gravity waves found

[solrey]

Use this same technique to lift your car and put it on the rooftop of your house, then you'll have my attention.

If I had a lever and fulcrum large enough, no problemo, although it would be more practical to use a tripod, pulleys and chains similar to Leedskalnins.



Sure one can feel the force acting on two magnets if they're close enough, but not if they're too far apart and the force is less than human senses are able to detect, in which case instruments are necessary.

Try cradling a 4 lb. odd shaped object on your fingertips and see if it feels stable and balanced.

If one can feel it, one can measure it yet all I've seen is uninformed circular reasoning to explain away the fact that nobody has been able to measure anything at all up to this point.

I believe one of the people that claimed to feel a change in weight is also the person who thinks scientists don't know what fire is. They also think the levitating cell phone video is not a hoax. IMO, that's not a very credible witness to confirm or deny anything scientific. As a matter of fact, there is a profound and somewhat disturbing lack of basic knowledge displayed by many in this thread so I honestly don't find any of the folks evaluating Davids rig to be credible in regards to judging the validity of anything scientific.

Start watching around 32 minutes of this MIT video on the various ways a ferromagnetic material can be returned to it's virginal state.

My advice to folks would be to watch the entire video from the beginning because it provides an explanation for what's happening with a PMH (think soft magnet).

Oh, David. We already know that aluminum is paramagnetic, nothing new there, other than some people being unawares and experiencing it for the first time.

I said, more than once, it could be the power of suggestion driving confirmation bias among certain folks lacking a background in physics. You twist that around in your head and come up with some kind of "mind control" scenario? David, grow up and stop acting like an immature bully. I might take you a bit more seriously then.

[solrey]

Jetijs.

How stupid must a person be to not able to distinguish the effect from light in a dust cloud? I am sure Loadstone is not the case

Who said that the "effect" was from light in a dust cloud instead? Not me. I just pointed out that what Scotty saw was likely dust/moisture in the air of his workshop. That had nothing whatever to do with David or his rig. I never commented about that being the cause of the "glimmer" either. Didn't even hint at it.
What I said regarding Davids rig was that a monochrome pattern like that can cause an optical illusion or trick of the eyes, which could be very similar to the "glimmer" that's been described. Not a word about light in a dust cloud.

And you're trying to call me stupid?

I mean

[gravityblock]

Sure one can feel the force acting on two magnets if they're close enough, but not if they're too far apart and the force is less than human senses are able to detect, in which case instruments are necessary. :

If a hall effect sensor is not close enough to a magnet or the force is less than the sensitivity of the sensor, then it's not going to measure anything either and will be no better than our senses.

My advice to folks would be to watch the entire video from the beginning because it provides an explanation for what's happening with a PMH (think soft magnet).

Regarding the MIT video and the PMH. Ed's magnets are not our magnets. Ed's magnets go out in straight lines and run against each other in a corkscrew motion (gravity). PM's have closed loops (magnetic fields).

My advice to you is to re-read the book, "magnetic currents" with this in mind, so you don't confuse the "magnets" that goes out in straight lines and run against each other with the "magnets" that have closed loops.

GB

[Jetijs]

Jetijs.



Who said that the "effect" was from light in a dust cloud instead? Not me. I just pointed out that what Scotty saw was likely dust/moisture in the air of his workshop. That had nothing whatever to do with David or his rig. I never commented about that being the cause of the "glimmer" either. Didn't even hint at it.
What I said regarding Davids rig was that a monochrome pattern like that can cause an optical illusion or trick of the eyes, which could be very similar to the "glimmer" that's been described. Not a word about light in a dust cloud.

And you're trying to call me stupid?

I mean

I am not calling you stupid, but you sound so convinced that you know what Loadstone saw that you know that it is this and that without any doubt. How can you be sure of that if you haven't seen it yourself. You should have used words "perhaps", "maybe" or "in my opinion".

[solrey]

Jetijs. Gotcha.

If I misconstrued your intent, my bad.

You're right, I should have interjected something like, "probably" or "likely" at the fore. That's a good thing to remember. Although I have spent enough time in workshops and warehouses at all times of day and night to have seen what Scotty described lots of times myself. So that's all it probably is, what Scotty saw in his shop.

[gravityblock]

Man moves huge blocks. Sorry to let the cat out of the bag. Mystery Solved, Case Closed! Let's focus on Dave's glimmer effect instead of the pullies, chains, etc found at Coral Castle.

GB

[Loadstone]

Hey all.
I understand what Solrey is saying, because I worked in a foundry for over 10years, and in there the air sparkled in the morning sun.

What I witnessed was almost the same as the you tube vids where they use special filters and light to see the air.

It was about 5 deg C in my shop at the time and 7 am in the morning.
As I said, it lasted long enough for me to do some basic tests.
It was not a particle substance but a true gasseous substance...really cool to see.
I have to go for a few days so I'll have to catch up then.
Scotty.

[solrey]

Given the time, temp, still dark at 7 a.m. and using deg. C I'm deducing this was during winter in Australia? In the vicinity of the coast maybe within 75km? I'll bet if you looked up the weather history for that date it would probably show humidity above 85%. Maybe the headlights were illuminating saturated air? Get that a lot here in the PacNW.

cheers

[david lambright]

jet!

you know whats funny jet?, solrey lives 30 miles from me and i offered to pay for his gas...he still wont come see this effect for himself....i think he might possibly be afraid he will see something new and will not be able to explain it ?...anyway jet, you will get a model to test.....david

[david lambright]

aluminum

Oh, David. We already know that aluminum is paramagnetic, nothing new there, other than some people being unawares and experiencing it for the first time.

I said, more than once, it could be the power of suggestion driving confirmation bias among certain folks lacking a background in physics. You twist that around in your head and come up with some kind of "mind control" scenario? David, grow up and stop acting like an immature bully. I might take you a bit more seriously then.

[/QUOTE]

so you can pick up aluminum with a magnet?.....and bully? this i do not get...hillbully perhaps......david

[sucahyo]

That's funny to me because it's well known that fire (combustion) is just an exothermic chemical reaction. For example, the formula for methane combustion is CH4 + 2 O2 = CO2 + 2 H2O
It's also well established that a flame is a lightly ionized plasma and will be affected by an electric field. No surprise or mystery there.

Yes it is just that. How about it's property. But is it matter or non matter? Is it part of things or not? Is it closer to light or closer to matter?

How many flame type are there?

Why flame can interact with magnet?

Why flame a very good high voltage conductor, better than air

However, with above point why flame being pushed away by pointy high voltage at the same time?


For me, flame is still mistery.

We also have a digital imaging expert on TB forum that explained the effects seen in Davids images and movies. That digital imaging expert has even written software to correct for the Moire effect, a common problem and one that is evident in some of Davids videos.

What if the video have no capability of capturing it?

After my aura filter, I believe that photo and video is very limited in capability to capture what happen in real life.



BTW, regarding unseen and undetected energy, I would like suggestion from everyone of any physical device that can replace head submerging trick I do:
http://www.energeticforum.com/104429-post2.html

Any suggestion of what I actually experience is also welcomed

The suggestion will also benefit attempt to detect the type of energy that the PMH produced. At least we will know if it is positive or negative, or maybe non polar.

[david lambright]

sucahyo

well said!...some people just do not get it, this is something new and it will not just go away...just because someone knows every possible thing about every thing that is KNOWN, does not make him an expert on things that are new....sucahyo, thank you ....do i ever BULLY anyone? ...you better answer or i willl......just kidding......but again, thank you

[david lambright]

new expiremental results..

to all replicators and experimentalists....take a piece of 3/8 copper tube and bend it into a 11" circle and solder the ends together...spin the device and hold the ring at equator and slowly pull upward ...you should see a film like a bubble...kindof?..like a funnel or vortex...please try this, its cheap ....let me know what you see and feel......if you have seen the glimmer, you have got to see this...bruce,you are getting sleepy... ...try this ....it is too cool....david

[Harvey]

@Solrey,

Personally, I'm not going to accept the rolling shutter theory until some proof is shown to support it.

One thing that I feel disproves the shutter theory is that the parallax does not follow the camera when the camera is rotated, but instead stays with the object and even with different angles at that. I have yet to find (and I have been doing a rather intensive search) anything on the net that resembles this in any of the known photographic or digital aberrations.

I would be very interested in hearing directly from your expert to see if any details can be offered to substantiate the rolling shutter theory.

I had thought that perhaps the EIS was responsible in some way, but that doesn't explain the snapshot in my honest opinion. Also, we don't have an explanation to satisfy why the elements themselves change from an elliptical shape to a round shape while the center wheel remains true to the round. The only thing I have found that supports this dual aberration where round or spherical remain round and spherical while all other shapes exhibit some type of contraction, is the Lorentz Contraction. I know that sounds far-fetched, but until it is scientifically disproved it remains as a real possibility. And as long as this remains as a possibility, your rolling shutter theory cannot be 100% correct.

I am fully open to data and proof to the contrary

[sucahyo]

to all replicators and experimentalists....take a piece of 3/8 copper tube and bend it into a 11" circle and solder the ends together...spin the device and hold the ring at equator and slowly pull upward ...you should see a film like a bubble...kindof?..like a funnel or vortex...please try this, its cheap ....let me know what you see and feel......if you have seen the glimmer, you have got to see this...bruce,you are getting sleepy... ...try this ....it is too cool....david

Interesting . Remind me of Tesla's experiment mentioned by Gary Vassilatos. Where energy seems like to radiate around copper. Where spesific copper tube diameter give out different color and strength. Where some size produce stronger stream than other. Tesla upgraded copper tube to flat copper coil. Maybe copper tube coil shaped like cone would produce pointed stream?

Keep it up .