Eric Dollard

[orgonaut314]

About the versor. If you forget about the space time tensor but go back into mac Farlane and quarternion type of tensor you see another kind of space modelling in space and counterspace. To the sine and cosine are added the hyperbolic functions cosh and sinh. They represent a circle in counterspace. For Maxwell to include the scalar wave (that is not a wave you moron ) he would have to use a counterspace model and he would have found that this counterwave is the longitudional wave in counterspace. It takes a new algebra of space that Eric is working on.

[orgonaut314]

In other words the connection between charge and mass was never solved but Einstein worked on explaining charge from the working of the same ether that caused gravitation.

[orgonaut314]

A short contribution on ether. Here is Einsteins article on ether:
http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Mat...Relativity.pdf

When you read it you realise Einstein needed the ether to explain the local interaction of space on matter in gravitation.
However special relativity did not allow the ether to have motional characteristics. This means he says special relativity also needs an ether because there is an electromagnetic field, a local interaction a mu and an epsiolon in electromagnetics but this field (ether) can not be a rest or at motion to anyone. So he takes away the motional aspect of the ether.
That way he solves the problem that experiments did not seem to measure any motion of the ether not even a relative one.

So Einstein needed an ether. He did not contribute the effects of special relativity or general relativity to space and time like most physicist seem to think.

These Einstein fields however are a potential energy that stores kinetic energy in a non motional way. It is a complete mystic field. It does not explain how this non motional energy can suddenly cause the motion of say an electron.

Thomson reasons that energy can only be stored as kinetic like it is stored in a heated gas. So perhaps the electromagnetic field is a kinetic field of ether particles perhaps a vortex with a pole.

Point is that Thomson does not need the mystic field of potential that is making motion out of no motion in a mystified manner. Thomson just needs motion.
Also this point by Einstein that the ether has no motional aspects seems to be contradicted by Tesla who detected a lot of motion in the ether.

Einsteins mystified ether also lets no one affect the ether except by large gravitational fields. He never managed to model how his ether caused the electromagnetic field. If he had succeeded in finishing his work we would not have to stare at the cosmos to find a space time warp we would have experimented with electronics. But no one ever finished Einsteins work and electromagnetism was left to the quantum physicist who did not even understand the ether Einstein was talking about and never made a connection. 't Hoofd nobel physics winner is working on an ether again, one of the few. I know what I'm talking about I had general relativity in university. Time to take our heads out of the potential ether and look at the interaction of electromagnetics with a real motional ether. Just like Tesla did.

And Maxwell. He shut the door even more by not modelling the scalar wave, the shock wave, the longitudional wave in electromagnetism.

The Maxwell wave can only exist in our earth field close to the planet where the ether is opened up like a lcd panel because of the electrostatic field between the earth and the ionosphere. In deep space you can not see light. Only the unknown scalar wave exists there.

In this interview Armstrong clearly states you can not see the stars in space without the use of optics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRJumTrie8c

[Sputins]

Gold

Super Natural Power of Music interview:

1:52:36 – “Gold is one of the few metals that has direct electrical contact to the Aether”.

“That’s why it’s used in electrical contacts. It’s hard to reach a situation where it doesn’t have a surface conductivity, it will not form an oxide to block off electrical contact to the environment. This suggests its use with some kind of antenna surface”.

Looks like the capacitive reflection terminal should be gold plated? Hmmm.

[BroMikey]

Einstein bashing

Einstein was credited with many other inventors work and he was a yes man.

Science today has reached way beyond that. If the media is going to lie about those things, how are we to know what is true or false about the man.

The old guy did his best and if he got out of line the big wigs would threaten him, drug him or you name it.

The real world is something most of the people who think they know so much, have no idea. It is some kind of fantasy world where everyone in charge is Mr Clean and looking out for everyone in the world to see the truth gets first place.

You may know many terms, but the real world is far different.

I hope you do not take this the wrong way, it is just the plain truth.

I have one more word "Indoctrination" Just like at the witch trial centuries ago people thought they knew.

This is how I see higher learning with it's lopsided dogma. The truth is many captive scientist don't like it either but they are told what to say and think, then books are written about the dogma and you read it as if it were the absolute finite only truth.

If you are a professor or high up, this message is for you.


Mike

[dR-Green]

I finally have apparatus to measure the current through the primary coil. I already know the secondary isn't tuned optimally, but with the meter I can also see that maximum current (and presumably voltage) through the primary doesn't necessarily mean highest Telluric output, because while the primary can be pushed up to nearly 1 amp (through adjusting the primary capacitance), best output is in fact at around 500mA input. So there are tuning adjustments to be made. Unfortunately the same meter isn't suitable for measuring the output of the secondary to earth because the range is too high and it doesn't respond at all, so that calls for more ebaying.



On the subject of dark spots in fluorescent tubes, a similar thing can be seen along the same axis as the wire winding on/around the extra coil, in other words the section of the tube that is closest to the coil or terminal. It would seem at first that the metal on the ends of the tube are helping each end to light and so leaving a darker spot in the middle, but when the tube is moved the dark spot always stays centred or aligned with the extra coil or capacitance mast, NOT relative to the tube itself, which shouldn't be the case if the effect was caused due to the metal on the ends. The tube is held relatively far away from the terminal to exaggerate the effect for purposes of taking a picture of it, taking it closer makes the dark band narrower and the surrounding areas brighter.

[Tenaus]

I suggest for those interested in picking up a copy or going to the local library and checking out Lee Smolins' "The trouble with Physics"

YES! That book is one of the best books I know that tackles the problems in science without resorting to any sort of bashing or baseless claims. It correctly identifies problems with the hierarchy of academia, among other things, without resorting to conspiracy theories or the like.

Eric has a gift for the hands on approach and is very intuitive, I wish him the best and hope that he's able to fully develop the mathematics of his theories. Just don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, just because my background is in physics doesn't make me the bad guy. I know Erics not aware of everything that goes on, but there was a very nice mathematics professor here a couple yrs ago that took it upon himself to sort and organize Erics writings into a 'book' I helped as time allowed, I don't think it was ever finished as we ran into discrepancies and un-defined operations. Not wanting to assume anything it was left, I know Eric wanted more info on counter-space algebra so possibly that is being used to finish the work.

That is the main problem with Eric. He seems to have a good basis of electromagnetism. He knows how to make circuits that do what he wants them to do. But he doesn't know how to elucidate that. In other words, it's hard for him to explain what he does in a concise manner. Hence, his theory seems flawed and incoherent, and the scientists dismiss it as pseudoscience.

[Atlas]

Wondering how many of us are aware of the work of Joseph Campbell, especially his Creative Mythology volume. Something to check out- and something Eric might want to read if he hasn't.


I'd also suggest Thunderbolts.org as a secondary resource with regards to Einstein bashing. Its allot of fun.

[dR-Green]

esoteric
adjective
1. understood by or meant for only the select few who have special knowledge or interest; recondite: poetry full of esoteric allusions.
2. belonging to the select few.
3. private; secret; confidential.
4. (of a philosophical doctrine or the like) intended to be revealed only to the initiates of a group: the esoteric doctrines of Pythagoras.

[madhatter]

Although I am not familiar with the paper you mentioned, I'm sure when Eric is speaking of "versors" he isn't talking about the actual versors, which were used in the late 19th century and were an algebraic form of quanternions, which aren't used today in any respect (or used in electromagnetism, for that matter). Instead, Eric is once again confused by terms and definitions. He is actually talking about Phasors, a method which Steinmetz pioneered and a method still used often today. With all Eric's praise of Steinmetz, one would think he would realize what we call this math.

Eric has made the same mistake with his definition of dielectric. Since before Maxwell, we've defined generally a dielectric as "a material which is easily polarized by an electric field". Eric, however, only listens to Steinmetz and thinks the dielectric is what modern physics calls the electric field. In fact he is so bigoted about this belief he ignores Heaviside's, Maxwell's, Tesla's, and other's use of electric field, most of whom made much greater contributions to electromagnetism in theory than Steinmetz.

Furthermore, Eric continually mystifies himself when he goes no farther than what seems to be high school text books to learn what modern physics teaches. He purports that contemporaries believe that all electricity is in the electron and such. He fails to make any actual reading of real electromagnetism in today's scientific literature. If he did, he would understand that nearly everything he is talking about is covered under transmission line theory. He would understand that the electron explanation is mostly used to explain electronics to simple high school students.

This is a large part of Eric's problem, in that he continually makes bigoted statements against modern science as if his studies are undisputed fact, but he never goes on with any corroborative evidence of these supposed facts, instead he treats them as axioms. Thus any remnant of science is lost since he fails to make any measurement, give data, or use anything within physical reality to prove the assertions which are pivotal to the type of work he is doing.

Additionally, he never gives any derivation of any form of equations equivalent to Maxwell's. I wouldn't care if they were in vectors or quaternions, but he needs to show how his math is equivalent to the Maxwell's math, otherwise he is doing just as Tesla warned: wandering through equation after equation, and eventually building a structure which has nothing to do with reality.

I wouldn't agree with such a romanticized idea of the forum. I think Eric, and the people working with him have good intentions. They are just swamped by mistakes that would leave Tesla rolling in his grave. xD

This is hardly a rebuttal to his post. You do nothing to add to the discussion.

Spot on.

I've been watching and contributing here for a couple yrs, mostly in the background quietly. I've seen many arguments and heated debates over nonsense, I've also seen intelligent questions and concerns ignored. I'm not going to get in the way of anyone wanting to pursue what they think may lead to some new discovery, some do learn from this, not all but a few. Advice and direction is offered and left for any who are interested.

Eric has said many times that he simply followed what was written down by Tesla in regards to duplicating the builds. As for the development of his other projects, they have many origins it seems. The CIG is fascinating but simple, I understand what he's after and this is ironic, I understand because a formal education in physics and mathematics has allowed me to put the puzzle together, though it wasn't easy esp since there is a massive lack of formal equations and explanations, these I had to figure and sort on my own. After building a small CIG rig and doing some testing it showed some interesting things, but scale and tuning is an issue. I also think that FTL may be easier to achieve with plasma.

I don't follow or understand why there is such extreme prejudice against E=MC^2, best I can figure is that the popsci explanation is taken at face value. The photon has no physical construct it's an energy field, there in lies the paradox. there isn't enough bandwidth to go into explanations on this or SR, GR, QCD or QM.

Practical applications of theories is based on the mathematics developed from observation and predictability. While one can build and design something that performs a specific function that does not preclude that it's unexplained by current the knowledge of physics, that requires doing all the aforementioned observation and experimentation with fully developed mathematics to support it. The we can take those sets and expand and build practical applications from them.

Lets take Tesla's Collorado notes, there he is doing experiments and recording the data and developing equations to design a practical application of his work. Another more modern reference is Farnsworth, read thru his patents, there is no eschewing of the established mathematics of physics, yet Farnsworth developed and expanded on his projects with the use quantum physics.

the beauty of science is that it's ever evolving based on observation and most importantly falsifiability. Recent data collected from improved equipment is laying out some new mysteries in the cosmos, the IBEX ribbon, the possibility of primordial b-mode gravitational waves. The more we look the less we know.

I suggest for those interested in picking up a copy or going to the local library and checking out Lee Smolins' "The trouble with Physics"

Eric has a gift for the hands on approach and is very intuitive, I wish him the best and hope that he's able to fully develop the mathematics of his theories. Just don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, just because my background is in physics doesn't make me the bad guy. I know Erics not aware of everything that goes on, but there was a very nice mathematics professor here a couple yrs ago that took it upon himself to sort and organize Erics writings into a 'book' I helped as time allowed, I don't think it was ever finished as we ran into discrepancies and un-defined operations. Not wanting to assume anything it was left, I know Eric wanted more info on counter-space algebra so possibly that is being used to finish the work.

I looked at that as well as quaternions, lots of missing pieces. In a simplified nutshell the BIG problem goes back to the photon and electron, they are not classical constructs, they are energy probability fields, any guess on how that is modeled mathematically? For now we break it down to keep it manageable, I'd love to see or develop a way to handle it without dealing with HUP.

Thanks for the bandwidth,

[jahnroeser]

As an irony, even his "versor operator" conception is a ripoff! It looks like he either stole the idea from August Hund and his obscure "Bi-symbolische Gleichungen und deren Berwendung in der Elektrtechnik", in German only, or is late to the party.

Hi Mr Upgradd

Thank you for the Reference to August Hund's Paper, It looks very interesting. However you are not correct in what you say. Hund at the beginning of this Paper explains his Method was first suggested by Dr. C. P. Steinmetz. Eric Dollard has clearly said many times his „Versor Operators” are the Steinmetz Method.

I do not understand what is the problem with Eric Dollards latest interview. It is not secret, that he is a religious man. And you all wonder, that he attempts to apply engineering methods to his Belief?

If more people did this, we would have many fewer problems.

[Tenaus]

snip

So you're saying that all the nonsense about music creating another dimension through the aether, and carrying your mind into counterspace is all simply acoustics?

[Tenaus]

As an irony, even his "versor operator" conception is a ripoff! It looks like he either stole the idea from August Hund and his obscure "Bi-symbolische Gleichungen und deren Berwendung in der Elektrtechnik", in German only, or is late to the party.

Although I am not familiar with the paper you mentioned, I'm sure when Eric is speaking of "versors" he isn't talking about the actual versors, which were used in the late 19th century and were an algebraic form of quanternions, which aren't used today in any respect (or used in electromagnetism, for that matter). Instead, Eric is once again confused by terms and definitions. He is actually talking about Phasors, a method which Steinmetz pioneered and a method still used often today. With all Eric's praise of Steinmetz, one would think he would realize what we call this math.

Eric has made the same mistake with his definition of dielectric. Since before Maxwell, we've defined generally a dielectric as "a material which is easily polarized by an electric field". Eric, however, only listens to Steinmetz and thinks the dielectric is what modern physics calls the electric field. In fact he is so bigoted about this belief he ignores Heaviside's, Maxwell's, Tesla's, and other's use of electric field, most of whom made much greater contributions to electromagnetism in theory than Steinmetz.

Furthermore, Eric continually mystifies himself when he goes no farther than what seems to be high school text books to learn what modern physics teaches. He purports that contemporaries believe that all electricity is in the electron and such. He fails to make any actual reading of real electromagnetism in today's scientific literature. If he did, he would understand that nearly everything he is talking about is covered under transmission line theory. He would understand that the electron explanation is mostly used to explain electronics to simple high school students.

All in all I have seen nothing from EPD or his associates that makes conventional science "obsolete" or even remotely wrong.

This is a large part of Eric's problem, in that he continually makes bigoted statements against modern science as if his studies are undisputed fact, but he never goes on with any corroborative evidence of these supposed facts, instead he treats them as axioms. Thus any remnant of science is lost since he fails to make any measurement, give data, or use anything within physical reality to prove the assertions which are pivotal to the type of work he is doing.

Additionally, he never gives any derivation of any form of equations equivalent to Maxwell's. I wouldn't care if they were in vectors or quaternions, but he needs to show how his math is equivalent to the Maxwell's math, otherwise he is doing just as Tesla warned: wandering through equation after equation, and eventually building a structure which has nothing to do with reality.

I feel like this forum is the apitimy of Medieval Europe, in the time before Charlemagne's reign and the succeeding High Medieval period, filled only with dogma and ignorance. The holy trinity of this fiefdom are P.L., A.M. and E.P.D., lords whom the peasantry serve by buying their inane intellectual products and who's misguided views they devoutly protect.

I wouldn't agree with such a romanticized idea of the forum. I think Eric, and the people working with him have good intentions. They are just swamped by mistakes that would leave Tesla rolling in his grave. xD

Hi upgradd

Let's hear your version of the depths of understanding of all existence.

I am all ears.

Mike

This is hardly a rebuttal to his post. You do nothing to add to the discussion.

[BroMikey]

Reptor Critters

Eric Dollard and EPD Labs has determined that David Wittekind, Rayam Azab Youssef aka Ray Savant aka Mohamed Youssef aka Techzombie, Tom Brown, and recently discovered individuals are definitely not independent operators. This is a definite organization.

Now that I have become successful, the reptile will rear its head in public so watch its face.

73 DE N6KPH

Thanks for the heads up T-rex

Mike

[BroMikey]

Let's here your deep wisdom

I wish I could give you a +1 up-vote for your post!

Seems the only science around here is dogma and repression of orthodox information.

As an irony, even his "versor operator" conception is a ripoff! It looks like he either stole the idea from August Hund and his obscure "Bi-symbolische Gleichungen und deren Berwendung in der Elektrtechnik", in German only, or is late to the party.

All in all I have seen nothing from EPD or his associates that makes conventional science "obsolete" or even remotely wrong.

I feel like this forum is the apitimy of Medieval Europe, in the time before Charlemagne's reign and the succeeding High Medieval period, filled only with dogma and ignorance. The holy trinity of this fiefdom are P.L., A.M. and E.P.D., lords whom the peasantry serve by buying their inane intellectual products and who's misguided views they devoutly protect.

Hi upgradd

Let's hear your version of the depths of understanding of all existence.

I am all ears.

Mike