Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX


2019 ESTC ALL SEATS SOLD OUT!
PRE-REGISTER FOR THE
2020 ENERGY CONFERENCE

Monero XMR

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: Cosmic Induction Generator

  1. #21
    Senior Member Faraday88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Bangaluru, Karnataka, India
    Posts
    1,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron Murakami View Post
    I couldn't find that phrase "intermediate light probing" but I know what you mean. We also have to define what TIME is - below is a definition that I created long time ago because it is the only thing that makes sense to me.

    From a non-relative perspective, time itself seems to be nothing more than the rate of motion of mass moving through the aether, which is dependent on the density of the aether.

    So under high density aether, there is more restriction to the movement of mass and even light speed but to an observer in that area, light will still look like light speed since all perception, etc... is based on the aether being that dense.

    Under low density, there is less restriction to the movement of mass and light speed is faster with less restriction - but to an observer it will still be at light speed since their perception is subject to that lower density aether.

    From the universal perspective - if we could look at both areas of the aether at high and low densities, we should see that the high density aether light is slow and the low density aether has light moving fast.

    But again, to each observer in their own respective areas of different densities of aether everything looks normal and to them time seems to tick normally because they are perceiving at their own benchmarks based on the aetheric density that they are in.

    Many of the principles of relativity are accurately describing the effects but an aether based model is what actually makes sense out of it.

    When we look at space and time - Eric considers space to not have 3 dimensions, but 1. XYZ are coordinates but not dimensions. You and I are at different coordinates in this world, but we are in the same singular dimension of space. So any "travel" that light does if it even travels is still within 1 single dimension of space from point A to B and that movement is from one set of coordinates to the other - but again in the same single dimension of space. As far as time, it can be a mathematical dimension we can multiply different variables by but it doesn't look like it is a dimension in the sense of "3D space and time". Time is an amount of movement that happened and that is about it.

    If some kid is swinging on a swing and the swinging is consistent and we count those swings, that is just as valid of a timepiece as a clock. The only thing the kid swinging and a clock are doing is simply MOVING in a countable or incrementally quantifiable way. To the observer within their own aetheric density - time will always look the same since the light is moving at a speed governed by that density, their observation faculties are governed by it, movement of mass is governed by it, etc... so no matter what density, this will always be the case but comparing locations with different densities, there will be a difference in the "flow of time" and therefore the "speed of light" from an absolute perspective.

    What is the actual mechanism at play that allows light to be created at one spot and appear at another spot in outer space without it being visible in between or light created at one spot down on Earth and hitting another spot while illuminating its pathway by interacting with dust, moisture, etc... good question! In both situations, the light only appears when it hits something because illuminating its own pathway down here is simply each particle on the path being hit and illuminated so essentially it is the same thing as light out in space where the moon is simply a big particle on the sunlight's path that is being illuminated by absorbing and re-emitting light.

    There is also a big fallacy when it comes to measuring distance to different stars by looking at color shifts as the light moves past other objects. I can't find that reference but there are examples where that whole idea doesn't manifest so it can change everything we think about in terms of how big the universe is, etc... I'll try to find it and post it because in a way, it kind of gives credit to some of Eric's ideas about light travel and it is based on actual photographs taken by NASA, etc.
    Hi Aaron,

    In Aetheric Physics it is established (very much like what Hamilton said that a distinct Science of TIME is possible) that TIME is the other counter part of the physical 'Nothingness' the first being the Physical fabric of space itself. if i understand Tom bearden writings on the Structure of TIME from the perspective of Engineering it, this should be it. i remember seeing a documentary in the discovery channel where a scientist is shown working on using Light to do 'TIME TRAVEL' none the less, TIME travel must be a diffenrt perception as opposed to Space travel...Astrophysics is yet to marry with the Science of TIME.
    Rgds,
    Faraday88.
    ‘Mass is the Spatial density of Matter (Particle) and the Temporal Intensity of Space (Field)’.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Faraday88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Bangaluru, Karnataka, India
    Posts
    1,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Handy andy View Post
    Time is not a real dimension (yes in a way it is not but in another way it is !!!), it is a useful way of determining where we are, were, and will be.
    If some one travels around the world in a supersonic jet with an atomic clock, the clock appears to have slowed down, when compared to a clock on the ground. No matter which you look at it when both clocks are compared they have a discrepancy, but they are both when compared exist at the same point and space in time. Time travel is not possible,(Yes you are correct, but again, this has nothing to do with the way we know about 'spatial Travel' Time travel is a different sense..i have said this before many times) even if we could open up a whole in space and appear at the other side of the universe at will, we have not slowed time. For the observer it might take a millenia for light to appear back here on earth confirming your arrival, so to the observer on earth you might appear to have travelled a millenia into the future.
    Look at this perspective : Spatial travel happens only unidirectional... while in the case of a light, it does it simultaneously in 3D axis, which is impossible for a Mass-particle to do.as for light, and its source, they are inherently associated with the 'Spatial spread' and not 'travel' so to speak. Light originates from the TIME-DOMAIN.
    when we perceive the 'travel of light from a distances point in the far Universe (like a star) we perceive the 'act' happening there and this act is the instance that it happens and not that it would have happend millions of years ago (as is generally interpreted).. TIME ENTERS OUR PHYSICAL REALITY FROM TWO NODES..... ONE IS THE FROM THE 'NEAR' MASS(COMPLEX PLANE) AND THE OTHER IS FROM DISTANCE SPACE (SIMPLE PLANE)....if LIGHT is made as the NODE between THE SPACE AND TIME ....A PHENOMENON CALLED THE TIME TRAVEL IS REALIZED!!!!!


    Light is only perceived when it hits your eyeball or sensor, photons of light travel through the ether space, (what ever you wish to call it) in a straight line unless interferred with, photons moving between the ether are being driven on like a perpetual spring. The ether transmits all forces including gravity and magnetism in the form of vortices, different vortices give rise to different types of forces, attractive and repulsive etc.

    The reason masses appear to increase with speed approaching light speed and the size of the particle reduces and becomes componential (i have coined this term) to aether it self is because energy must be expended moving the ether out of the way. like any liquid it becomes rock hard when squashed too hard, it has inertia, and therefore a memory of what has passed.

    The solar system is thought to be expanding because of red and blue shift observations, which is based on the doppler effect which you hear when a car approaches you then passes, light behaves the same. Einsteins observation on light being bent due to gravity, hides what is really going on. The gravitational waves in the ether reduce the density of the ether ie stretch it, and give the appearence of space being stretched, therefore like in water when light passes from one medium to the next the refractive index changes and the light appears to bend. At least thats what I reckon, I am open to discussion.

    Interestingly I think rosemary ainslie also included all matter as coming out of the ether, the masses being given by centrepetal forces of the ether. She used zipons to represent her magnetic field, I think she was wrong here, the magnetic field is the ether spiraling out of one pole into the other, I could be wrong, But I am open to discussion.

    A star trek type idea just occurred to me flashed through my skull, ref opening up a gap in space,(We already have this 'GAP' and it is know to us by the name MASS and yes it does have a superluminal 'velocity' to travel in TIME) and travelling faster than light.

    My view of the ether is that it consists of very small pieces of space, that are all connected by a zero space, all things are connected literally by this extra dimension. However if a tunnel could be opened up in the ether, ie moving the ether out of the way, then travelling at above light speed might be possible in an artificial zero space dimension. You would probably die trying to do it, therefore it is not recommended. Also my view is that quantum matter appearing from the ether and disappearing continually all around us, is the ether trying to produce matter, when the ether is stretched I reckon this quantum matter appears permanently as matter, so stretching space too much might suddenly result in vast amounts of matter appearing, some of it could be antimatter(BANG, gamma ray emissions, see centre of rotating galaxies, where matter is produced). This is most likely how the original matter in the universe appeared, in vortices which stretched the ether. This matter then coalesced into big clouds nebulae, which became stars, converting the matter into bigger particles. The stars then supernovaed this heavier matter out into the universe forming the planets we have today etc.

    I originally started my investigations on wardenclyffe wondering what would happen if we pulsed a big enough potential across an area of space, could we pull quarks or even electrons and positrons into existence, and harvest them. That is when I got into lightning. But to go back to the high potential concept, like lightning and water it will work better in a vacuum. The ether also behaves like a very fine liquid so it will pass through the walls of any container you try to create a vacuum in. Setting up gravitational waves to stretch the ether, might be possible using one of teslas ideas.
    Hi Andy, above are some of my views (Highlighted) on your comments...
    Rgds,
    Faraday88.
    Last edited by Faraday88; 11-27-2016 at 08:25 PM.
    ‘Mass is the Spatial density of Matter (Particle) and the Temporal Intensity of Space (Field)’.

  3. #23
    Senior Member Faraday88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Bangaluru, Karnataka, India
    Posts
    1,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Handy andy View Post
    Hi

    Thanks for your comments, I will take some time to absorb them fully. As you are aware my ideas are very flexible and changing rapidly, I have now incoorporated Rosemary Ainslies ideas with a twist into my ideas.

    At first pass, I think this isnt mentioned in these threads and I overlooked it partly because of the breadth of the stuff I am looking at in my essays. This is that the speed of light can be exceeded in differing reference frames. The Aether is moving in space, light travels through the aether at light speed. But the aether itself is not stationery. This is observed at the outer edges of the visible universe where galaxies are accelerating away from us, even more interesting is that galaxies within a moving aether travelling at light speed could and do exceed light speed. The following is a link outlining some of the issues astronomers have, you may find it interesting, I did.

    http://phys.org/news/2015-10-galaxies-faster.html#nRlv

    Do you have a good book or reference website for aether physics, you could direct me at.

    Kind Regards

    Andy
    Hi Andy,

    look it is like this... Astrophysics and Astronomy have a perspective of the physical universe and the irony is..these in general have no perspective for TIME it self as a Distinct Science and that is where the overall understanding fails.. i would suggest you to read Tom Bearden (at least i cohere with his conception ) one striking statement that he made ' Astrophysicist and cosmologist wrestle to uncover the secrets of the so-called Dark Energy whereas it can be readily proved on table top experiment if one understands how to siphon the Vacuum Energy using a Dipole that bears a Broken symmetry with the immediate Vacuum... Yes if you get it right, Space Time is more readily understood in Electromagnetic terms and once you get that the structure of the working of the Universe in both Space-Time manifold will be obviously evident.
    just a background of the jut feeling to my understanding on this... years ago while in school i was very inquisitive about Einstein's Theory of Relativity but would struggle to comprehend the concept... but believe me today i know it more on the Electromagnetic Theory (Scalar Electromagnetic or Quantum Electrodynamics) basis.. and that how it is!!!!
    Rgds,
    Faraday88.
    ‘Mass is the Spatial density of Matter (Particle) and the Temporal Intensity of Space (Field)’.

  4. #24
    Senior Member Faraday88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Bangaluru, Karnataka, India
    Posts
    1,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Handy andy View Post
    Hi

    Thanks again for coming back, I am still mulling a few things over ref how space behaves at when galaxies are travelling close to light speed and still accelerating, it explains a few things, and is yet another example where standard physics ignores the obvious, when it doesn't suit.

    I played with a magnetic dipole theory many years ago, but improved it over time to what I have now, something between aether, string, and dipole theory. My aim was to write something that all people at all levels could understand, at the moment I am improving it again, I had not realized the galaxies at the edge of the visible universe were moving so fast. A finite expanding universe is a nonsense to me, as are infinite gravitational forces, and black holes. All things are relative when different reference frames are taken into account.

    All electrical equations can be written in terms of electromagnetic equations, it is not too hard if you are fresh out of school. Equally things can be represented in different ways with differing numbers of perceived dimensions, and reference points. I suspect we are talking about the same thing using different words. Dark matter is theorized to exist because of a misunderstanding of how gravity works, and what space is made up off. The properties of space are manifest in light speed in our reference frame and the double slit experiment, showing wave behaviour as a photon passes through space. This wave like behaviour in space as a photon passes through space is replicated by larger bodies galaxies even. A galaxy approaching light speed will have a huge vortex of space around it, stretching space in its wake, this vortex will most likely bend light back on itself. I think this explanation explains what is happening in the physics link on the previous reply to you. It also explains why there appears to be a edge to the expanding universe. Your Vacuum energy I suspect is what I would term a vortex, a stretching of space, like the gravity caused by a planet or the gravity seen at the centre of a galaxy or solar system. Magnetic fields are caused by vortices in space spiralling away from magnetic material, all things can be explained in terms of vortices of one form or another, or as tesla stated in to understand the universe you must think in terms of frequency energy and vibration.

    4 billion years from now our sun may be dieing, (if new matter is not continually being created in space for it to consume), our solar system is going to get a make over. The Andromeda galaxy is on a collision course.

    I will see if I can acquire Tom Beardons book ASAP I should have time to read it before then.

    My main interest on this site is the lightning and chain reactions, do you have any comments on that. Apparently it has been viewed over 500 times and no comments.

    Cheers

    Andy
    Hey Andy...Yes, on the hind sight i too am interested in Lightning and Cold Fusion stuffs.. under a lot of Plasma Chemical Interactions in what you term as the H+ OH- split up..!
    Irwing Langmuir is the guy who did Plasma chemical experiments his famous being the Atomic Hydrogen flame or the Electrically heated Molecular Hydrogen dissociating under occlusion process..and in low pressure (Glow-Discharge) conditions.... theses are all Radiant Energy phenomenons if you further elaborate them...right??
    I really wonder why people have not used Radiant Electricity to excite Cold -Fusion electrolysis or did they..?????
    Rgds,
    Faraday88.
    ‘Mass is the Spatial density of Matter (Particle) and the Temporal Intensity of Space (Field)’.

  5. #25
    Senior Member Faraday88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Bangaluru, Karnataka, India
    Posts
    1,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Handy andy View Post
    Ref the cosmic induction generator, in all likelihood if things are going to be observed it will work better in a vacuum(as in light bulbs), to avoid interactions with air molecules. I do not agree with the big bang creating all matter in the universe, I think it appeared molecule by molecule over eons from the aether, it accumalated in nebulae etc.

    This process happened in the partial vacuum of space, the vacuum of space is full of quantum matter, here one second gone the next. This is easier to visualize than to talk about 3,4,5,6, to 13 dimensional universes explained only by mathematics. If you ignore the jargon and the gozzintas (sums) it is easy to visualize many types of vortices like you would see running your hand through water. I always try to create a picture in peoples minds when trying to explain something, and avoid talk of multi dimensional universes. My views are always in a state of flux constantly changing.

    Vortices or waves in the aether appear as quantum matter. The more the aether is stretched the more excited it gets like a gas. etc

    I noticed some major discrepancies in tom beardons book 2002 and what is going on in the zero force motor, disinformation and drip feed of information, does not sit well with me.
    Hey Andy,

    I would like to know the discrepancies you found in Tom bearden's book.. and yes I too do not believe in the Big bang Theory..Universe does not exist in way!
    It is only Space-Time Manifestation..
    Rgds,
    Faraday88.
    ‘Mass is the Spatial density of Matter (Particle) and the Temporal Intensity of Space (Field)’.

  6. #26
    The ether also behaves like a very fine liquid so it will pass through the walls of any container you try to create a vacuum in. Setting up gravitational waves to stretch the ether, might be possible using one of teslas ideas.

  7. #27
    The analogy between a liquid and the aether can be used because a fine liquid is a myriad of particles held together by forces. When a force is observed it is found that only the results of the force can be measured, the force itself cannot be identified as a physical, measurable object. Therefor the force holding the particles of a liquid together is a area of Aether subject to rules which allow the velocity of a object to change. If a liquid is compressed external force is required, the internal force of the liquid serves to maintain the liquids density, so the compression of a liquid is the compression of the Aether surrounding the particles within the liquid. In another arrangement if forces are used (such as the ones that hold objects together) in a configuration using two contiguous areas of force/Aether then these areas can either compress into one another or part from one another as determined by the direction of the areas of force which in and of itself can be determined by the direction a object moves when placed in such a area of force/Aether.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Handy andy View Post
    Hi Sam
    Zooming in a bit further all particles are made up of vortices of the aether (toroids etc), zooming in further still, you have waves of the aether that cause quantum matter, zooming in further still, you have the stretching of the aether which causes gravitational effects, all forces everything is made up of the aether. Mainstream science is looking for a god particle, that everything is made from. The aether does not become a particle until it acquires enough energy locally to become a particle vortex. The aether fills all, points in space, between all atoms, it makes all atoms, it carries all forces. Every kind of long range or short range force is just a manifestation of a different type of vortex toroid dipole archimedes screw etc within the aether. The other interesting thing is a zero dimension, to which all points of the aether are connected, but it does explain quantum entanglement, and the possibility of monopoles.
    At least thats what i reckon.
    Andy

    I agree with your description of particles being vortices of aether. However when it comes to forces being the stretching of the aether due to the presence of the particle it seems to me the field itself should decay from the edge/surface of the particle. In other words the curvature of aether should be greatest closest to the particle and as the distance from the particle increases the curvature of aether should decrease. Also the greater the mass of the particle the greater the curvature close to the particle and also the greater the overall size of the curved area of aether. Another way of saying this would be the greater the speed of the vortex of aether the greater the curvature of aether around the particle and also the greater the size of the curved area of space.

    However when a gravitational field is observed around a known source of gravity all that can be observed is the effects of the field. Furthermore it is known that the gravitational field of the earth is essentially constant in its strength through varying altitudes. This does not support the idea of curved space because the curved space decreases in curvature from the particle of high mass. In other words because the planet's body, within the idea of curved space will have a substantially larger effect on space than the atmosphere a similarly substantial decrease in the effects of the curved space on objects should be observed as the distance from the planet's body increases. In reality the effects of the earths gravitational field decrease by a substantial amount starting at the edge of the earth's atmosphere.

    Sam

  9. #29
    Gravity may be explained by the stretching of space in the sense that it explains the motion of a object towards another object. But what this theory does fail to do is to fit in to reality. Reality is not just the motion of the object in the gravitational field but how the objects velocity changes in the gravitational field (the rate at which the field decays over distance and the point at which this decay begins).

    I have expressed the problem with the stretching of space and how the Earth's gravitational field ultimately does not support such a idea. :"

    However when a gravitational field is observed around a known source of gravity all that can be observed is the effects of the field. Furthermore it is known that the gravitational field of the earth is essentially constant in its strength through varying altitudes. This does not support the idea of curved space because the curved space decreases in curvature from the particle of high mass. In other words because the planet's body, within the idea of curved space will have a substantially larger effect on space than the atmosphere a similarly substantial decrease in the effects of the curved space on objects should be observed as the distance from the planet's body increases. In reality the effects of the earths gravitational field decrease by a substantial amount starting at the edge of the earth's atmosphere."


    The decay by the inverse square law of the gravitational field begins at the edge of the atmosphere, (at the edge of a low density medium). The decay of the field through the atmosphere is negligible. This fact alone serves to disassociate the direct relationship between mass and (gravitational) field strength.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •