Tweet
Very good post gravityblock, you gave me a bit to read up on.
-
-
Wave absorption is the key.
Look at the audio device that Moray had in his house.
It "absorbed" sound from a distance.
If he invented a device that can do this with sound, then it is a fair bet that his radiant energy device did the same with EM waves.
Sound does not have a polar orientation.
God I wish I wasn't so damn broke. Anyone near Plano who has a nice garage lab setup?Comment
-
Wrong!Originally posted by Macchendra View Post
Below is a quote from Wiki, saying sound can be polarized in a solid medium.
"For longitudinal waves such as sound waves in fluids, the direction of oscillation is by definition along the direction of travel, so there is no polarization. In a solid medium, however, sound waves can be transverse. In this case, the polarization is associated with the direction of the shear stress in the plane perpendicular to the propagation direction. This is important in seismology."
GBComment
-
Nope. Moray's sound device worked in air, buddy. It still refutes your claim that this has anything to do with polarization.
Your ideas on the matter weren't really helpful. The concept that I'm talking about doesn't need such added complexity.
Originally posted by gravityblock View PostComment
-
Below is a quote from Pyrazo.com in reference to using polarized sound waves.
"Applications of the Device
The device may be used to absorb or amplify signals from any signal source. Specifically, it may be used for: converting ionosphere vibrations to usable energy, absorbing electromagnetic waves off of nearby high-voltage power lines, converting radio signals generated by pulsars, quasars and black holes to usable energy, converting noise pollution to energy, amplifying radio signals, amplifying sounds, absorbing the energy produced by earthquakes, absorbing the vibrations in bridges and large buildings, and much more."
Sound can be polarized in a solid medium, such as from earthquakes, vibrations in bridges and large buildings, etc.
GBComment
-
Please contact me.Originally posted by Macchendra View Post
Also, please refer, to an oversimplified version of a similar circuit from a man I admire very much....
YouTube - Pulling Local Energy Part#2
YouTube - Simple Ways To Tune Coherence Receiver
I think you will enjoy!
My name is Andrew
319-389-5760 (what you might call a "Burner" cell phone)
Manriquea@my.uwstout.edu
Skype: Armagnd03Comment
-
GravityB,Originally posted by gravityblock View Post
I like what you post because it brings up an interesting concept (signal modification through static field interaction), but I do not think it applies after further study. By the way, the person you are talking to (Macchendra) is the inventor (perhaps re-inventor (no disrespect intended)) of the circuit in question. (I have thoughts on what you posted, but they do not apply here, if you are interested also please contact me!)
Take care!Last edited by Armagdn03; 05-13-2011, 04:39 AM.Comment
-
Oh really?Originally posted by Macchendra View Post
T. H. Moray's Sound Pickup Device.
Below is a quote from the above link on Moray's sound pickup device.
The sound on the outside was being picked up by Moray's sound device through the propagation of the sound through solid materials, such as through the ground, the walls and windows of the house. Air doesn't penetrate through the walls and windows of a house, especially air from a railroad station a minimum of 5 miles away. The sound propagating through the air from the railroad station 5 miles away would have been dispersed too much by the time it reached Moray's sound device."There was an old radio box of conventional design with two headphones plugged into the box. Dr Moray tuned the device by turning the knob in front. He handed me one set of headphones and one set to my nephew Mr. Clark Gardner; he then arranged for three people to walk out of the house into the street and carry on a conversation to which we were tuned.
I was sure I was listening to these three men. I remember distinctly it was raining at the time and I could hear the patter of the rain on the pavement as they walked.
I remember them saying they had better hurry back into the house lest they get wet.
In the course of their return, I wondered if I might hear other people talking, and despite the advice of Dr Moray not to fool around with the tuning device, I moved the knob slowly and heard very distinctly the sounds of a railroad station: the whistle of a train, and a porter or the station master at his station saying, "All aboard". The nearest station to the receiving set would have been a minimum of 5 miles."
However, the speed of propagation of a phonon, which is also the speed of sound in the lattice, can propagate for large distances across the lattice without breaking apart. This is the reason that sound propagates through solids without significant distortion. And guess what? Phonons can be polarized when propagating through solid materials.
GBLast edited by gravityblock; 05-13-2011, 08:08 AM.Comment
-
William of Ockham called...
William of Ockham called, he wants to give you a shave.
But seriously, you'd have to do more than re-orient the polarity of the photon to divert it's path.
And also, I want people to grasp the fundamentals of the device before we start throwing complicating theory around. Too much noise, ya know. KISSComment
-
Proprietary, eh? Well, I'm sure he's grateful for y'all's hard work. :-/
Parametric is nice, but imagine now a feedback loop such as the one in the Pyrazo circuit. The signal will come through the primary of the transformer used for pulsing, then right at its peak in one direction, the current through the primary is interrupted, causing the fields to collapse, and causing a voltage spike in the secondary. This spike is then routed through the primary again in the other direction, which makes for an even more dramatic change in the primary's fields which is effectively a feedback loop of inductive kick.
This pulse is aligned with the signal so that it effectively pulls the signal with the same spike. Effectively, it is broadcasting a cancelling signal.
Without the feedback loop of inductive kick, it would be no more interesting than the coupled induction they are doing over at MIT.
I love your handle, btw.Originally posted by Armagdn03 View PostComment
-
The noise is coming from you. You said sound doesn't have a polar orientation. Obviously wrong and was a bunch of noise. You said Moray's sound device worked in air, when sound propagating through the air for 5 miles would have been dispersed before it ever had a chance to reach Moray's sound device (How can you not accept this fact?). I provided references to how sound can be polarized and can propagate over long distances through a lattice without breaking apart, without becoming dispersed, and without becoming distorted. I've shown through real world experimentation how the photon can be diverted in it's path (You obviously didn't put the pieces together).Originally posted by Macchendra View Post
I've provided overwhelming evidence to Moray's device working on the principals of an energy source which is polarized, regardless if the energy source is electromagnetic waves or sound waves. Moray's device is good at night, where it uses an energy source which is already polarized. There is a better method during the day-time though. That method is to use and amplify direct sun-light with a parabolic antenna or a DCPF antenna, then polarize it along with other things I have already mentioned. Everything I have said, has been backed up by references (no noise here on my part).
Good luck with the fundamentals of Moray's device, since you're basing it on wrong assumptions, wrong observations, and wrong theories. Also, I wish you good luck with your 87' antenna (and you say my concept is complicated, lol). Jibbguy said, "No one has progressed on Moray's circuit (at least openly) in 70 years". This should tell you that it's not just a simple circuit or concept (although I don't believe what I'm saying is overly-complicated to grasp either, it's just outside your current understanding).
As a side note to All: A flying saucer could be described as having two parabolic dishes facing each other. The two parabolic dishes could be sharing the same focal point. Also, the parabolic dishes can be ran in reverse, where an energy source can be located at the focal point, and this energy source is reflected out in a parallel fashion, like a spotlight, but in a controlled way to provide thrust in a particular direction.
Did you guys see the video on how two parabolic mirrors facing each other creates a 3-D hologram image on the outside? Now that is wicked cool!
Do we want free energy or do we want to get off this rock? We could have both if it wasn't for the noise. Thank God sound doesn't propagate in a vacuum.
GBLast edited by gravityblock; 05-13-2011, 12:51 PM.Comment
-
Go away
Dude, you contribute nothing, go away.
Sound would not disperse over 5 miles. The sound energy would follow the path of least resistance which is toward pairing with the cancellation wave: just as the electromagnetic energy follows paths that resemble magnetic lines of force.
There is no more "progress" needed on the design of the device. Anyone who wants can build it right now from the information I have provided. If you have your own theories of device, then please go ahead and start your own thread and get off of mine.
You have not stated one word on how the polarization would alter the path of the photons or phonons. How would it? Unless the path of these "particles" would be altered, the device would not receive more energy than what would normally intersect the antenna and that would then be proportional to the inverse of the distance squared.
And then you go mentioning some completely unrelated device and unrelated theory of something else. You have a completely unrelated side note? Put it on your own damn thread.
On a side note, gravityblock, I curse you. And I do this publicly so the scandal feedback loop will do the rest for me. You can join the dozens of others who have witnessed that whole other space-time effect that follows me around, including Moray and Tesla. I'm glad for it and regret it not one little bit with you.
You can take this up with Mr. Gardner a few years from now. I'm sure he'd be happy to devote a few years to discuss it with you.Comment
-
Here is the effect I describe...
Here is the effect I describe...
YouTube - Yardbirds - Heart Full Of Soul (Backmasking)Comment
-
Re: wrong assumptions, wrong observations, and wrong theories
By the way, while are the goofy folk were running around claiming that it just had to be the radioactivity, I was the only one to connect the audio device to the principle of the radiant energy device.
(And between myself and Mr. Gardner, the one out of the garden and both of us abductee lab rats from our teens, we have the rest of the tech too, including the proper leedskalnin spacetime expansion/compression device, the means of using this to create spacetime density bubbles for antigravity, dark matter/energy radio transceivers and all the other tech that was "suppressed" by mysterious coincidences of fate. Oh, the mystery of anarchy is our Ouroboros.)
Originally posted by gravityblock View PostComment
-
hello again
I am creating another causality loop, check your messages, or email.
Thank you sir!Comment
Comment