causes all kinds of problems. to remove the light speed limit we need to remove the bound space time notation placed in physics as well. this small but huge point is often missed. the concept of space time also hides gravity as well, another very large hole in physics.

[lessismore]

[wings]

related?

Microvert

[t-rex]

[t-rex]

[lamare]

Longitudinal speed is NOT pi/2 times c....

Hi all,

As you know I'm working on a longitudinal moonbounce project and am currently calculating my antenna. I found out that the transverse surface wave across the sphere can be expressed with the theoretical formula for Schumann resonance:

Schumann resonances - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

f_n= c/(2*pi*r) * sqrt(n(n+1))

I calculated the diameter for a 1/2 lambda sphere using Dollard's formula that the speed of longitudinal waves is pi/2 times c, but then the corresponding Schuman resonance frequency turned out to be 1287 MHz, which should be 1296 MHz if Eric's formula is correct.

So, I compared the Schuman formula with the formula for resonance in a string, basically a 1/2 lambda resonance with closed ends:

f_n = (n * c_l)/ 2L

Since L = 2r, we can now calculate the theoretical speed c_l. When we take n=1 in the string formula and n=2 in the Schumann formula, we end up with matching resonance frequencies.

Since n(n +1) equals 6 for n=2, we get:

c_l / (4 * r) = c_t / (2 * pi * r) * sqrt(6)

This works out to:

c_l = 2/pi * sqrt(6) * c_t

This computes to 1,559393604, while pi/2 computes to 1,570796325, a difference of 0,7%.....

So, now we have a theoretical derivation for the longitudinal wave speed, which turns out to be just a tiny bit lower than Eric's pi/2...

[t-rex]

[Ras]

For the record, EPD refusing to interact with modern technology in any way is just as absurd as having the worlds last highly qualified pre-natal neuro surgeon refusing to do a complicated surgery because he doesn't believe in the new "robo-scalpel".

In engineering, I am so far below most of the people here that I don't even plan to participate in the technical discussion in the near future, if ever. But, for me, it is sooo easy to understand Eric Dollard for being 'analog' and not 'digital'. The electrical science took the wrong turn in XX century. The whole technology we use today is a product of that bad decision, forced by economical and political reasons (to maintain slavery of the people). What would the world look like if it accepted Tesla's solutions? We cannot even imagine! Using modern 'digital' technology is the acceptance of the slavery, or could be understood that way.
Now, Eric may not understand things this way, but I do. And the fact that Eric refuses 'modern' technology only confirms (if you ask me) that he is a true scientist, genuine and honest. That, along the facts that he advocates 'live food' (raw vegan, I assume) and listening to Bach (for years, I have almost exclusively listened to Baroque) made him the most popular person on the planet for me .
One thing I think that Eric owes to the world is a book with title such as 'True Electricity' or something like that, with a thorough study of Teslian electricity vs. Einsteinian physics. This book would then, in an ideal world, be required in all high schools and universities in the world. All of them.

[Kokomoj0]

Hi all,

As you know I'm working on a longitudinal moonbounce project and am currently calculating my antenna. I found out that the transverse surface wave across the sphere can be expressed with the theoretical formula for Schumann resonance:

Schumann resonances - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



I calculated the diameter for a 1/2 lambda sphere using Dollard's formula that the speed of longitudinal waves is pi/2 times c, but then the corresponding Schuman resonance frequency turned out to be 1287 MHz, which should be 1296 MHz if Eric's formula is correct.

So, I compared the Schuman formula with the formula for resonance in a string, basically a 1/2 lambda resonance with closed ends:



Since L = 2r, we can now calculate the theoretical speed c_l. When we take n=1 in the string formula and n=2 in the Schumann formula, we end up with matching resonance frequencies.

Since n(n +1) equals 6 for n=2, we get:



This works out to:



This computes to 1,559393604, while pi/2 computes to 1,570796325, a difference of 0,7%.....

So, now we have a theoretical derivation for the longitudinal wave speed, which turns out to be just a tiny bit lower than Eric's pi/2...

so have you tried it yet on a transmission line to see who is closer?

[lamare]

so have you tried it yet on a transmission line to see who is closer?

No, and that is not easy to measure with a transmission line. However, with a radio telescope performing a moon-bounce at about dec 21st, we get a return time of 1,54932687869881 seconds when using the pi/2 formula, while we get 1,56065598874604 seconds when using my formula, when calculating for a distance of 364799 km:
Moon distance for Lansing, U.S.A. - Michigan in year 2011

This gives a difference of about 11 milliseconds, which should be easily detectable. At the Dwingeloo site, they can measure within a fraction of a millisecond:

ASTRON JIVE Daily Image

[t-rex]

very good

c = 2(pi)r Centimeters

is not vectorally complete, it is

c = 2(pi)kr Centimeters

Centimeter per Second,
Or Velocity, v

This represents the ratio of space, centimeter, to time, second.

In a conjugate form the propagation constant of a Longitudinal Magneto-Dielectric Wave is given by the dimensional relation,
This is the ratio of counterspace, per centimeter, to time, seconds.

In an alternate form of expression, the T.E.M. propagation constant is the square root of the product

Henry per Second, Mu

And,

Farad per Second, Epsilon.

And for the L.M.D. propagation constant, it is the square root of the product
And

e = (b/a)*jE

Where

e, the Electrostatic Potential in Volts

E, is the Electro-Motive Force in Volts

a, is the Power Factor

b, is the Induction Factor of the Oscillating Coil

Area equals

Width times k*Height

This is a cross product, k is the right angle operator, a versor of dimensionless form. Wave propagation is normal to the surface of this area of width cross height, on the axis of versor k. Heaviside calls this

Vwh = l

The transverse product of width and height is length. V is his vector product operator.

The situation is much different for the L.M.D. wave. Directivity here is co-linear, or axial. Dimensionally it is given as

Length times Length

Equals Length squared

subdivided