Aether characteristics

[brusers]

I have read Aaron's book "The quantum key" and I find it really interesting.
I had some questions though, to just elaborate on a few things.
One was intertia. I can understand the aether giving a resistance when moving through it, but what about when a moving body stops accelerating? There is still movement, but the effects of inertia are gone. Or slowing down.. The momentum of the body would want to keep going forward. How does the aether play a part in this?
If anyone can help with a down to earth explanation I would appreciate it.
The idea of an aether medium really helps to understand a lot of things, but I'm having trouble in a few areas..
I'm only one year into this research, so the big words still throw me off.
Thank you,

Marcel
p.s. hope this thread is ok in this section.

[Aaron]

gas model

Hi Marcel,

According to the aetheric gas model, it appears that the mass traveling and then coming to a set speed will attain an equilibrium.

The general aetheric gas model is necessary to understand what Tesla was talking about.

[brusers]

ok, thanks for that. I'm definitely going to need to read more.. lol
I had some other questions, but to be honest I can't remember.
And I didn't write anything down like I should have when I was reading.
So I'll leave it at that, and go over the book again later.
Right now I'm going through "Secrets of cold war technology" by Vassilatos. Seems to be a pretty impressive Tesla section so far.
I'll probably post again, if anything comes to mind.
Thanks again,

Marcel

[Aaron]

Secrets of Cold War Technology

Chapter 1 was a great inspiration to me. This might be oversimplified, but if you read that and REALLY get that chapter, there isn't much more you need to read to get Tesla.

I knew John Bedini for a couple years before Peter's "Free Energy Secrets of Cold Electricity" book came out. I got it and then John recommended that I read the Secrets of Cold War Technology book.

Between Bedini's explanations and those 2 books, there is enough to figure out just about anything you really want to know about Tesla. Living proof of this has been given permission to start surfacing right now.

[brusers]

Peter's book is next on the list. Have to wait until payday though. I actually heard of the secrets of cold war technology from a video of one of Peter's lectures. Googled the book and lucked out, found a copy.
Permission to start surfacing?
I've noticed a large growth in these video's of people replicating things of he overunity nature. I really think we are on the edge of some big changes. Sure is interesting to live during these times.
Alright, the boy is asleep for the night now, and the wife has gone to work.
Back to the lab for me! lol..

Marcel

[Aaron]

permission

By permission, I mean I believe there is some divine will behind all of this.

[brusers]

Inertia

Hello,
I have read something else about inertia and the aether, in that book secrets of cold war technology. Really happy I got this book by the way. Would you happen to know any other books or wesites that go into more detail about inertia and aether, and similar properties?
I would like to be able to explain this to people, but I have to paint the picture for myself first.
Thanks a million.

Marcel

[boguslaw]

Hello,
I have read something else about inertia and the aether, in that book secrets of cold war technology. Really happy I got this book by the way. Would you happen to know any other books or wesites that go into more detail about inertia and aether, and similar properties?
I would like to be able to explain this to people, but I have to paint the picture for myself first.
Thanks a million.

Marcel

Cosider some facts:

- aether was proven to not exists according to Einstein theories and Michelson experiments, but that was mechanical aether
- radiant energy is often called "waves of aether" or "waves in aether"
- it is known that radiant energy has some special features like magnetizing iron but charging electrostatically copper
- seems that "Earth currents" are at least related to radiant energy
- seems that we are coping with electrical aether theory

Now, may I question : is electrical aether something redundant, maybe something we know already ?


Why did Tesla investigated thunder features ? What he was talking about when said about "wheelwork of nature" ? A mysthic aether ? Do you believe that he was able to create wireless communication without knowledge what it really is ?


Why did he talked about Earth being only a small metal ball ? Why does Earth look like a homopolar generator ? A metal ball in stationary magnetic field .... Why was Steven Mark able to "connect to very wheelwork of nature" ?

Why we so little know about magnetic current,reluctance, magnetic flux, plasma "freezing" magnetic field effect ... Do you think that Ed Leedskalnin was a madman or he knew something important?

What is the TRUE nature of electricity ? Do you know that electrons move in wire maybe a few centimeters per hour ?

Why all this knowledge is restricted and supressed ???

[lighty]

@boguslaw

You should really read what Rudolf Steiner had to say about 4 types of Aether.

[Aaron]

inertia and aether

There is just a touch on this I think in the Revolutions book by Hans Nieper. That might be just on gravity but that is an awesome book that not many people know about anymore.

It even had a chapter or section on Bedini.

[brusers]

Books

Aaron, I'll check that out for sure, I appreciate it.
Lighty, I'll look further into that too, but I was under the impression that those were just different states of eather. Like water can be steam, liquid, or a solid.. I guess that is an ok analogy.

[Aaron]

natural forces

The Michelson experiment was flawed.

Also, magnetic current is what nobody in the free energy community is talking about and I haven't seen anything that makes sense. I have my own model of it that makes sense to me, but still, nobody is talking about it.

Many people are throwing around the words cold electricity, radiant energy, etc... there are many fine distinctions of different entities of each that can be clearly defined and the distinctions are easily made but most people lump them all together as one, almost.

There are some concepts of the neutral particle concepts such as neutrinos, etc... but if they are neutral, what and how are they charged more or less to positive or negative? What gives them any potential difference? Even if they have different interactions with masses of different densities, what is the twin of their effect or is there one?

Also, it appears that it is fairly well known or at least believed that the neutrinos are bombarding right through the Earth like the Earth isn't there. I remember learning about this 20 years ago on Japanese television where they were measuring neutrino bomardment deep into the Earth in caverns with water hundreds or thousands of meters deep...the neutrino activity or interaction with the water that deep was measurable. This was all translated to me but I was interested in it and remember it distinctly. There was no symmetrical direction that these neutrinos took to bombard the Earth. They were moving in an asymmetrical direction and the Earth's rotation around the sun, around the center of the galaxy and the galaxy's rotation, etc.... was the relative movement of the Earth through these "neutrinos". They are in one direction and not moving to the center of the Earth from all directions. Gravity has the function of moving to the center of the Earth from all directions so is that the neutral particles and if so, what gives them charge and how can they push upon the planet if the neutrinos that the Earth are moving through are pretty much unidirectionally? If so, then we would only have gravitational push on half the planet...or whatever side of the planet was moving against the neutrino flow.

When it comes down to it, nobody knows what is going on. Every single model is just an opinion...from postulation up to almost theories and none can even be considered laws.

But the person with the most accurate model(s) will probably make the most advancements and regardless of the models...they may deserve the most attention because they obviously know something that the others don't even if they can't describe it.

[brusers]

hmm..

Does anyone else smell that?
There is smoke coming out my ears.. lol
It's amazing how much there is out there to learn.
I'll get a copy of that book, and try and figure out what is happening.
Obviously if the government can have vehicles that move so suddenly, then they have to have figured out how to avoid inertia, which puts us on a model basically like your explination in the book Aaron. The physical body just wouldn't be able to handle that treatment unless what ever is interacting with the matter is displaced.
And I think as people learn more, it's going to be more simple than a lot of people think.
So yeah, back to the studies, thanks again,

Marcel

[fritz]

overwhelmed!!

Newbie here
Been lurking here for about 2 months..The info & knowledge here is a bit over my head, but wonderfully interesting...maybe others as well

Would you kind gentlemen have any reccomended reading on the topic discussed in this thread
Thanks for your patience
fritz

[Aaron]

inertia

Marcel,

About 4 years ago, I met someone who developed their own grand unified field theory. He was a project coordinator for many years at a certain company. He found a way to reduce the weight of a sphere of aluminum on a balance beam. Pumping it in a certain way.

Anyway, what it comes down to is that a practical application of that is to have this technology on a big cargo ship for example...as it comes into port and stops, if the technology was turned on, there would be no inertia meaning the hull of the ship doesn't stress and strain extending the life of it. It would simply come to a dead stop. Even if inertia is from speeding up to equilibrium, the resistance from slowing down is just as important. That was only one example he shared with me.

Point is, the inertia really is from the interaction of whatever the "aether" is made of and if you can deflect the aether around the mass without it moving through it, there can't be inertia.