Re: [EVGRAY] re: Longitudinal wave antenna

Body

Hi Ole,

I had thought Smith was of the Graviton particle theory, my mistake.

"The motional electric field always has the same direction from the
moving charge regardless of how it's moving and it can't be shielded." 
Can you elaborate?

Sad how so much is lost to attrition.  Very similar to Tesla's work
almost being lost if not people like the Corums and Norm did not take an
interest.  There should be position for people like us to go dig through
the archives of classified research and come up with alternative uses.

I have read the Corso book.  Unfortunately the alien stuff never leads
to anything concrete aside from some of the claims in the book.  It's
like taking something that exists halfway between reality and the dream
world and trying to make sense of it.  Another interesting alien story
is the one about the Tall Whites who allegedly live somewhere in the
Nevada test range at a base they setup as a way point hundreds of years
back.  I think the book was called Millennial Hospitality, I enjoyed
it.  Unfortunately most of the entities do not exist here so they must
take one to there,  their dimensional space to interact.  Trying to get
something physical and concrete from there to here is likely very
difficult and energy intensive.  Seemingly the Tall Whites do exist in
this dimension according to the book and are not just phantoms that flit
in and out like most plasma beings tend to.

On 1/3/2019 7:19 AM, [email protected] [EVGRAY] wrote:
>  
>
> Hi Mick,
>
> "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."
> The Smith/Hooper theory suggests that gravity is made from the
> difference in the motional electric field formed from electrons
> orbiting in atoms. The slight difference in the field strength from
> when the electron is in front of the nucleus versus behind the nucleus
> could be the cause of gravity according to their theory. The motional
> electric field always has the same direction from the moving charge
> regardless of how it's moving and it can't be shielded. Gravity has
> similar properties. According to Smith's theory the aether is
> electrons or positrons which are the smallest physical particle to
> exist. All bigger particles can be made by combinations of electrons
> (or positrons). This is also suggested by the Rhythmodynamics theory.
>
> "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."
> I watched the following video from a former US military colonel. He
> said W.B. Smith was a brilliant man. The military leaders think and
> act as to protect their country but are too lazy to follow up on
> things beside that. This makes lots of things look like secrets but
> could be attributed to forgetting about them. Then they get stored
> away forgotten and disappear until someone retires. The colonel's
> opinion is that even the government will disappear from itself if left
> to itself. Here is the video 'Roswell Revisited -- Colonel Phillip J.
> Corso:' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAfTY7NuceQ (20:12). His
> opinion is that ET technology should help us before being all
> forgotten which is why he has written a book on what he know.
>
> Regards
> Ole
>
>
>
>
> ---In [email protected], <mkjekyll@...> wrote :
>
> 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, onielsen@... <mailto:onielsen@...> [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] <mailto:[email protected]>,
>>     <mkjekyll@...> <mailto: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??
>>>
>>>         ...
>>
>