gravity waves found

[witsend]

If you've got some kind of magnetic interaction going on, then the electrons/ions around the thing would clearly be moving..... Could it be that the electron holds the temporarily higher energy state for longer than usual, long enough to physically move to a different position before it kicks out a photon, so that new photon is traveling in a slightly different path?

Hi SupercaviTationistic. I wonder if we're perhaps getting to the heart of the problem here. I think the general assumption in mainstream is that light is deflected off surfaces at an angle that is consistent with the level of penetration of each photon into the structure. This determines the emitted 'wave length'. Hence we get distinct colour and texture gradients that differentiates one material from another, one colour from another. We know that these 'differences' are easily readable. So we can differentiate a crocus from a car motor - and so on. We also know that - to the best of our knowledge - we can film motors and, thus far, have not been alerted to any significant distortions in our view of such motors. Assuming that motors use some combination of permanent and/or induced magnet fields - then I think we can rule out the 'changing levels' of interaction that may induce some variation to the photon's emission from such material. Else we would have seen the same level of distortion and Dave would not be showing us anything new.

So if simple magnetic fields - induced or otherwise, don't cause that distortion of light, and if simple electric fields also don't cause it - based on the same principle that if they did - then we'd know of this effect, then the question is what is causing it? We do know that various 'localities' can cause the same effect. We've been shown this. Perhaps, whatever condition applies to those localities may be what Dave has duplicated in his rig?

So the next question - presumably, - is what is that 'rare' combination of forces that is in this 'rig' that may account for the 'effect' and what has this got in common with the locality dependent phenomena that does similar distortions? We only know that the rig comprises simple magnetisable material that has been bent into a unique shape to generate what logically seems to be a combination of attractive and repulsive magnetic fields that somehow manage to stay 'locked' in shape. Could it be that these 'locality dependent' phenomena also have rare combinations of just such fields that have been induced inside the earth at those localities? And if so, then could it be that such combinations are able to 'bend light' in the same way that gravity is known to be able to bend light?

And then. The next question. Is this 'combination' of magnetic fields therefore the same thing as 'gravity' itself. If so, then one can perhaps propose that our earth's magnetic fields may, themselves, be the source of our gravitational fields. Again - the suggestion is not that far out. Einstein himself proposed this - and then eschewed it. I don't know why. All I know is that the liklihood of magnetism and gravity being the same thing is feasible provided only that these same magnetic fields permeate all of space. Because gravity is known to be a universal force. Personally I have no problem with this concept. But it's not a popular thought.

What would be interesting is to see where Dave's rig actually takes us. So far the evidence is that there's a distinct anomaly and that it seems to do to light what convention has determined can only be done by gravity.

Which - as always, is just my humble opinion.

[david lambright]

candle shadowgraph!

this will help!.....david

[david lambright]

witsend..

thanks....your insight into this is nothing short of INCREDIBLE!! this energy wave is being revealed!!!!! and you are correct.....this is getting good! ......david

[david lambright]

let people know what God can do when you believe," he says. "I don't care how low you go, there's an opposite of low, and as low as I went I wanted to to avoid early evaluations when listening to a person with whom you disagree. When listeners begin to disagree with a sender's message, they
SABRA ALDA ANASTACIA BECKIE AJA MARITA MELLIE DORIE VICKEY

what?..............

[david lambright]

skype?

what languages?.....david

[witsend]

what?..............

LOL. I've been trying to work this out. I think the name is an anagram of senile ogres. Not sure if we're seeing cryptic messaging? Who knows. Very strange Dave. I think you need to alert admin. I'm tempted to try and crack a code but it probably doesn't exist.

[david lambright]

hi...

Not much at all really. What is needed is a density differential in a material, such as air. When light moves between the boundary of those two densities, it bends. theoretically, you could setup a density bubble with air of the same temperature but different pressures and get the same result.

See refraction here:refraction: Definition from Answers.com

======================

I wish I lived closer - I would have liked to have been there for your demonstration.

I have built a Mock-Up of your rig for photographic comparisons. My camera does not show the distortion, but my son has a HD camera, and I hope to use that to see if there is some particular image locking in it that produces this distortion.

I noticed in the Mikes video that movement was being done with the camera relative to the rig and the distortion stayed with the rig. But it would be good to have that 360° walk around to separate whether the distortion is rig related or camera (as in shutter speed and syncronization) related.

===========================

@ Psyclic,

I have communicated with John a bit on his experiments and he will be the first to tell you that he used a 500,000V electrostatic field which he feels contributed greatly to the levitation of the objects. He claims that the principle has been provided to the US military and that they have done successful experiments with flight craft. Tinsel Koala demonstrates the electrostatic effect common to Johns liquid demonstrations in this video.

The large round ball that levitates on Johns video is probably the most dramatic. On a coast to coast radio show, John stated that this was a 6 to 8 pound cannon ball - but later, on an internet radio show with Bill Alek he said it was between 70 and 80 pounds. I asked for confirmation to see which was correct, and John indicated it was the later. I never did do a dimensional comparison between that ball and its environment to see if we could see what size it was for a mass comparison, because it wasn't important to me. But electrostatically elevating 8 pounds or 80 pounds is just as impressive in my honest opinion. One theory suggests that an interruption of space and time in that vicinity by the intersecting of two different radio signals in that zone, contributed to the levitation.

Of course getting levitation and controlling it are two different things

has john seen any of this?......

[david lambright]

wit!

you are funny! ....... and intelligent too

[witsend]

you are funny! ....... and intelligent too

LOL I wish. I'm addled and old and suffer from mental arthritis. It's a rare condition that afflicts the really aged.

[Harvey]

has john seen any of this?......

I don't think so - but you could invite him:

YouTube - johnkhutchison2008's Channel


As regards your rig, heat and light bending:

As I have stated, different air pressures can create boundaries between them. When light passes between these two boundaries it will be BENT i.e. refracted. When we use the term "Bending" light, we are referring to altering the path of the energy we call light. To bend a photon itself would be a difficult (but not impossible) task, but to alter the path the photon is moving along has been well known and used even before Newton wrote his works called OPTICKS .

In your rig, when it spins, there is definitely air density changes surrounding it. This is why both you and I feel that cool effect near the machine. Mine is just a mock-up, but it still exhibits the cooling effect. Also, their is a low pressure zone above (and probably below) the moving elements and a high pressure zone off to the sides. My experiments also show that these result in vortices, like little whirlwinds spinning off from the sides. Place your smoke under the elements while it is spinning and you will probably see them also. Generally we would need a relatively high differential between the material density (like glass to air, water to air, etc.) to get refraction, so I don't know if you are getting high enough pressure differentials to do this even though they are most definitely present.

Light also follows its medium - this is how fiber-optic piping works. While some of the light will bounce off the walls, the majority is routed via the lattice stress at the molecular level. Just like a lens that causes the light internal to it, to follow a path to the surface and exit on a different trajectory.

Scintillators work specifically with light absorption and re-emission.

We know that light has a frequency (color for visible light) and that means it is changing from one state to another and back again. The wave function of light is known to possess a magnetic amplitude 90° from its trajectory and an electric amplitude 90° to both of those. Those two amplitudes peak at the same moment, become zero at the same moment and peak in the inverse at the same moment as their counterpart. So, at the prescribed frequency, a photon will be positive magnetic (say N) and positive electric and will oscillate between that and negative magnetic (say S) and negative electric. This means that 50% of the time the photon exhibits one polarity or the other. This duality is why it usually travels in a straight line - but not always. Imagine you have a spinning apparatus that presents a charged surface at a particular frequency and the rest of the time it is zero. So it goes from zero to charge and back to zero. Now imagine that this occurs synchronous to a laser light beam of a specific single frequency and polarization. Some of the light in the beam that is synchronous to the charged surface, will bend because of the uneven attraction. the charge could be magnetic or electrical, either will work the same way - it simply has to be in phase.

So there are many ways to alter the path of a photon - some conventional, some unconventional. Some require physical interaction, some do not.

You asked how much heat it would take to bend light - but you did not quantify the question. I think what you were asking was how much heat is required to raise the air pressure to a point that refraction occurs between the hot air and cool air. And that my friend is an extremely variable thing contingent upon particulates, humidity, temperature and ambient pressure.

I hope this helps to clarify the issues cut off any arguments that members here seem to want to start with partial comments. You need all views to get a good picture of the reality and saying "Light can't bend" is only one narrow view.

Cheers!



ETA:
Bending light

[david lambright]

candlegraph

there is no heat being generated...the distortions are made by this energy wave...that is why i was asking about the heat....the heat from a torch can be seen in a shadow or ....i saw a video about this screen... you have seen this setup before,i will bet.....people at saturday market were saying it looked like gas fumes or heat.....i will bet that "screen" setup will be revealing........david

candle shadowgraph...i will try this and possibly video.....david......shadowgram...sorry

[david lambright]

shadowgram works!

there is no heat being generated...the distortions are made by this energy wave...that is why i was asking about the heat....the heat from a torch can be seen in a shadow or ....i saw a video about this screen... you have seen this setup before,i will bet.....people at saturday market were saying it looked like gas fumes or heat.....i will bet that "screen" setup will be revealing........david

i tried this using a hi-power led...it works..... i am waiting for sunshine to do the video!...david

[witsend]

Again. As discussed, we have strange distortions resulting in both the static and the moving condition of Dave's rig. One proposal put forward was that it is fairly common for light to 'bend'. If this is true then Dave's apparent 'distortions' on his rig are trivial and easily explained. This may very well prove to be the case.

However, perhaps we should first consider what we know about photons. They're neutral. They are not affected by a magnetic field. They are not affected by an electric field. They have no preference to move towards or away from the positive or the negative charge of any particle. And being neutral, they do not obey the 'exclusion principle'. They can and do 'share a path'. Irradiated light can be seen as 'streaming' out from its source in clearly shared paths. Photons have no rest state and no single photon has ever been held in a fixed location in space and in time - as has been achieved with electrons, protons and for some limited periods, even neutrons.

It is my understanding and, as explained by TeslaProject - the path that light follows is always in a straight line. Dave's rig has no special material to enable light to be continuously changed to enable it to 'bend' through space and in time. He has nothing between the camera and the rig except air. The distortions persist - at least as long or longer than his camera shutter speed. So it is unlikely to be due to vagaries of his equipment. It is also unlikely that the objects actually do expand and grow or shrink to a smaller relative size. So any distortions are probably due to light.

So then, and rightly so, it's proposed that changes in the air pressure - due to sharp gradients between hot and cold - may account for this distortion. If so, then then the simple test would be to open your fridge door and film it. If there is a resulting distortion to the size and shape of the objects in the fridge then this thesis would be proven. Conversely if there is no distortion then the thesis will be disproved. If the exposure depends on a more isolated evidence of hot and cold, then film an ice tray in free space. Personally I'm inclined to predict that no such distortions will be evident. But that's only my opinion. I'll try this tomorrow - in any event.

I have never heard of light being influenced by 'heat'. What I know is that light will deflect off the molecules and atoms in the air. Given a hot atmosphere there may be some distortions resulting from that heat - a kind of turbulence. But this would 'obscure' the image rather than enhance it as is seen in a heat wave. I am not talking about the 'long range' effect of a heat wave. Just the space between Dave's camera and that rig.

Again, I am of the opinion that the distortions in Dave's videos are the result of some gravitational anomaly that also requires more investigation. I personally do not see it as a trivial event due to vagaries related to environment or atmosphere around the rig. But I will do my own tests to see if I can help hone in and clarify this effect.

[Aromaz]

With all due respect, I do not believe that photons are neutral. To be
neutral they need to be static - no movement, no spin. If they are neutral
they would also not be attracted to or repelled from any other item
like 'electrons or protons'. Nothing in the current universe can be neutral,
maybe temporaly balanced; which photons are not.

I propose that photons has a very low polarity charge - due to slow spin
speed;
which allows them to travel fast because they can mostly 'ignore' influence
by other more polarized material.

But then, this is my crackpot opinion and not to be taken seriously!

[witsend]

With all due respect, I do not believe that photons are neutral. To be
neutral they need to be static - no movement, no spin. If they are neutral
they would also not be attracted to or repelled from any other item
like 'electrons or protons'. Nothing in the current universe can be neutral,
maybe temporaly balanced; which photons are not.

I propose that photons has a very low polarity charge - due to slow spin
speed;
which allows them to travel fast because they can mostly 'ignore' influence
by other more polarized material.

But then, this is my crackpot opinion and not to be taken seriously!

From Wiki. I'ts not my 'idea' I assure you. Photons are classified 'neutral' and have never been known to be influenced by electric or magnetic fields.

Composition: Elementary particle
Particle statistics: Bosonic
Group: Gauge boson
Interaction: Electromagnetic
Symbol(s): γ, hν, or ħω
Theorized: Albert Einstein
Mass: 0
<1×10−18 eV[1]
Mean lifetime: Stable[1]
Electric charge: 0
<1×10−35 e[1]
Spin: 1


This may very well be wrong. But it IS mainstream thinking at present.

EDITED. I corrupted the copy - this one refers. sorry