E=mc^2

[cikljamas]

cikljamas, although you have made some references to mass and energy, for the most part, the FET you're sharing is quite a bit off topic. I can move all these FET for/against posts into their own thread as it is quite a topic on it's own.

thx1138 started this thread so ultimately his/her call, but it's just my suggestion.

Whatever you decide i am fine with it...yes, i am aware of my slightly drifting off the road, or riding on the edge of the road...i mean E=mc^2 is kind of constitution-foundation of the modern science, and what i am trying to elaborate is that whole paradigm based on GR and STR (including Newton's mechanics) as main pillars (of modern science) IS WRONG. So, as i said if i went to far with it i am willing to stop my off topic right here.

My last contribution to my off topic which i am now closing is this video that i just have shut: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxmL...ature=youtu.be

Sorry, once again...And thank you very much for your patience and tolerance!!!

[mr.clean]

really? no comment?

https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/80.../imag0773o.jpg

LOL maybe im posting this in the wrong thread hehe

Could some highly intelligent person make a calculation based on this (new/old) formula as an example?

[Ernst]

LOL maybe im posting this in the wrong thread hehe

Wrong thread,... because?

Could some highly intelligent person make a calculation based on this (new/old) formula as an example?

Not sure what you mean, but then I probably do not qualify as "highly intelligent"...

According to special relativity the total kinetic energy of a mass (m) moving at velocity (v) is given by; mc² / SQRT(1-v²/c²)
If you rewrite this as series, you will get
mc² + mv²/2 + 3mv⁴/8c² + ....
For most velocities the 3rd term and those following are exceedingly small, which leaves us with the first 2 terms for most practical purposes:
mc² + mv²/2
The first term is not dependent on velocity, so even when the mass is at rest it has this energy, the second term is what is commonly (Newton) known as kinetic energy.

A calculation based on these equations?
In a nuclear bomb plutonium is converted into another metal losing some of its mass. Let's assume that 1 gram is lost in this process. This 1 gram is then converted into energy.
The amount is given by mc² = 0.001 * 300,000,000² = 90,000,000,000,000 J
(amply sufficient to fry an egg or two)

If a drop a 1 Kg ball from a 10 m height, then before the drop it has a potential energy of mgh = 1 * 9.8 * 10 = 98 J
After the drop this energy is converted into kinetic energy so
mv²/2 = 98 J
thus
mv² = 196 J
v² = 196 m²/s²
v = 14 m/s
(amply sufficient to break a toe or two)

Note that in the first example the mass no longer exists, while in the second example the mass holds the energy.

Now, what was your problem with these?

Ernst.

[BroMikey]

Very Intelligent

https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/80.../imag0773o.jpg

LOL maybe im posting this in the wrong thread hehe

Could some highly intelligent person make a calculation based on this (new/old) formula as an example?

Hey Clean

Nice poster of what Nik said way back when. I guess to some folks it is just something to ignore, however if someone keeps putting it up it will eventual be addressed.

I know they finally put the bag on Nikolia while he was old and lay on his bed and kept his real work out of the media many times his whole life long.

It is just so hard to believe for people who have never faced the jungle we live in.

Thanks Clean, been followin yer work. Good stuff.

Mike

[aljhoa]

Louis de Broglie postulated that
all particles with a specific value of momentum p have a wavelength λ = h/p, where h is Planck's constant.
This hypothesis was at the basis of quantum mechanics.
Nowadays, this wavelength is called the de Broglie wavelength.
Wavelength - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

E=mc² is Incomplete - YouTube


Al

[indio007]

M = E/VphVgr
ph = phase
gr = group
V = Velocity


Negative Refraction, Light Pressure and Attraction, Equation E = mc2 and Wave‐particle Dualism

The process of mass transfer from the emitter to the receiver is considered for different connection between energy and momentum. Shown, in particular, that in the case when the energy is transferred by radiation, this relationship has the form E = mvphvgr, where vph —phase velocity, and vgr ‐group velocity. From this equation immediately shows that in media with negative refraction radiation transfers the mass not from the transmitter to receiver, but rather from the receiver to the transmitter. It follows, that the mass transferred from the transmitter to the receiver is determined not only by transferred energy, but also by transferred linear momentum, which may be associated with energy in different ways. Thus, the well‐known relation E = mc2 is a special case of E = mvphvgr.

Victor G. Veselago

[thx1138]

Citation?

https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/80.../imag0773o.jpg

LOL maybe im posting this in the wrong thread hehe

Could some highly intelligent person make a calculation based on this (new/old) formula as an example?

That's what I was looking for in the original post. That makes sense because it uses velocity of the mass rather than speed of light which is supposed to be constant although I'm not smart enough to figure out where the 1/2 came from.

I've been studying Tesla's work for 3 years now and haven't run across that quote although I've seen some about relativity. It's not surprising to me that I missed that one because his work was so prolific.

It would be nice to have a citation of the original source if you have it or can find it. I've been looking for a citation on the "magnificence of 3, 6, and 9" for two years and haven't found the source for that one yet. I'm to the point where I don't believe he ever said that. All anyone has been able to refer me to was a bunch of web sites but none of them have the source either and it's gibberish without knowing the context.

[indio007]

That's what I was looking for in the original post. That makes sense because it uses velocity of the mass rather than speed of light which is supposed to be constant although I'm not smart enough to figure out where the 1/2 came from.

It's a computation for 1/2 the energy of a 2 body problem i.e. a collision
It's the energy of one of the objects.
I want to know how Einstein gets C^2. He just randomly throughs it into the second law of motion so he can equate the V^2 with C^2. He wants to clamp velocity to the speed of light. So he goes ... SQRT of 1-V^2/C^2 . Circular reasoning if you ask me. there is no logical reason to use C^2 at all.

This is the problem with today's science. You draw a conclusion then cherry pick evidence to support it. Or better yet use convoluted formulas , map them to physical phenomena and declare victory.

[thx1138]

Found the citation for "a mass of error and deceptive ideas "

Although, as stated in the refernce link, it is not a direct quote but a shortened version of the same idea. See the last two paragraphs.

New York Times

July 11, 1935, p. 23, c. 8

Tesla, 79, Promises to Transmit Force
.
.
.
The theory of relativity he described as "a mass of error and deceptive ideas violently opposed to the teachings of great men of science of the past and even to common sense."

"The theory, "he said, "wraps all these errors and fallacies and clothes them in magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king. Its exponents are very brilliant men, but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists. Not a single one of the relativity propositions has been proved."

Tesla, 79, Promises to Transmit Force

[mr.clean]

Wrong thread,... because?


Not sure what you mean, but then I probably do not qualify as "highly intelligent"...

According to special relativity the total kinetic energy of a mass (m) moving at velocity (v) is given by; mc² / SQRT(1-v²/c²)
If you rewrite this as series, you will get
mc² + mv²/2 + 3mv⁴/8c² + ....
For most velocities the 3rd term and those following are exceedingly small, which leaves us with the first 2 terms for most practical purposes:
mc² + mv²/2
The first term is not dependent on velocity, so even when the mass is at rest it has this energy, the second term is what is commonly (Newton) known as kinetic energy.

A calculation based on these equations?
In a nuclear bomb plutonium is converted into another metal losing some of its mass. Let's assume that 1 gram is lost in this process. This 1 gram is then converted into energy.
The amount is given by mc² = 0.001 * 300,000,000² = 90,000,000,000,000 J
(amply sufficient to fry an egg or two)

If a drop a 1 Kg ball from a 10 m height, then before the drop it has a potential energy of mgh = 1 * 9.8 * 10 = 98 J
After the drop this energy is converted into kinetic energy so
mv²/2 = 98 J
thus
mv² = 196 J
v² = 196 m²/s²
v = 14 m/s
(amply sufficient to break a toe or two)

Note that in the first example the mass no longer exists, while in the second example the mass holds the energy.

Now, what was your problem with these?

Ernst.

Well i would say you are definitely intelligent, and i didnt mean to imply that i was any more intelligent than the next in my posting that, but the title of the topic was irresistable.

i had posted this earlier and didnt get much reaction so i asked if this was the right place hehe, joking

and as a matter of fact the previous replies from Indio007 and Thx1138 have been illuminating for me as the corrected formula itself

[mr.clean]

It's a computation for 1/2 the energy of a 2 body problem i.e. a collision
It's the energy of one of the objects.
I want to know how Einstein gets C^2. He just randomly throughs it into the second law of motion so he can equate the V^2 with C^2. He wants to clamp velocity to the speed of light. So he goes ... SQRT of 1-V^2/C^2 . Circular reasoning if you ask me. there is no logical reason to use C^2 at all.

This is the problem with today's science. You draw a conclusion then cherry pick evidence to support it. Or better yet use convoluted formulas , map them to physical phenomena and declare victory.

Brilliant explanation and observations !

[mr.clean]

Although, as stated in the refernce link, it is not a direct quote but a shortened version of the same idea. See the last two paragraphs.

New York Times

July 11, 1935, p. 23, c. 8

Tesla, 79, Promises to Transmit Force
.
.
.
The theory of relativity he described as "a mass of error and deceptive ideas violently opposed to the teachings of great men of science of the past and even to common sense."

"The theory, "he said, "wraps all these errors and fallacies and clothes them in magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king. Its exponents are very brilliant men, but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists. Not a single one of the relativity propositions has been proved."

Tesla, 79, Promises to Transmit Force

Good find buddy ! can you imagine where we would be if we had accepted Tesla's ideas?!
If we could have just Let him teach us what he wanted to, what would the world look like eh?

thanks again

[thx1138]

Some things are just unknowable

Can you imagine where we would be if we had accepted Tesla's ideas?!

I find most of his science pretty straight forward but that may be because I don't have any formal EE training. You do, however, have to get it straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak, rather than what other people say about what he did or what he said.

An entire industry has been built up around other peoples' interpretations and misrepresentations of his work. That's why I look for citations. "Radiant energy" is one such. Here's what he said about "radiant energy":

“…streams resembling the cathodic must be emitted by the sun and probably also by other sources of radiant energy, such as an arc light or Bunsen burner.”

(“Tesla’s latest Roentgen Ray Investigations”, Electrical Review, New York 28 No.17, April 22, 1896)

Now tell me what a Bunsen burner has in common with all of hoopla about electrical circuits and longitudinal waves and the aether and all the other BS that is slung around under the guise of "Tesla's radiant energy". "Radiant energy" is really simple. It's energy which is radiated. That's it.

BTW, that also includes radiation from radioactive materials which is where the Roentgen Ray (x-ray) investigations tie in. To understand it you have to understand what was unknown at the time. It wasn't until 1897 that J. J. Thomson started his investigations that led to the discovery of the electron. Before that the absolute minimum of matter was considered to be the atom.

I think most of the problems that cropped up with Dr. Tesla's plans were geopolitical. For instance, his world wide transmission of communications and power would not be acceptable to most countries back then because the governments didn't want it. He said he could power the world with less than 10 transmiiters. That, however, would make all countries dependent on his technology and they could possibly have had their whole country's power shut off. That's no more feasible today than it was then. We are seeing the problems with the interdependence of the grid today as problems cascade across systems and shut down entire regions rather than a city or two. Imagine if the whole world were dependent today on ten transmitters of electrical power. The world was a simpler world in his day so wars were fought between nations. Imagine the targets those transmitters would become for terrorists.

He also said he could make communications as private as a thought. Since Roman times and before, the need for communication in battles was quite clear. That made the desire to intercept and decode messages a priority. So his ability to make them indecipherable by everyone but him or his company was also unacceptable just as it would be today.

So it's quite hard to imagine what the world would be like today had his technologies been adopted back then. We tend to think of the good outcomes but his work is just as susceptible to bad outcomes. What if they were adopted and Hitler, Stalin, or Mao controlled them. Or Osama bin Laden, for that matter.

Of course, all of this doesn't really matter today. The world is what it is. In fact I'm looking to use technology to go in the other direction - to allow people to become less dependent and, to a degree, more autonomous. Decentralization rather than centralization which today's Hitlers, Stalins, and Maos see as just as dangerous as Tesla's centralization was back in the day.

Dr. Tesla covered decentralization also but didn't expound on it:

“As to the idea of rendering the energy of the sun available for industrial purposes, it fascinated me early but I must admit it was only long after I discovered the rotating magnetic field that it took a firm hold upon my mind. In assailing the problem I found two possible ways of solving it. Either power was to be developed on the spot by converting the energy of the sun’s radiations or the energy of vast reservoirs was to be transmitted economically to any distance. Though there were other possible sources of economical power, only the two solutions mentioned offer the ideal feature of power being obtained without any consumption of material(fuelless power generation). After long thought I finally arrived at two solutions, but on the first of these, namely, that referring to the development of power in any locality from the sun’s radiations, I can not dwell at present.”

“Tesla Describes his Efforts in Various Fields of Work” in the November 30, 1898 Electrical Review

(comment added)

Search "thx 1138", the film George Lucas made before he made "Star Wars". It's quite dated now but gets the idea across.

[Aaron]

The Theory of Anti-Relativity by Eric P. Dollard

The Theory of Anti-Relativity

by E.P. Dollard

Back to Space, or Why One Over The Speed of Light Squared:

In order to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the dimensional relations of the magnetic inductance, and the electro-static capacitance it is necessary to turn again to the metrical dimension of space. It is, however, this dimension of space has become warped, as expressed in a N.F.G. It is in what follows found that the Faraday understanding is in direct conflict with the Einstein understanding, the latter extinguishing the former. Lines of induction have given way to relativistic concepts, fact has succumbed to phantasy. This condition has a direct influence upon the conceptual understanding of the conditions and dimensions that give rise to electrical inductivity as expressed by the co-efficients of magnetic and dielectric fields known as “the inductance” and “the capacitance”.

The concept of space, as given by Albert Einstein, constitutes a serious impediment to the understanding of this metrical dimension. The salient constituent of the Einstein “Theory of Relativity” is the Minkowski “Four-Space”. To quote Einstein “With out it the General Theory of Relativity, etc., would of perhaps got no farther than its long cloths,” “Relativity” by Albert Einstein, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey. Minkowski proposed a fourth co-ordinate be compounded upon the three co-ordinate (cubic) set of Descartes, “Cartesian” third order space. Einstein here accordingly represents this fourth order space in “Gaussian” rather that “Cartesian” co-ordinates.

The fourth co-ordinate, or length, of space is derived as

(1) Velocity - Time

Since it is dimensionally

(2) Velocity, or Space per Time

Substituting (2) into (1) gives

(3) Space - Time per Time or Space - Numeric

Here derived is a fictitious space co-ordinate, a length, this given as a light second. Hence

(4) Centimeter - Second per Second, or Centimeter

And

(5) Second per Second, or Numeric

Minkowski affixes a versor operator, the square root of negative one, to this numeric. It has been shown that this versor can possess two distinct values, and hence two distinct versor positions in time. Taking the light second as ct, where c is the luminal velocity, and t is the time period, the versor gives the pair

(A) Positive jct, Light - Seconds
(B) Negative jct, Light - Seconds

This quadrature form implies four distinct time frames, however, Einstein ignores the versor positions, retaining only one, jct. Einstein - Minkowski represents this as an ill-conceived space versor.

Einstein remarks here “Time is robbed of its independence”. Now time is married to the velocity of light. Minkowski goes on to say, “Hence forth space by itself and time by itself are doomed”. All are relative to the velocity of light. This is “The Theory of Relativity.”

Here any development of a mathematics of space comes to a standstill. Space now is just a factor of the velocity of light. It is instructive to reflect here upon the history of one over the speed of light square. The dimensional relation is,

(6) Constant, or Second Square per Centimeter Square

One over c square finds an origin in the work of James Clerk Maxwell, 1831 to 1879. Maxwell was a Scottish born natural philosopher. His work follows the trail of Ben Franklin and Michael Faraday, thru the mathematics of Newton - Liebnitz. Here arose the “Faraday - Maxwell” theory of electricity, the foundation of electrical understanding. But does anyone understand it? I think not.

Maxwell, in his studies, had determined the existence of a distinct factor of proportionality, this factor expressing a ratio of mechanical force exerted upon physical matter thru dielectric actions, to mechanical force exerted upon physical matter thru magnetic actions. This of course relates directly to our principle question at hand for the quantum mechanics; the condition of equal and opposite forces between dielectricity and magnetism. No answer yet.

It may be noted that Maxwell’s determination of this “proportionality factor” gave rise to a NUMERIC value of one over c square. It is a faulty inference to assume this factor is an actual velocity, or is the dimensional relation of a velocity at all. Here given it is numeric. In the comparisons of optics and electrodynamics it is found that a dielectric has the following characteristics;

(1) Refractive Index
(2) Dielectric Inductivity
(3) Luminal Velocity

All three of these relations are exactly related to the velocity of light. But here again is one over c square and actual velocity?

Maxwell’s discovery of a factor of proportionality between dielectricity and magnetism led to his theory of conjugate pair of inductions, dielectric and magnetic, in union, propagating at the velocity of light thru the “Luminiferous Aether”. Hence, electro-magnetic waves in free space, unbounded by gross physical matter, mass free energy. This propagation is within the dielectric, or aetheric, medium itself. It is free of so-called “charge carriers” (electrons), a mass-less form of electricity. This concept had a very powerful impact upon the scientific and philosophical thoughts of Maxwell’s era. So here begins the notion of “wireless”, the transmission of electricity without wires or other guiding structures.

Leading up to the work of Heinrich Hertz, 1857 to 1894, the wireless transmission of electricity had found experimental verification by Joseph Henry, and Elihu Thompson. It even was patented by M. Loomis. See “Secrets of Cold War Technology” by Jerry Vasillatos. These examples however were no electro-magnetic, they were electro-static (dielectric). Heinrich Hertz provided the first complete laboratory demonstration of the transmission of electricity thru “free space”, (across the room). This was instantly considered proof of the Maxwell theory of electro-magnetism, and electro-magnetic waves. When Nikola Tesla engaged in the experiments of Hertz, he found these waves not to be completely electro-magnetic. The early death of Hertz prevented any further progress. However “the world view” kept hold of its belief that “Hertzian” waves are only transverse E. M. waves, the two distinctions now synonymous.

When Nikola Tesla undertook the development of his unique transmission transformers, he soon found the velocity of light had no relation here. In his “Colorado Springs Notes” experiment and calculation demonstrate that the propagation on his “extra coil” tends toward 180 percent luminal velocity. See “Theory of Wireless Power”, by E. P. Dollard. It is found that the extra coil propagation is not even in the dimension of velocity at all. See “Transmission and Reception of Telluric Electric Waves”, by E. P. Dollard. The one over c square is not applicable to the efforts of Nikola Tesla. Tesla is not equal to one over c square.

In the writings of J. J. Thompson it is found he considered dielectric propagation and magnetic propagation can be independent. Also considered is that the magnetism is a secondary response to dielectric forces. This is also found in the writings of C. P. Steinmentz, “Transients in Space”, page 394 to 419, from “Theory and Calculation of Transient Electric Phenomena”. Here considered is a “Hysteresis of the Aether”, given as an alternative to the concept of electromagnetic radiation. In this chapter the velocity of the dielectric induction and the velocity of magnetic induction are given as independent variables. The factor one over c squared is here only a dimensional transform between inductance and capacitance. See The International Tesla Society lecture on the “Hysteresis of the Aether” by E. P. Dollard. Here again one over c squared is only a proportionality factor, not a velocity.

Finally, it has been disclosed by insiders within the space program, N.A.S.A., of a “certain complication”. It was found that when far outside the Earth’s field of influence the stars and sun are NOT VISIBLE! However, the Earth and the Moon are plainly visible. No direct light in outer space, only that made visible by gross physical matter. This gives rise to an important question, does the “light” from the sun propagate with a velocity at all, or is it simply a function of time. The “time delay” may be no more than a hysteresis of the luminiferous aether.

It should be noted it is only by the time delay that we can consider velocity in many situations. Otherwise also needed is the wavelength. Is it the primary luminal induction, say from the Sun, a hysteresis in order to engender visible light on Earth? Now we are dug in deep!

So, what meaning do we attribute to one over c square? It is a velocity, an index, a ratio, a proportionality factor, and even a constituent of the Farad. It is in everything, and now we hang Einstein’s Theory of Relativity on top of it all. Such is one over c square.

[Aaron]

Theory of Anti Relativity by Eric P. Dollard 2

In order to make a determination on this matter of one over c square it is instructive to enter the One Wing Parrot itself. We will take the position of Dorthey, who must conquer the Wicked Witch of the West, (WWW). Now she must stand, with her poodle and some unlikely friends from Lone Pine, before the great Wizard of Oz. Dorthey simply wants to go back to Kansas, and so do we. Here we must meet face to face with Einstein and the Theory of Relativity. In order to become better acquainted with the development of Relativity refer to E. Whittaker, “History of the Theories of the Aether”. Here follows only the salient features of Relativity as expressed by Albert Einstein. The primary purpose here is how Relativity relates to Electrical Engineering thru the concepts of Inductance and Capacitance.

Einstein’s theory finds its seed in a certain speed of light dilemma and the related experiments of Fitzeau involving moving liquid dielectrics (10-C Oil). Consider a pair of red lasers in a setup like the cubic experiments given earlier. Two red lasers, side by side, distant from each other, again are utilized. Each individual beam is received by its own individual target. Here the measurements are made. One laser is stationary, the other laser is moving towards its target at 50 percent luminal velocity, c. It is of course found that the beam sent by the stationary laser arrives at its target with a lag in time (hysteresis) that co-responds to the delay involved in luminal propagation thru the span between the laser and its target. The moving laser beam also arrives at its target with a lag in time, but not that of 150 percent luminal velocity as given by the superposition of velocities. It arrives with the same delay as that due to luminal velocity thru the span between the laser and its target. Hence the law of superposition is now not applicable to luminal velocity, no matter what the velocity of the moving laser, the velocity of the beam is always c. This situation provides the cornerstone upon which lay the Einstein concept of Relativity.

It is however that Einstein may have left out a few details. The stationary laser puts a red spot on its target. It is a red laser, just like the moving laser. They are both red, big deal. But wait Mr. Wizard, Look! Look! The spot on the moving laser’s target is GREEN!

The Theory of Relativity, or Why One Over C Squared:

So, how are you going to explain to the cops that the light was green when it is in reality red? Will you tell them “its all relative”? They say “you were going too fast.” The light looks green because of the “Doppler Effect”. This is a situation where the wavelength of light shortens and the frequency increases, maintaining a constant velocity. The moving laser is traveling with a velocity 50 percent that of light, the wavelength shortens by the square root of 50 percent, the frequency increases by the square root of 50 percent. Hence red light is forced to become green light. The speed of this light is still luminal velocity, c.

The dimensional relation is given by

(1) Velocity, or Length - Frequency

This velocity is a constant or invariant. Any variation in condition is factored into, the length of the wave, and the cyclic rate of the frequency, each in a complimentary manner so as to maintain a constant velocity. Here given is,

(2) Space, or Length in Centimeters,
(3) Time, or Per Frequency, in Seconds,
(4) Velocity, or Space Per Time, in Centimeter Per Second.

Thus the Doppler Effect shortens the wave length, and also shortens the time period, as given by the frequency. Because luminal velocity is the ratio of length to time, and both length and time both shorten in exact proportion to each other, the change cancels and the velocity remains a constant. In other words if the transmitting laser is in motion at a percent velocity of light, being 100 at luminal velocity, it is the length contracts by the square root of this percentage of luminal velocity, and the time period contracts by the square root of this percentage of luminal velocity. And obviously the product of a pair of square roots is the square of the square root, or the percentage of luminal velocity.

The basic dimensional relation

(5) Length times Frequency Equals the constant

Lambda times F gives c. This is a most fundamental law of radio engineering, where the constant c is 300 mega-cycle - meters per second.

Relativity results from the following situation. Riding with the laser, it moving 50 percent luminal velocity, you see it as red. It has a red wavelength and a red frequency. The stationary observer sees it as green. It is a green wavelength and a green frequency. Relative to the stationary observer, you riding the moving laser see length as longer, (red vs. green), and time as slower, (red vs. green) Einstein’s Relativity tells us the stationary observer sees length as shorter, (green vs. red) and time as faster relative to the motional observer, (green vs. red). Experiment shows that the light beam changes in its dimensional relations, Einstein says the motional observer changes in it’s dimensional relations. What can we make of this discrepancy?

The velocity at which light propagates, the luminal velocity, c, is a property of the dielectric itself, be it aether, or 10-C oil. This velocity has no relation to the motion of the transmitter itself, nor are its transmitted waves material projections. Nothing is “shot” out of the moving laser. The electric field can only “soak into the medium” at the rate defined by that medium. Light can only travel at luminal velocity as defined by the dielectric medium and its dimensional relation of one over c square, a numeric constant. Light is not a material projection, it is an inductive process, a process of the aether.

Is it now Einstein is in basic conflict with the radio engineer? What would the F.C.C. say? Einstein is also in conflict with Ohms Law. It has been shown by Thornberg, a critic of relativity, in his paper, “Real, or Imaginary Space - Time” that electro-magnetic relations derived thru relativistic concepts are in conflict with Ohm’s Law. This is, dimensionally, canceling the per centimeter.

(6) Ampere, equals Ampere plus Volt

Apples plus oranges, ampere and volt are different dimensional relations, hence they are NOT additive. But anything seems possible with Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. The proper form is

(7) Volt per Ampere, or Ohm

Thus referring to (6) it is

(8) Ampere equals Ampere plus Volt per Ohm

This is Ohm’s Law. What are we to make of this, have we been duped?

As seen thus far, the factor one over c squared looks as if it represents some kind of “Universal Virtue”, it finding a way into a multitude of dimensional relations. One over c square becomes a “Vestige of God,” transcendent from mortal scrutiny, except thru the prophet Einstein. It is a seed from which to spout a religion. Thru the effort of Albert Einstein luminal velocity and the “Theory of Relativity” has in a way engendered a spiritual foundation for “Today’s Society”. “Hey bro, its all relative, man, so*…”. To question Albert Einstein can even be considered “Anti-Semitic”, hence it will be enforced.

* Now the Lawyer is a Priest!

However, Einstein is a false prophet. The Theory of Relativity as the “Holy Scripture” is like a tele-evangelistic sales pitch. Nikola Tesla regarded Relativity as the greatest historical aberration of scientific thought. Relativity is no more than a philosophical standpoint, a virus to infect a “New Age”.

From the standpoint of the electrical engineer Einstein’s Relativity is “Bravo-Sierra”! However, it has sunk its roots into the basic consideration of Inductance and Capacitance. L and C represent co-efficients of aetheric processes, and as such represent the aether, not Relativity. Albert Einstein stands in the way of Michael Faraday, and Pharisees are now Physicists.
A basic theory of Relativity was put forth by Charles Proteus Steinmetz, the “Wizard of Schenectady”. His Relativity was for use by the electrical engineer. Hereby results a great simplification when calculating transient waves on electro-magnetic transmission lines. This theory finds development in his “Theory and Calculation of Transient Electric Phenomena and Oscillation,” the section “Transients in Space and Time”. Steinmetz refers to this as “Velocity Measure”. See his “Impulses, Waves and Discharges”, page 91 to 93.

In complex transmission line calculation the exponential operators, as derived from the factors of the Heaviside Telegraph Equation, are expressed in both time dimensional and space dimensional relations, it is like apples and oranges, they are not additive thus cannot be combined directly into a single unified exponential operator. Analogous is the E.M.F., E, in Volts, a time derivative, and the dielectric gradient, d, in volts per centimeter, a space derivative. The two are not directly additive.

These complications render the general solution for the Telegraph very complex, if not impossible. In fact as of yet no general solution has been developed at all! In order to overcome this problem, Steinmetz utilized the condition that one over c square is an intrinsic property of electro-magnetic transmission lines. This is to say, the ratio of the space factors is a constant, the velocity of light. The metrical dimensions of space and time are unified thru this constant, c, and the exponential operators are now directly additive.