Body
Ole,
I like Catt's concept of treating components as a transmission line, it
is very elegant for engineering and his capacitor definition is much
more accessible. Whatever works the best for engineering I am all for.
As for Wilbur Smith he has some great stuff too but I don't agree that
gravity has it's own particles but rather, more likely, is a result of
the background quiescent aether flux that allows field lines to exist or
propagate. There are so many little odd anomalies we have no idea about
and I don't think much of the physicists who get paid to create math
problems only they can solve or halfway prove with trillion dollar
research facilities. The Rythmodynamics is also very special and makes
much more sense when it comes to the aether flux and interference patterns.
I still think we are leaving out something very fundamental and very
difficult to observe from our perspective. This little function or
parameter or what have you would explain the transitional states we
can't seem to pear into and presently only guess at.
I agree with Dr Tesla's idea of doing ones best with engineering math
but then for instance separating RF transmitter and receivers in real
field tests in order to actually prove something before writing it down
as a gospel.
There has become too large an abyss between theoretical and applied and
I think the research money is going to the wrong one. But then the
research money goes where the politicos at the think tanks decide it
should, often to the detriment of humans and truth. Scientists are paid
not to think empirically so it is always refreshing to find one who
still does.
Sadly Norm's applied proofs all come from weapons research because this
planet is run by very lazy people who use the most base animal emotions,
hatred, jealousy and fear in order to motivate and bound capital flow
because it's time proven to work very very well. If the average person
was brought up respecting science and real accomplishment rather than
childish sports and glamour the human race could evolve rather than
devolve. For now defense contractors are going to be our best source of
fringe science. Remember what John Hutchinson said, something to the
effect the civilian scientists and universities were the first to blow
him off but the ones from the military defense contractors took him
seriously enough to come out and have a serious look at things and
patiently listen to him and watch his demos.
On 12/31/2018 11:56 AM, [email protected] [EVGRAY] wrote:
>
>
> Hi Mick,
>
> The theory of Wilbert B. Smith starts from nothing at all like pure
> emptiness without any space. Then he first builds up the space and
> fills in some density to construct the fields. The three fundamental
> fields are then Tempus (field of change) the electric field
> (divergence) and the magnetic field (curl). After that the fundamental
> particles (the electron and positron) are build which extends to
> quarks and other fractions of atoms.
>
> Thus to say which is the most fundamental of E and B it is the
> electric field E according to Smith. T or the tempic field is even
> more fundamental as this is the density required for making the
> electric field (divergence of density) and the electric field is
> required for making the magnetic field (stirring the electric field).
> Actually the fields can't be separated from each other as I understand
> it as the fields are unified into each other as shown by Ivor Catt.
> This causes trouble for Faraday's law of induction. The scientific
> society won't touch the theory of Catt even though seen from an
> engineering point of view it gives solutions instead of paradoxes. But
> also new problems arise as shown by Forrest Bishop. True science will
> solve the problems instead of turning away from the problems.
>
> Regards
> Ole
>
>
> ---In [email protected], <mkjekyll@...> wrote :
>
> Norm,
>
> Hard to say it's the chicken and the egg again. B before the E and
> H... OK photons are the current answer according to the link, however
> what if the B fields were there first, then it would be like magnetic
> super strings of some kind. Now would these be particles or just
> pertubations of the background quiescent aether space flux? There are
> the monopole particle theories such as Ed Leedskalnin or Russells
> magnetic light. My theory would be a magnetic particle is the inverse
> of a photon and as such something not presently detectable directly.
>
> On 12/31/2018 8:03 AM, Norman Wootan nwootan@... <mailto:nwootan@...>
> [EVGRAY] wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> When you set out to research a topic, You have to first define
>> it. Boy, the jury is still out, so to speak for the experts
>> still do not know the exact composition of magnetic fields or
>> lines of force. Just just have to laugh. See
>>
>> Ohttps://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=414
>>
>> Ok, guys, what is your idea as to composition of magnetic flux??
>>
>>
>> On 12/31/2018 5:45 AM, Norman Wootan wrote:
>>>
>>> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosive-driven_ferromagnetic_generator
>>> Source doc. for "pressure-induced magnetic phase transition."
>>>
>>> On 12/31/2018 5:43 AM, Norman Wootan wrote:
>>>>
>>>> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weapon This
>>>> document is a pretty good review of the DEW technology so
>>>> far. My prime interest is in the annihilation of magnetic
>>>> flux which according to the Wired article produces a stream of
>>>> particles that can be focused and channeled to a target. My
>>>> question is, What are the particles that composed the magnetic
>>>> flux before destruction and do they comply with the SUPER LIGHT
>>>> theory. Folks, this is whole new ball game if we can create
>>>> vast energy from directly destroying magnet flux. Kone, just
>>>> blow up a few of your 1.5 Tesla one inch cube magnets and have
>>>> a direct generation of "pressure-induced magnetic phase
>>>> transition." electric output in KV @ KA. BTW, this is one
>>>> for Ole to comment on. Lol
>>>>
>>>> On 12/30/2018 1:51 PM, Norman Wootan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> To add to the info on the Neo magnetic NNEMP weapon, take a
>>>>> look at this Army doc.
>>>>> https://www.wired.com/2009/03/army-turns-bomb/ In the old
>>>>> Flux compression Generators there was a need for HV capacitor
>>>>> bank and a long solenoid coil to provide the powerful magnetic
>>>>> flux field needed to be annihilated which yielded the EMP
>>>>> (Magneto-electric pulse). It reasoned that the new family of
>>>>> Neo magnets held the necessary flux strength which negated the
>>>>> heavy capacitors and copper solenoid coil. With a super fast
>>>>> explosive , Octanitrocubane could destroy the Neo's in the
>>>>> nanosecond range needed for the EMP shot (magnetic flux
>>>>> converted into particle flux which is the constituents of the
>>>>> magnetic field)
>>>>>
>>>>> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octanitrocubane
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/30/2018 11:42 AM, Norman Wootan nwootan@...
>>>>> <mailto:nwootan@...> [EVGRAY] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Remember that my main line of research is the Magnetic flux
>>>>>> annihilation-Reconnect EMP phenomenon. Here is a first step
>>>>>> into learning more about the Magnetoelectric effect. Just
>>>>>> build sensors. See attachment. Now that you have a sensor
>>>>>> lets look at the Magnetoelectric (EMP output when you destroy
>>>>>> a very powerful neo magnet via rapid explosives. Remember
>>>>>> that energy cannot be destroyed but can convert into another
>>>>>> form of energy we call the Magnetoelectric EMP. See
>>>>>> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosive-driven_ferromagnetic_generator
>>>>>> This is a direct conversion of powerful magnetic flux field
>>>>>> directly into very high power electrical output.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/30/2018 11:29 AM, Norman Wootan wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tesla's Pyro generator to which I referred which took
>>>>>>> advantage of iron phase shift.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/patents/us-patent-428057-pyromagneto-electric-generator
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Somewhere here we have to jump back and address IONS both positive and negative. See my 1996 paper for KeelyNet titled WHAT is Heat which dealt with ionization and its potential. The loss or gain of electrons in the atomic lattice causes the precise predictability of the various phase change points.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is the Bad Boy that I wanted to build using nitrogen gas and an alpha emitter electrodes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is Heat #2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For about 10 years I have been studying the effects of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> heating and cooling associated with the phase change of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> liquids with the hope of building a simple generator of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> electrical power around the phenomenon. The reason for this
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> interest is based on the theory that energy can be extracted
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> from the ambient background via thermal differentials. My
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> line of thinking really took off back when I experimented
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> with the all too familiar Peltier junction devices found in
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> electronic cooling devices. Would you believe that most
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> people do not understand how these devices move thermal
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> energy through a current flow across a semiconductor
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> junction. Historically we find that German physicist,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thomas Seebeck back in 1820 observed that when heat was
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> applied to a junction of copper and steel wire that
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> electrical energy resulted. Later in 1834 Jean Peltier
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> discovered that when a direct current was applied to two
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> dissimilar metals the junction got hot or cold. It was not
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> until 1838 that Emil Lenz clearly showed the importance of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> both Seebeck and Peltier s discoveries by placing a drop of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> water on the junction of dissimilar metals which froze then
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> melted when the polarity of the direct current was
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> reversed. These discoveries remained dormant for over 100
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> years because of the unavailability of semiconductor
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> materials which could provide the wide temperature
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> differentials. In the 1930 s semiconductor materials became
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> available which revived the electric cooling principles. In
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the 1960 s many companies began building spot cooling
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> devices and refrigerators based on these effects using a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> junction material of bismuth-telluride. Today more advanced
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> materials are used with the basic parameters of being a pore
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thermal conductor but being an excellent electrical
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> conductor. The dissimilar materials must provide a high
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> coefficient of voltage temperature relationship. The first
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Peltier devices that I experimented with back about 10 years
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ago were built by Marlow Industries here in Dallas. With a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> small temperature differential across the device a weak
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> current with an attendant voltage was developed. Increasing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the differential provided a proportional increase in current
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and voltage. About 6 years ago I posted a chart of the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wattage generated from two different size Peltier chips on
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the KeelyNet BBS. My curiosity was based on the puzzle of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> how electron flow could move thermal energy across the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> junctions and how electrical energy was produced by moving
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thermal energy across the junction. This is a directly
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> reversible situation based on polarity.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now let us look at a very familiar parallel process used in
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> refrigeration, cooling and heating devices employing phase
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> change material such as water and refrigerants. We have
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> always been led to believe that evaporating water provided
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> cooling effects which is a mechanical process. By the same
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> mechanical process we are provided heating effects by the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> condensation of a gas back to a liquid phase change. Would
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> you believe that any material that undergoes a phase change
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> provides an attendant electrical effect. Back in 1840
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Armstrong invented an electrostatic generator based on
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> escaping steam through insulated nozzles which provided one
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> of the most powerful devices of this type ever built.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Popular belief was that this was a frictional process with
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the electrical output resulting from the steam friction
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> passing through the nozzles. After reading an old (1920 s)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thermodynamics in Chemistry text book I realized that the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> phase change of materials was an electrical phenomenon and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> not purely mechanical. The atoms of the material lose or
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> gain electrons in the process which accounts for the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> discrepancy in the energy equation when a material
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> transitions between phases. More energy is present after
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the phase change back to the lower form or atomic state. The
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> text book stated that this phenomenon could not be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> explained. When Jerry and I attended a Conference hosted by
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hal Puthoff down in Austin back about 6 years ago a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> physicist from Austria presented a paper on the phase change
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> of water and the attendant electrical phenomenon which is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> totally not understood by modern science. Now my suspicions
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> were confirmed that phase changes of materials are an
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> electrostatic phenomenon, which leads us to the fundamental
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> question of, What is heat? We were told in the school
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> that heat is the presence of energy and cool is the absence
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> of energy. What is the form of this energy? Let us look at
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> a very simple example of heating which may explain this
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> process. When sunlight strikes an absorbing surface it is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> heated because electrons in the material are converted to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> photons which are emitted in the infrared band of light
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> leaving the material in a net positive state or hot. The
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> more electrons a material looses the hotter it becomes. Now
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the inverse situation is explored by evaporating some water
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> from the surface of a material which leaves the surface in a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> net negative state or cold. Heat or cold is based on the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ion relationship in the material. When we apply a flame
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (ionizing) to a material we cause the emission of photons
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> which is basically stripping away electrons from the atomic
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> structure causing a gross net positive situation to occur.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now we are getting a picture as to how an electric current
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> across the Peltier junction can transport thermal energy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (ions). Since the energy is in the form of presence or
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> absence of electrons then it is a simple explanation as to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> how the process works. All phase change processes work the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> same way basically via ion transport and are not mechanical
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> processes which we were taught. Everything in chemistry is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> an electrical or electrostatic process at the atomic level
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> based on the ionized state of the atoms involved.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At a Vangard Science Round table discussion several years ago
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> we talked about the ion wind method of fire fighting in
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> which ionized air will extinguish a flame because of the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> cooling effects. Now we see Patents issued based on
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> negative ion spraying of a surface causing it to rapidly
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> cool because it becomes net negative charged. This is a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> very efficient method of air-conditioning because an ion
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> generator operates at very high voltages with very little
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> current involved. It is possible to develop this ion
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> transport (thermal energy) to provide direct electrical
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> output from very subtle temperature differentials. Remember
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> that this is a direct reversible process where a thermal
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> differential will cause a development of current and voltage
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> as in the Peltier device. I hope that this dialog will
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> provide some food for thought out there on the KeelyNet.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please provide some feedback on this very interesting line
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> of experimentation. Norm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>