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 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Thread: Cosmic Induction Generator

  1. #1
    Networking Architect Aaron Murakami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Spokane, Washington
    Posts
    1,456
    Blog Entries
    1

    Cosmic Induction Generator

    I did this interview with Eric Dollard last September - about the Cosmic Induction Generator. Just put it on YouTube today. Please support John Polakowski's Indiegogo campaign!

    http://emediapress.com/2014/05/05/co...-eric-dollard/
    Aaron Murakami





    You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” ― Richard Buckminster Fuller

  2. #2
    Networking Architect Aaron Murakami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Spokane, Washington
    Posts
    1,456
    Blog Entries
    1
    Cosmic Induction Generator – The Early Work

    Here is a short video showing some of the early work John Polakowski did on the Cosmic Induction Generator with Eric Dollard. This was last year during one of my early visits to Eric’s lab.


    In the video, John is working on the coils and he and Eric are working the bugs out of the old Navy transmitters.





    Please donate to John Polakowski’s Cosmic Induction Generator Indiegogo Campaign: http://igg.me/at/cosmicinductiongenerator/x/2343214


    Come see John give a demo of the Cosmic Induction Generator at the 2014 Energy Science & Technology Conference – seats are running out so register now! 2014 Energy Science & Technology Conference | Exclusive conference with the Godfathers of the modern day free energy movement!


    Cosmic Induction Generator – The Early Work | A & P Electronic Media – Digital Publishing by Aaron Murakami & Peter Lindemann
    Aaron Murakami





    You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” ― Richard Buckminster Fuller

  3. #3
    Hey Aaron..I've, ( Marty from MartinMotors) been a long time fan and supporter of Eric Dollard and was wondering if you could have Eric give is answer to a general question that's been going around in my head. Question: In the vacuum of outer space beyond our atmosphere I understand that the particles constituting light would not be moving slow enough for our eye to register light; that it is our atmosphere that slows down those particles to our percieved speed of light enabling us to "see the light", so if we went to the moon and set foot on it there being no atmosphere, wouldn't we be in total darkness? If we had a flashlight and turned it on would we be unable to illuminate anything..or?? Makes me wonder how the footage of the supposed moon landing was produced..?? Opinions?? Thanks for your time and efforts!

  4. #4
    Hello again, I had the pleasure to recently view the video of Eric's antenna project and, though most all of it was far over my head, it seems clear that Eric is probably the only soul on the planet making a "meaningful phone call" with his connection to above and below ground. And all without silly phones or computers! And what a Corolla! He started to talk a bit about the visibility of earth, moon and mars beyond our atmosphere and I am most fascinated with this bit of reality. Can anyone point me to a thread/discussion by Eric on this where he might go into detail explaining how he sees it?

  5. #5
    Networking Architect Aaron Murakami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Spokane, Washington
    Posts
    1,456
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by powerdraw View Post
    Hey Aaron..I've, ( Marty from MartinMotors) been a long time fan and supporter of Eric Dollard and was wondering if you could have Eric give is answer to a general question that's been going around in my head. Question: In the vacuum of outer space beyond our atmosphere I understand that the particles constituting light would not be moving slow enough for our eye to register light; that it is our atmosphere that slows down those particles to our percieved speed of light enabling us to "see the light", so if we went to the moon and set foot on it there being no atmosphere, wouldn't we be in total darkness? If we had a flashlight and turned it on would we be unable to illuminate anything..or?? Makes me wonder how the footage of the supposed moon landing was produced..?? Opinions?? Thanks for your time and efforts!
    I don't believe it is so much the speed of the light that is making it visible - it is slower in our atmosphere than in the vacuum of space but for visibility, it is that light needs to interact with molecules to be visible. The moon actually does have an atmosphere and even some very faint clouds have been photographed on the moon. For years, it was denied that water was on the moon, but we now accept it as fact since they finally admitted it.

    Here is one of the simplest examples to show the concept of light needing something to interact with to be visible...

    Whet it is nighttime and it's midnight, we're roughly on the darkest part of the Earth, the Sun is hitting the daytime side and light that is just as bright is streaming past the Earth. When it is midnight and we look out at the sky, we don't see any of that light streaming by because there is nothing for the light to interact with to be visible. But, it is still there as bright as the light that hits the daytime side of the Earth yet it is completely invisible to us.

    It's the same as infrared - the heat from the Sun is not warming the Earth. It is just the infrared that interacts with molecules here on Earth. Between the Sun and Earth, it is beyond freezing yet it is full of infrared radiation from the sun, but there is no heat. The heat cannot manifest unless it has something to interact with - same thing.

    If light is supposed to be visible in the darkness of space, then infrared radiation should be detectible as heat but it is not.

    The light not being visible in space was admitted to Tom Brown during a phone conversation with a NASA official years ago. In one large photo compilation of photographs in space that Peter Lindemann, etc... examined - 100% of every picture was NOT in the visible spectrum. There was x-ray, uv, etc... but not one single one in the natural visible spectrum.
    Aaron Murakami





    You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” ― Richard Buckminster Fuller

  6. #6
    Networking Architect Aaron Murakami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Spokane, Washington
    Posts
    1,456
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by powerdraw View Post
    Hello again, I had the pleasure to recently view the video of Eric's antenna project and, though most all of it was far over my head, it seems clear that Eric is probably the only soul on the planet making a "meaningful phone call" with his connection to above and below ground. And all without silly phones or computers! And what a Corolla! He started to talk a bit about the visibility of earth, moon and mars beyond our atmosphere and I am most fascinated with this bit of reality. Can anyone point me to a thread/discussion by Eric on this where he might go into detail explaining how he sees it?
    Eric hasn't mentioned it a whole lot but check out this thread: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...ble-light.html
    Aaron Murakami





    You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” ― Richard Buckminster Fuller

  7. #7
    Thanks Aaron. So what about pictures taken by the Hubbel telescope outside our atmosphere? Not sure how they fit into this explanation? Wouldn't celestail bodies such as stars and planets that have any kind of molecular atmosphere interact and project light and be visible to one who is outside our atmosphere? Eric did say that the earth, moon and mars were visible from ponts outside our atmosphere so why not any other body with an atmosphere...is it that most stars don't have the molecular quality you mention to interact and make light? or are the stars just too far away to be seen per there own light when we are outside our atmosphere? Just seems like something is missing and more explanation is necessary. But thanks..I think I'm starting to understand it better with your help.

  8. #8
    Networking Architect Aaron Murakami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Spokane, Washington
    Posts
    1,456
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by powerdraw View Post
    Thanks Aaron. So what about pictures taken by the Hubbel telescope outside our atmosphere? Not sure how they fit into this explanation? Wouldn't celestail bodies such as stars and planets that have any kind of molecular atmosphere interact and project light and be visible to one who is outside our atmosphere? Eric did say that the earth, moon and mars were visible from ponts outside our atmosphere so why not any other body with an atmosphere...is it that most stars don't have the molecular quality you mention to interact and make light? or are the stars just too far away to be seen per there own light when we are outside our atmosphere? Just seems like something is missing and more explanation is necessary. But thanks..I think I'm starting to understand it better with your help.
    I don't know - there are a lot of unknowns. We just know that many cameras used by NASA actually could not pick up any of the background stars.

    I think the cameras like the Hubble probably have camera lenses that are inside of a gas filled chamber for the light to interact with to be visible.

    All the pictures in the visible spectrum that the astronauts take with stars in the background are almost all on the inside of the ship where there is plenty of oxygen, etc...

    But at the simplest, where is the sunlight in the night sky when it is dark? There is a massive amount of light in all spectrums streaming by the Earth but we don't see a single bit of it until it hits the moon. The light that is between the Sun and Moon is completely invisible.

    We can go out at night and shine a bright light into the sky and we can see the light as a long column so we can see the light appear between the source and whatever it hits at the end. But in this case, it interacts with dust particles in the air, water moisture, gases, etc... so we can see it... but we don't see the sunlight going past the Earth at nighttime.

    There really is no such thing as reflected light - it is all absorbed and then re-emitted. If there is nothing in empty space to absorb and re-emit the light, then it can't be visible. There are some gases, etc... in that thread I posted for Energetic Forum, someone mentioned about hydrogen and helium - its an interesting idea.
    Aaron Murakami





    You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” ― Richard Buckminster Fuller

  9. #9
    Senior Member Faraday88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Bangaluru, Karnataka, India
    Posts
    1,530
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron Murakami View Post
    I don't know - there are a lot of unknowns. We just know that many cameras used by NASA actually could not pick up any of the background stars.

    I think the cameras like the Hubble probably have camera lenses that are inside of a gas filled chamber for the light to interact with to be visible.

    All the pictures in the visible spectrum that the astronauts take with stars in the background are almost all on the inside of the ship where there is plenty of oxygen, etc...

    But at the simplest, where is the sunlight in the night sky when it is dark? There is a massive amount of light in all spectrums streaming by the Earth but we don't see a single bit of it until it hits the moon. The light that is between the Sun and Moon is completely invisible.

    We can go out at night and shine a bright light into the sky and we can see the light as a long column so we can see the light appear between the source and whatever it hits at the end. But in this case, it interacts with dust particles in the air, water moisture, gases, etc... so we can see it... but we don't see the sunlight going past the Earth at nighttime.

    There really is no such thing as reflected light - it is all absorbed and then re-emitted. If there is nothing in empty space to absorb and re-emit the light, then it can't be visible. There are some gases, etc... in that thread I posted for Energetic Forum, someone mentioned about hydrogen and helium - its an interesting idea.

    Hi Aaron,
    The idea of 'Intermediate Light probing' to look for its presence pre dates or at least contemporary to the Action-at-a-Distance Theory itself, this is in fact a corollary to the Quest of knowing if Light even travels the way we know what 'travel' (Spatial) is like!!!
    I strongly believe that Light propagation has no Spatial role, but it is temporal,as it has a definitive Source but no sink..! Spatial travel seeks the simultaneous presence of both these aspects.
    Rgds,
    Faraday88.

  10. #10
    Thanks Faraday88.. I found Eric Dollards youtube video discussing secrets of the sun wherein he mentions his take on nature of light. I don't feel so bad now finding myself trying to wrap my head around how it might be as compared to what I have been taught...the threads of discussion on this topic definantly go quite deep and I am glad to see so many thoughtful folks seeking the truth.
    Thanks and regards to all,
    pd

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
  •