Peter, whatever happened with Eric P. Dollard?

[madhatter]

I think Eric is building up an understanding of the math used in his books and the old books of Electrical Engineering. A physical and abstract analysis of Electricity and with this come's the knowledge to engineer it. If the equations used are Oliver Heaviside's, and they accurately describe the Electrical phenomena, then some background information about what they mean is a little helpful . After all, we aren't talking about Quantum Mechanics here!

Thank's for all your work Eric, it is really appreciated and really is starting to bring the picture together. I've got so much reading to do!

Understandable, I just hoped Eric would be above mud slinging though. I'm referring to the reference to "primordial versor space algebra" it's not in my opinion accurate, are there those who view quaternions as a panacea? maybe however it should be addressed in technical terms to avoid the same issue of Beardons misinformation.

The early lectures esp those of Steinmetz are different from the currently taught texts. One has to research the various changes in math that have occurred. Laplace transforms and Dirac delta derivative have replaced the original Heaviside work with little notation of it.

The resurgence of the use of quaternions and bi, oct etc.. are a result of pushing further into quantum physics. This has a direct tie into what Eric is sharing here with the group. admittedly this would be advanced beyond the traditional application Eric is trying to convey, however a deeper understanding of the nature of these longitudinal scalar waves will allow for further development. Eric mentions the power from the square root of negative 1, I won't spoil his fun here on this one however this relation is clearer if....

[Aether]

I think Eric is building up an understanding of the math used in his books and the old books of Electrical Engineering. A physical and abstract analysis of Electricity and with this come's the knowledge to engineer it. If the equations used are Oliver Heaviside's, and they accurately describe the Electrical phenomena, then some background information about what they mean is a little helpful . After all, we aren't talking about Quantum Mechanics here!

Thank's for all your work Eric, it is really appreciated and really is starting to bring the picture together. I've got so much reading to do!

[madhatter]

clarification is needed here because honestly Erics last post is a bit ambiguous and misleading. Not sure if that was his intention or not.

Heaviside operational calculus works but has been somewhat substituted with Laplace transforms. As was quaternions was by Heaviside. To say one is superior to another is really ignorant of the use of each. Quaternions and Octonions which contain the Lye groups are still important in quantum physics.

At the time of Heaviside there was not much use for quaternions and they are difficult to work with. His simplified step functions and operational calculus along with Dirac replaced the use of quaternions in application.

It really comes down to how rigorous you wish to be and which one to use, they all will come to similar results and one may be simpler than the other depending on the use of the function.

The problem isn't the structure of what math to utilize but the theory of what one is doing.

[Raui]

Direct hit, Mr Dollard!

Bravo!!

Couldn't have said it better myself! One can only hope this will put Beardon's slagging of Heaviside's equations to rest even if it is only the group of people reading this. It's really funny noting the differences between how Heaviside describes electromagnetic phenomena and how my modern 2010 textbook does, Heaviside's description is more intuitive. I thought things were supposed to get simpler as time went on?

My lecturer says in one breath that electricity is the flow of electrons in a wire and then in the next breath says that displacement current is an electrical flow not involving electrons and not even flowing in a conductive material. To me at least this indicates that the fields are the more primary phenomena because we can have electrical phenomena occur without electrons moving in a conductor (aka. displacement current) but when we supposedly have so called electrons flowing through the wires the fields are still present and thus these apparent electrons are a kind of secondary phenomena to the primary phenomena which resides in the fields and thus in space not in the wire. Thank you Eric and god bless you!

Raui

[Sputins]

Wow



Direct hit, Mr Dollard!

Bravo!!

[t-rex]

[madhatter]

I'll spare the mathematics for the group here. There are nth number of dimensions as needed for any one theory. Strings added one additional and it matched the M-branes theory to the displeasure of the M-brane crowd at the time. Read Lee Smolins work if your interested in the crazy state of strings and where physics has most likely taken a wrong turn.

From my own personal research and study I have come to where wave functions have more to explain than any point particle theory ever could. However the problem is a basic one, all the wave functions in the world won't work for the fundamental quantum nature as it has to move from 3rd to 4th or more. just moving into 3D wave functions is a mind twister, it's hard, very very hard and beyond complex, you start adding in dimensionless fields then your really out there. The issue is simple, point particles are fairly easy to handle in the 3rd and a bit more complex in the 4th dimension, however 3D spherical wave functions and associated 3D spherical wave function interference is not and that's just for the dimension we interact in. adding in a scalar vanished dimension to a spherical wave function just for a single isolated example is incomprehensible enough let alone for a multitude of interacting complex waves.

I think that for the future of physics and a better understanding of the fundamentals we need to delve into the spherical wave function and it's associated higher dimensions. It's is a simpler 'structure' but a very complex one in terms of associating lower dimensional math to it. Hamilton was brilliant in is development of quaternions and it's a shame it was dissected and reduced down due to complexity and lack of understanding at the time of higher order dimensionless fields.

I could be completely wrong too, however I have studied quantum physics and string theory so I can say at least that I'm not ignorant of them. it also helps in seeing where and why some things break down, adding in further complex adjustable parameters and 'tunable' constants doesn't solve the problem either.

Eric knows what he's talking about and has kept it simple, his explanations and equations are simple and work.

[Pinwheel]

I guess orientation would be vectoral. hmmm

[Pinwheel]

Elements of quaternions : Hamilton, William Rowan, (1805-1865) : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive

Elements of Quaternions by (I think their creator) WR Hamilton

also this...

Tensor and Versor of a Quaternion - scribd

Therefore my guess for the 4th order of space is...

cm^4 = orientation
cm^-4 = scale


Survey says...!!!
The Price is Right losing horn - YouTube

I should go re-skim Theory of Wireless Power but it's 2am. Tomorrow maybe.

[Pinwheel]

Eric here says "nth order of space" - I wonder how many more there are.

I'm having a hard enough time thinking that there is a 4th. All the while trying to divorce myself from the L x W, or, L x W x H stuff.

Space relations are not well understood in the contemporary engineering world, and misconception abounds. N.F.G. relations introduced by the QRM mystics, such as curved space and 2D, 3D thinking has all but eliminated any real comprehension of the application of the dimension of space to electrical study.

Distance
Area
Volume

Span
Density
Concentration

Derp (?)
per Derp (?)

[madhatter]

If I'm not mistaken the IV - Fourth order space: would be non communicative. with vanishing scalar fields. hence the inability to visualize a dimension outside of ours. We can measure and see the effects of such a thing, though it may make no sense, similar to 2D world watching two circles merge into one while in 3D space it's two spheres in phase moving in thru 2D plane, if one of the spheres orbited the other it would look truly strange to 2D world. the point being 2D would not have anyway to visualize the 3D world that is responsible for what they see.

I noticed that the quaternion multiplication table shows this non commutative property and that is lost with the vector notation since it is commutative.

Eric, I applaud your efforts. This is no doubt a difficult msg to convey when dealing with spacial units and scalar fields that are dimensionless. I may very well be wrong here, I think that the proper equations will show the 'effect' of the scalar field and taking notice of how it is derived and can be manipulated will be key to understanding the nature of electricity and the universe.

There is notable progress being done with spherical harmonics and wave functions as computational power and graphics programs have progressed. although it's being used as a 3D spacial tool it can be manipulated to show the effect of the 4D scalar field on the wave function. Though this hasn't been done, I have taken the task of working thru the eq to do this. to say it's not easy is a massive understatement. fortunately I have the associated graphic math programs for just this task, side effect of business work.

[t-rex]

[h2ocommuter]

gulp: oh; just a bit excited the words are correct enough.

Hi h2ocommuter,
Congrats on the pickup.

Cheers

Thank you so much. Thank you all for the good reguards.
Oh I have a good grip the book is very well written indeed.

@ everyone, Take the time to Copy everything Eric posts because nowhere in this world will this information ever flow from another persons lips. unless we all get this information documented and varified and take it to the students of the world. grab it while you can.



Zane Muckey

[Farmhand]

Please forgive me for wandering off course so far, I must to let you know I am still in the hunt no matter how far it looks I have strayed....

Please enjoy 2 links
Video The electrical engineer "in the Nicola Tesla folder"

Zane

Hi h2ocommuter, I'm not sure of what the motor/generator that you have will
output, but you're description of what is shown in the drawing is wrong.

Turning the page to the right so the generator is at the top as it is in you're video.

The left side is AC (clearly marked A) and the right side is DC (clearly marked D),
This is further confirmed by the way coils are excited directly by the currents
on the left side (AC). It's all explained in the text, so don't believe me.

This is a plan showing how currents of high frequency and potential can be
obtained from a DC generator or a AC generator of low frequency. The DC
generators on the right show that the main generator is likely a DC generator
as well having the input chopped by commutator the output can be AC by the
looks of it.

I think what you have is an induction motor or generator. I think currents can
be taken from the armature when it is used to generate and DC is supplied to
the armature when used as a motor, I think but I cannot be certain on that
point. But the Tesla drawing is self explanatory.

Congrats on the pickup.

Cheers

[t-rex]