Body
Great I was just getting used to regular math . this would be like 3
dimensional chess . ? How will I be able to reboot if my brain freezes up
?😂
On May 8, 2018 9:39 PM, "[email protected] [EVGRAY]" <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Mick,
>
> "Smith said we need 12 dimensional math to explain this reality, 8 more
> dimensions than the Kaluza & Klein manifolds "
> W.B. Smith mentions 12 parameters to explain the universe.
> Electromagnetism is the first six parameters where the first three
> parameters are the three physical directions at right angle to each other
> explaining space. Change is the fourth parameter. The electric field is the
> 5th parameter and magnetism is the 6th parameter.
>
> With modern computers and software it is easy to show complex
> relationships without knowing advanced mathematics. This can be seen in the
> Rhythmodynamics theory of Yuri N. Ivanov and Gabriel LaFreniere. Simple
> experiments can also be done to show the relationships.
> http://rhythmodynamics.com/index_en.htm
>
> "As far as cohering the odd energies such as the return strike or neutral
> spike if one looks to nature one finds a plasma channel. It seems many of
> the so called free energy devices rely on spark gaps, therefore if we copy
> nature we can sum these energies."
> It is not necessary to use electronics for taking energy out of the cosmic
> background. Tariel Kapanadze first did it with his mechanical device (
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3thvqFhFIfY). Then he made his electronic
> devices. When knowing the principle as given by W.B. Smith 'The principle
> of Inversion' this principle can be used in all kinds of devices. According
> to Smith all physical matter is made of charges. This is the particles
> known as electrons and positrons which are actually just spin and different
> densities. W.B. Smith and W.J. Hooper even suggest that gravity is caused
> by the fields of the moving electrons. Inertia is probably because of same
> reason. The fields communicate with each other. Thus the entire universe is
> actually electrical and thus a mechanical device is too when seen from
> micro cosmos. Mr. linear motor Eric Laithwaite
> <https://en.wiki2.org/wiki/Eric_Laithwaite> also suggested using the
> formulas of electronics for describing gyroscopes that radiate some kind of
> field he claims.
>
> Instead of a spark gap semiconductors can be used. Using a transistor or
> other semiconductor in avalanche mode is like the semiconductor gets a
> spark through it. This may wear down the semiconductor though. The fast
> pulse makes everything ring at their resonant frequencies. nsec or psec
> pulses can excite very high frequencies. But even short wires may ring at
> those frequencies. This requires designing all connections like
> transmission lines to get the energy going to where it is wanted (I. Catt's
> problem when the super-ffast emitter-coupled logic
> <https://wiki2.org/en/Emitter-coupled_logic> was invented in the 1950's).
> Else it radiates in an uncontrolled way.
>
> Pierre Cotnoir demonstrated a self-running device that didn't seem to
> depend on resonance. Resonance is a pain in the butt keeping stable during
> variable loads. Cotnoir changed loads while the device was running. I hope
> we will hear more from him. There is a thread on overunity.com about his
> device. He removed his videos on YouTube two times now. I'm quite sure he
> made magnetic fields coherre to get the device running without any
> connected energy source.
>
> Forrest Bishop
> <https://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/index.php?title=Forrest_Bishop> has
> an interesting article about the forbidden equation in physics
> https://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/index.php?title=The_Forbidden_
> Equation:_i_%3D_qc i = qc describing current. This is about Ivor Catt's
> question.
>
> Here is another of Bishops articles that looks interesting and I'm going
> to read sometime: 'Reforming Electromagnetic Units, Equations, and
> Concepts: An Extension of Ivor Catt’s Theory:'
> http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6554.pdf
>
> "Have you built much of the hardware Smith described and experimented
> with it?"
> Not really. At least not with the info I have now. Smith never found a way
> to calibrate his binding force meter. For the tensor beam (Smith coil or
> caduceus coil) big ferrite tubes are needed. Perhaps such tubes can be made
> by stacking ferrite rings. Smith was told to experiment and find out by
> himself how it works. I think the ETs have a non-interference directive
> they must obey to. We thus have to find out by ourselves and there are
> things we can't be given as we may destroy ourselves which Hector also
> warns about. Communication through a tensor beam has no measurable delay
> according to Smith.
>
> Smith never made free energy as to my knowledge. He made energy disappear
> or perhaps just transmitted it through the tensor beam. I do think several
> free energy devices use the inversion principle of W.B. Smith. Some of them
> are the devices of T. Kapanadze, A. Melnichenko, P. Cotnoir, Akula (Roman
> Karnouhov) and even those of Bob Boyce and Steven Mark. All these devices
> involves merging separate fields into coherent fields by different sorts of
> non-linear mixing.
>
> Ivor Catt's books: http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x3118.htm.
> <http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x3118.htm>
> The references to Forrest Bishop's homepage don't work.
>
> Catt's theory is a unified theory where electricity magnetism and motion
> of the fields can't be separated like when introduced in school books where
> they are separate disciplines like electrostatics and magnetism. According
> to Catt's theory there's nothing like a steady electric charge as the
> charge carriers have to always move at the signal speed of the medium
> they're located in. A static charge may look static but is actual equal
> amount of charges traveling in opposing directions. The magnetic fields
> cancel out as well as the speeds in opposite directions. W.J. Hooper shows
> this too with his motional electric field and W.B. Smith's theory tells the
> same thing that the fundamental particles die if they're stopped.
>
> Regards
> Ole
>
>
> ---In [email protected], <mkjekyll@...> wrote :
>
> Hi Ole,
>
> I think your right, even if the math theory was all right there practice
> and theory are different. At resonance many factors change dramatically.
> The flyback pulse is also different as this would be another frame of
> reference and at a certain nodal points may temporarily invert things like
> the controls of an aircraft inverting at mach speeds. Smith said we need
> 12 dimensional math to explain this reality, 8 more dimensions than the
> Kaluza & Klein manifolds which is already insanely complex math. I am not
> sure where Smith came up with the 12 dimensions as proving much of the KK 5
> dimensional theory has taken modern computing hardware. Haha I think I
> need a tutor, but really getting too much into theoretical math can create
> infinite series thought holes.
>
> As far as cohering the odd energies such as the return strike or neutral
> spike if one looks to nature one finds a plasma channel. It seems many of
> the so called free energy devices rely on spark gaps, therefore if we copy
> nature we can sum these energies.
>
> I know Wilbur Smith was very interested in producing spinning fields from
> stationary circuits. I find this pathway of particular interest if you
> have additional information.
> Have you built much of the hardware Smith described and experimented with
> it?
>
>
> Thanks again for your wonderful detail!
>
>
>
> On 5/7/2018 4:25 PM, onielsen@... [EVGRAY] wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Mick,
>
> "Can you elaborate onthe E field and H0 Hd based on the capacitor to
> inductor size in a resonant circuit."
> For high voltage keep the capacitance low and inductance high. For high
> current it is the opposite way around. At resonance the energy is
> oscillating between the capacitor and the inductor. By knowing the peak
> current of the inductor and its inductance the peak voltage of the
> capacitor can be calculated when also knowing its capacitance. That's
> because the same amount of energy oscillates between those two components.
> Magnetic energy stored in an inductor of inductance L and current I:[image:
> {\displaystyle E_{\rm {p,m}}={1 \over 2}LI^{2}}]
> Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_energy
>
> Electric energy stored in a capacitor: [image: {\displaystyle W=\int
> _{0}^{Q}V(q)\mathrm {d} q=\int _{0}^{Q}{\frac {q}{C}}\mathrm {d} q={1 \over
> 2}{Q^{2} \over C}={1 \over 2}VQ={1 \over 2}CV^{2}}]
> here C is the capacitance and V is the voltage. Source:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor
>
> Knowing the inductance L and the capacitance C makes it possible to
> calculate the current if knowing the voltage or vice versa. The voltage and
> current are the peak values which determine the total energy oscillating
> between the inductor and the capacitor. The two formulas use different
> letters (E and W) for energy. The terms after the last equal sign of both
> formulas are just put equal to each other to solve for the voltage or the
> current when knowing the rest of the parameters.
>
> Resonance happens at the frequency where the impedance of the capacitor
> equals the impedance of the inductor if the resistance (damping) of the
> circuit isn't too big: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LC_circuit. This
> link applies for an ideal circuit. For a more realistic circuit look up RLC
> circuit.
>
> You may have to study this area yourself. Conventional theory doesn't give
> much clue as to how to get free energy though. For that purpose different
> disciplines will have to be studied. Some such areas would be nonlinear
> physics and wave theory. Those two disciplines allow mixing non-coherent
> waves into coherent waves. That's a clue to harvesting free energy.
>
> Regards
> Ole
>
>
> ---In [email protected], <mkjekyll@...> <mkjekyll@...> wrote :
>
> Ole,
>
> Can you elaborate on the E field and H0 Hd based on the capacitor to
> inductor size in a resonant circuit.
>
> In the case of a resonant field of an equal microhenries to microfarads
> and then a resonant circuit biased towards a larger capacitance or a larger
> inductor ratio?
>
>
>
>