Eric Dollard

[Sputins]

Extracoils

Excellent work Sputins, very good job of demonstrating some of the effects. Nice output too. Have you tried extra coils yet?

Thanks for that dR Green.

I have built a couple of extra coils, each with different wire, wire lengths, spacing or some other variable. Once I find the one I’m happy with together with its terminal capacitance, I’ll duplicate it for the second (image) or receiving coil. So the answer is yeah but only for one coil thus far, not both together at the same time at the moment. The Extra coil does add to the output. I do look forward to having the two extra coils in place. I could try two different extra coils on each coil and attempt to tune to the same frequency by adjusting the top terminal capacitance. – Something I could try fairly soon.

The method of construction on the extra coils is I’ve been using half inch Teflon rod or wooden dowel as the spokes (salvaged Teflon rod, or baked wood dowel at 105C for several hours). The wire is space wound with the nearest desired diameter of fishing line. Then the windings, wire and fishing line against the Teflon or wood are painted with several coats of polyurethane. Once dry the fishing line is carefully removed and the wire holds its position, (hopefully, most of the time).

Here’s a little discovery tip: On some other trial builds the use of a white or clear ‘Silicon Tape’ is used between the spokes and the wire. This silicon tape acts as a nice ‘roadbed’ for the wire. As it has some springiness, spongy quality to it, as well as a good insulator. It provides some tension and helps hold the wire in its location when space wound, polyurethane is then not required, neither is cutting slots – Likely this is the standard method I’ll use in future.


As push-pull transmitters are difficult to impedance match (Pi-networks not recommended or used for push pull). I’ve also been working on an add-on module for my existing single ended transmitter, as I have an 833a tube and its filament transformer to extract out of an old sparking VTTC I made years ago.. Then I can use a beefed up Pi-network to Z match.

This and some sort of modulation would be nice.

[orgonaut314]

The discussion on displacement current made me look into Erics work on the electromagnetic energy. It left me with much questions however.

In short Eric takes the product of the electrical and magnetic field. Normally the cross product is the poynting vector.

Eric says the inproduct is a vector too. So when electric and magnetic flux are in the samer direction there is a longitudional vector.

However to say that the inproduct is a vector is true in 4 dimensional versor calculation only if the scalar part of the versor is not zero. So i understand that Eric says the electric and magnetic field is a 4d versor field with a non zero scalar part. From that It might be that all the transversal and longitudional products follow that make the transversal and longitudional waves and scalair fields.

But it is a big asumption that the electric field is a versor 4d field and it sounds like space counter space but Eric is not explicit about it.

If he uses versors to do 3d calculations than the scalar part should be set to zero but than there is no longitudional vector product only a scalar product.

This all has me in a loop of almost understanding and thinking this is not correct but I might miss something. After several weeks I decided to write this down maybe someone understands?

[t-rex]

Versors in Space

In response to the previous post, my mathematical expressions for Versors in Space appears at the end of my paper titled "Theory of Wireless Power". Refer to this for more information. A complex product in space has four components:
1) Scalar Product
2) Line Product
3) Clockwise cross-product
4) Counter clockwise cross-product
For complete information on my derivations of these ideas refer to the paper titled, "The Principals of the Algebra of Physics" by Alexander McFarlane.

I will be able to see the internet for another week or so giving the rare opportunity to ask me questions.
My main interest is the Cosmic Ray Detector.

73 DE N6KPH

[7redorbs]

re: Cosmic Ray Detector Faster than Light & Other Controversial Contrivances

Hi Eric,

Thank you for all the work you have shown us all so far. Due to personal circumstances I only recently received your letter and postcard dated July 2013, thank you. I appreciated it a lot and it is my regret that I have not written to you directly in so long but as a lot has been going on and I have only just received it.

I have come to prefer writing on paper as opposed to the internets and apologise for not writing sooner but I thought that after your previous kind and generous explanations of things in the interviews I had the rare privilege and pleasure to do with you in 2013 and 2014 that I should post some follow up questions of things that we perhaps didn't get round to fully covering last time. Although I don't think I ever mentioned it your work has really saved my life, in more than several ways, and at the very least saved me from a life of meaningless hypocrisy. I did not think I would ever be able to thank you enough, but after working on the earthquake fundraiser with Aaron and yourself it became clear to me that you really had finally managed to get a project alive again, like your previous Landers installation, and it was really working this time round, with a lab. I have for the most part the last few years been really upset by some people's reaction to your antirelativity lectures. It really had a lot more information to provide on radio than a lot of people realised or would have liked to admit. I mean if electricity travels without a velocity Eric, the discovery is mind blowing! There is a lot of theoretical physics that probably supports infinite speed of an electron! Trained physicists joke that one or two electron is "probably enough for the universe!" - if they move in an out of time! That is a cool trick, I wonder if the second law of thermal dynamics considers this sort of applications. I think not.

For a long time I have been interested in the nomenclature of the "Ray", specifically the "Cosmic Ray" described by Tesla. Isn't it true that Tesla said that atoms themselves consisted of something more akin to "streams of rays" as opposed to particles like electrons and protons. Could it really be as you (and Tesla) suggest? Quantum physicists and relativists really lost the way - and to an avid researcher - tesla warns of this - repeatedly.

Not only that he provided claims but those claims asserted he had not only obtained evidence, but constructed elaborate ray detectors to achieve such a thing. For instance, Tesla briefly mentions he measured the cosmic rays from Antares, more than several times, to be of a velocity which was 50C or 50 times the speed of light. As presented by Tesla such a statement seemingly disproves relativity in one fail swoop, what happened to that? really? Tesla was ignored?

The same with Wheatstone? He constructed what seems to be a perfectly good test using a split or segmented transmission line to obtain the speed of the electrostatic discharge which he gave to be approximately 281,000 miles per second. Is Einstein and both Wheatstone incorrect if the velocity is infinite? I think often (and for a long time) people have tried (and failed) to measure electricity, physicists and electricians like Wheatstone have contrived ways to measure and predict electrons, but I am not convinced whether physicists or electricians of today understand what causes them. Tesla believed an external kinetic means caused the activity of some atoms. What are your thoughts on this Eric? For instance we know Tesla believed atomic activity were concerned with something he described as "streams" or "streams of rays", we know that radioactivity could be halted in atoms according to tesla. In the modern traditional sense we've only just started to find out about the influence that suns have on the background radioactive decay of isotopes - the results seem compelling enough to show that Tesla may have been right all along - radioactive decay could be caused by external means, such as the emissions from our local star and other stars. What are your thoughts about this Eric?

Can the cosmic ray detector help end this speculation? I think so, but it would be nice to hear what you think about obtaining the velocity of a cosmic ray with detectors.

For instance, When I've asked around on forums and on the internet, not many people are forthcoming with an answer, of course physicists (the enemy) always have an opinion on "FTL" - it's impossible to them - just like God - because the 2nd law of thermal dynamics needs no god to create matter, right?! What do we know really? IS it possible that matter could be created by an external force? At least according to Tesla radio activity of dense metals alpha and beta and gamma rays was being caused by external means. !!!! I believe Tesla even suggested there was something other than "matter" which seemed to give certain properties to matter, such as the emission of light or alpha beta and gamma rays.

Well, so I'm told, "neither electrons or neutrinos" are capable of what Tesla described in a modern sense. I think the question arises, naturally, how Tesla may have measured such a velocity. But having talked with Eric in some detail about this before it has been suggested that Tesla provided no apparatus or technical detail as to detect cosmic rays. That really is a shame, but it is exciting to have had Eric and see some engineers construct! I wish more were involved.

Another question specifically concerning the individual detecting of waves from specific stars , such as Antares, previously suggested in rare hints by Tesla. Would this alone completely disprove relativity by the obtained velocities measured? Can this be done? It is my hope that such a thing would work a long way to exonerate both your own and Tesla's claims. It seems you've probably achieved some interesting effects already which "only transmission linesman can explain" and "only transmission line deal with". Is it true to say that the explanation of electricity and it's behaviour from an linesman or engineer is very different to that of a theoretical physicist?!

Briefly and perhaps not loudly enough I had briefly suggested previously to Mr. Dawson and others that the detection of specific rays from a specific location, such as Antares could work to measure to obtain and detect these theoretical cosmic rays, and make them "less theory". However from what I understand a single device is so far unable to provide a velocity of a cosmic ray to exceed that of light. Would two in tandem as I have described provide such a benefit of providing a velocity of the ray? Would such a possibility be obtainable?

I have been thinking that I think it would be a learned opportunity for some enterprising people to construct several cosmic ray detectors in tandem at different points of the earth, and, each Cosmic ray detector be focused on a specific star or `individualised` to a particular ray. (that is to only detect specific ray emissions from a specific location) along with an radioactive isotope and geiger counter - is this even possible or worthwhile?

Presumably if one is able to detect a single cosmic ray electrically with the apparatus you have so kindly provided diagrammatics for, which some people have already replicated, then with the addition of a second point of reference and cosmic ray detectors do you think it would be possible to obtain a velocity of the cosmic ray or additional novel information about the activity of our local sun and other stars? Do you think the CRD could be adapted to obtain the velocity of Marconi's MLFTA propagations?

Eric you have mentioned before that the propagation of electricity `does not have a velocity`, in the strictest sense are you to mean that the tesla electrical system, that is to say the transmitter and receiver could in certain scenarios appear to act in tandem in some sense whereby `electrons`, or rather electricity disapears at one end, whilst electricity arrives at the other. Such a scenario was described by Einstein as a paradox, impossibly he said for instance; if one were to trigger with a switch which would cause a boxing glove to come out and hit the person just before they touched the trigger, and preventing them from reaching it to begin with, what happens? This is an interesting and compelling question, as what both you and Tesla claim distinctly is that in certain rare cases effects can be known to precede the cause. Can you elaborate on the algebraic method that you used to show this? I believe you use a 4 quadrant theory to explain such a possibility. Was einstein wrong about the paradox? What would happen in such a strange scenario that effects would precede their cause? Is this not a time machine in the grandest sense of the word , a time radio.

In the case of the Tesla Magnifier I have been wondering was the objective to overcome distance resistance? Is this even possible? It surely would be a holy grail!


Tesla's Wardenclyffe transmitter appears to have two wave forms, overground and underground - one is interacting with the ground of the earth and the other the ionospheric `ether`. Can you elaborate further about how Tesla might have extended the planetary grid to become an interplanetary grid? It was a bold claim and if possible really represents more than just an "Electrical stonehenge" as you called the Bolinas station which partially featured some of this Tesla technology. What is happening with Bolinas now anyway? Commonweal, greenpeace , the local municipalities, national park etc? Shouldn't this sort of site be a museum? Why does it seem that physicists, electricians and beurocrats would see this die? Is it ignorance or something more nefarious? Human stupidity, or does someone not like the idea of buildings falling down, the earth splitting in two and tanks getting blown up at a distance. heh, you'd think it was all out of a James Bond film, but waht is probably more likely, everything out of a James bond Film is straight out of Tesla's 19th and 20th century writings! right?


I've been wondering did Tesla plan to use the earth ground as a means of instantaneous point to point transmission? From everything I've read and everything Tesla said this looks to be what Tesla was claiming. IS it really possible to move thousands or possibly millions of horsepower between locations without distance resistance existing in between?

and is there an specific algebraic construct available for reference of this possibility. I apologise as time and money has been sparing of late that I have not been able to keep up with all of the new activity you are engaged in which I am sure no doubt is far less out of date than my own conceptions.

Of course, if speeds were to exceed that of light then would not the potential energy would be rather phenomenal? from what I understand about nuclear physics, and from reading about Nikola Tesla's ideas in newspapers and article clippings, it becomes apparent that Tesla did not believe that radioactivity is caused internally by the arrangement of protons and electrons and neutral particles, i.e. not a function of density, but believed that something akin to an external cosmic ray caused the dense matter to become unstable . In such a case then the electron rotation of any electrolyte, and any resultant potential between any anode and cathode, could be caused by external means, which would of course be interesting because that would itself mean that the motion of all chemicals 'electrons and protons' could arbitrarily be powered by external means. Could this what Farnsworth was doing with his tubes? The possibility of a new order of inter-action perhaps as significant as Thomson and Rutherford initial findings?

[7redorbs]

part 2

If the above were the case then would this not mean that any household battery relies on cosmic rays for the acid to peal away the moving 'electrons' of the zinc or iron? Tesla spoke specifically about radioactivity being "turned off" by the proper isolating of cosmic rays from a sample of radium? IS this possible and presumably if it were, would this be done by some electrical means, or by the deflection of cosmic rays? Cosmic ray deflector, well at least it rhymes I suppose. Maybe it would be worthwhile to build such a deflector in the case that a cosmic ray was detected at 50C with the CRD. It would certainly explain well the reason why the denser the metal then the more likely it was to interact with these Faster than light "Cosmic Rays", there are less gaps in the "diffraction grating" such FTL particles are passing thru.

I suppose what I'm saying is, would it be possible to get two cosmic ray detectors running in tandem , to test this, both individualised to a specific cosmic ray from a specific star to obtain a delta (or distance traversed thru a straight line or curved route), a round robin, which would essentially be usable for obtaining the "real" velocity of a cosmic ray between detectors "A" and "B", with a known distance 'd' and a known period of time 't', would it be possible to obtain a velocity detected faster
than light? Presumably now some people have listened to Eric and constructed some CRD, could this be a next step, and help tell us something about the means by which Tesla intended to develop velocities between 50 and infinite times the speed of light?

Are we mistaken to think that Tesla claimed he could transfer power and communications "regardless of resistance distance"? resistance? Can you elaborate a little bit more about that, perhaps most of all for everyone else who might not understand why overcoming distance would be as significant as the discovery of fire, both for the transfer of intelligence and the human extension of power for an interplanetary civilisations? Did I go too far? Wasn't this what Tesla envisaged? Would appear on the front covers of 19th and 20th century newspapers with titles like "Free Energy, coming soon". What ever happened?


Was it ever really possible? Were the coming world wars 1 and 2 an influence on why the Marconi MLFTA disappeared into RCA's hands? Do you think that it is significant that Marconi built the Tesla system, and neither the man that built it (Marconi) or the man that invented it (Tesla) had control over it post 1917. I know many times Tesla recommended that electrical inventions be in control of the government and military; because of all the
significant over exaggeration of inventors and electricians in the day, but isn't it true the friendly government military RCA company also worked great harm into the advance of radio and wireless as a whole, for instance by obstructing FM Yankee radio, non satellite mobile-commercial communications, and the longitudinal system of Tesla? Is it fair to say that companies like Marconi, RCA and Edison Electric didn't like competition from others and tended to stamp it out - regardless of whether it was far superior or could be for the benefit of civilisation. again - did Commercial greed and human ignorance outweigh human competence, right? We've lost our Victorian engineers!

Is this really the world we find ourselves living in? Many signs point to yes. Much practical and mathematical data has been provided by you Eric and I would like to thank you for continuing on the difficult and hazardous work of challenging the convention of the scientific religion. That of the electron, the neutron star, and dense metals - all wrong? Where did scientists go wrong?

Concerning the problem of relativity, or should I say regarding "anti relativity". Tesla was not the only enemy of Einstein. Schroedinger and Heisenberg were causing quite a mess as well for it!

Tesla tough, was making claims about systems which he claimed operated like quantum physicists "entangled particles". Tesla was talking about faster than light waves, before quantum physicists like Schroedinger and Heisenberg started to suggest them at Copenhagen. Where "Einstein failed to convince". Tesla was not the only one trying to defeat the tenet of light speed velocity. Apparently nearly all "modern" physicists today say "its okay for electrons to travel faster than light" and thru the dimension of time, apparently that's quite conventional for Q physics, its just been claimed that such a faster than light or instantaneous spooky action at a distance cannot carry data. Is this baloney? I believe Tesla and you would think the physicists were "marching off" performing experiment after experiment and leading themselves from one invention to another, without actually caring to be critical what it is they are treating. Even Thomson himself is a good example of this because it took Rutherford to replace the broken plumb pudding with an electron! But it didn't stop Thomson invented a vacuum tube that worked, though, right?!


So, could it be that Tesla was so far ahead of his time that he pre-discovered a way to use quantum entanglement to achieve an infinite velocity of a travelling wave. Also, as this has been bugging me severely, is it true to say that the surface area or width of a longitudinal wave "envelope" is so infinitely small, that it's "amplitude" or "length" must be infinitely long in order to satisfy the principle of energy to mass ratio' of Einstein, that is to say if energy was locked up tight in a beam so focused and confined that, it's effective amplitude and distance resistance would have to be proportional to the width , surface area and density of the beam?


Tesla occasionally said in his "true wireless" document when comparing his radio system to that of the Hertzian one to be "Billions of times inferior", is that because of this principle of "punching thru" by the arrangement of dimensional wave envelopes .

As you've suggested before, is it fair to say that the wave of Nikola Tesla is something different. For instance you once mentioned that it was the "time" period of which energy was released which determined power (i.e. energy is not equivalent to power), similarly you said that it was not about the "speed" of the velocity but the proportion of energy to mass, in your old SBARC lecture, is that still relevant? Sorry for such a long letter, it has been some time that I have written to you Eric but appreciate everything you have done with the Earthquake project, it has been a real eye opener at what can be done with new types of theoretical waves, and detectors to confirm it!

Thanks for everything you have done, and the rare privilege and pleasure of being able to put to you some of my questions, and I am glad that they are hopefully about what most excites you . the CRD. and "Ray" of Tesla.

On a slight side note there had been some discussion elsewhere that "Tesla's X - ray " system was completely harmless, completely. Really? Do you think you can help elaborate on the difference between reflected and direct x rays?

It is with thanks to dr-green for providing this information yesterday on another group. Is the social and commercial situation, just like you say Eric, are we really being irradiated unnecessarily not just by medical x-ray equipment but radio equipment too? Have you seen the upcoming 5G microwave telecommunications masts? Do you think it's safe? Worse or better than 3 and 4G? What about the phone emissions themselves as opposed to the masts? Presumably 4G being 100Mhz, 5G will be even greater in freq.

It's such high frequency you can download a dvd film in a few seconds, to think its trillions of billions of bytes per second! It's literally "thousands of times faster", surely the mobile phone companies have tested the microwave emissions over the last 30 years? I fear not. But from what I understand from you and Tesla's work the world could have been a far friendlier and happier place had not human greed and ignorance created this paradise lost, and isn't it a shame too? A world at war over nothing really significant, but such things as overcoming distance resistance, is a frightening weapon of possibility is it not, just as much as it is that of peace. Perhaps you are right , transmitting power wirelessly may not be a good idea, but in the right hands surely will it not build the technology for a new Babylon? All I can say is I hope to one day see it benefit society the way tesla intended, and although all the human resistance against what it is you are doing Eric, I know it in my heart, philosophically that what you are doing is meaningful and worthwhile, and while it may not be accepted by academics today, this work of teslas and yours may bring about a change in nuclear and atomic physics to bring about very real change.

Thank you sir for everything you are doing and all that you have endured, I have seen you experience some of it, and I can say with certainty more than numerous people like me are still here to help in any way we can to see you succeed in your endeavours of anti relativity. Lastly, and my apologies for asking so much, have you heard of the Catt Anomaly (too much electricity on a conductor and a problem finding where it comes from?) If not then I highly recommend the reading, it is very reminiscent of the things you have pointed out and if you have heard of it I would be very excited to hear your thoughts on conductors orientation to the planetary axis, I think this is how Marconi built his station, wasnt it?

be well! All the best


Best Wishes,
Adam



PS: If it would be all right and if Eric can respond to any of these questions in my letter at all, I would very much like to repost Eric's response to The Tesla Society (UK) for editorial. Would this be OK?

[Sputins]

CRD Progress & testing

G’day Eric,

I hope your eye injury is healing okay.

As far as I am aware there is only David Dawson and myself who have attempted to construct the Cosmic Ray Detector (CRD).

My efforts are shown on its own sub-channel here:http://www.energeticforum.com/eric-d...ad.php?t=19697
So there it follows my build progresses and includes datasheets and spectral graphs etc. Further updates to come.

The HV DC (10Kv) section is not yet installed, however it is constructed and will be mounted in the power supply housing soon. I’m at the stage using the test fire circuit of determining the minimum amount of capacitance needed (at my 190v DC supply voltage) to trigger the 0A4G. Currently the 1uF cap isn’t enough, (assuming my circuit is working correctly) but it does alter the corona slightly on the 0A4G when test button is pressed. So it’s working it seems, but not quite there yet..

Pictures show the overall setup, the power supply, the CRD main housing and circuit and the 1P40 Phototube. (The Phototube either mounted directly, or via an extension lead). Photo shows the 0A4G all a-glow, a lovely corona on it.





Below: As I don’t have the Bell Telephone ringer, I’ve committed heresy and used a double pole relay and an annoying electronic buzzer instead. - Although the silver coated terminal posts on the relay may hold up to the arcs better?



More work and likely further modifications are needed, but this version of the CRD is close to working, hopefully…

[Sputins]

CRD Questions:

So some questions cornering your Cosmic Ray Detector:



Q1 - Why did you select or suggest the Phototube GL930 (or IP40) to detect the Cosmic Rays? The GL930/IP40 is an S1 spectral response and the graph shows a spike in sensitivity at around 3750 Angstroms and the graph does not show a plot below 3500, but if the line is projected down it looks as if it begins at around 3000 Angstroms. So this is the UV light spectrum. – Closest to Cosmic Ray wavelength? - The GL929 (or IP39), with a S4 spectral response may be an alternative. – The 929 is hard to find and very expensive if found. (Phototubes are somewhat of a mystery to most people including myself, so research was needed here).

Q2 - Should the Phototube itself be shielded with a shroud of some material to prevent false indications from ordinary UV light? So the only the Cosmic Rays pass through the shielding and trigger it, but any UV light does not pass through?

Q3 - It is speculated by some that as the Earth’s Magnetic Field weakens, (which it is doing so faster and faster apparently), the Cosmic Rays will spike in their intensity... Is this one factor in the importance of this detector? What are your deeper thoughts or purposes for this device, (because there’s always more than one reason or angle)!

Q4 - Is there a difference between ‘Tesla’s Cosmic Rays’ and what scientists of today call Cosmic Rays? - (Akin to Tesla’s Primary X-Rays and today’s X-rays)?

Sputins

[orgonaut314]

In response to the previous post, my mathematical expressions for Versors in Space appears at the end of my paper titled "Theory of Wireless Power". Refer to this for more information. A complex product in space has four components:
1) Scalar Product
2) Line Product
3) Clockwise cross-product
4) Counter clockwise cross-product
For complete information on my derivations of these ideas refer to the paper titled, "The Principals of the Algebra of Physics" by Alexander McFarlane.

I will be able to see the internet for another week or so giving the rare opportunity to ask me questions.
My main interest is the Cosmic Ray Detector.

73 DE N6KPH

Thanks Eric. I got stuck somehow and while rereading "Theory of Wireless Power" I think I do not see the problems anymore
I see now you combine the two components of electromagnetic induction (longitudional and transversal) with the two components of the dielectric and magnetic field in a Tesla coil. That gives the quadrature of relations.
Sometimes I have to ask a stupid question to get further

[orgonaut314]

Another one. Does counterspace have something to do with dimensions? Or is it just a term that could be astral space or something?
Sometimes I get the idea that counterspace is an imaginairy dimension but to be honest Eric never said that. Is it the Einstein in my head ?

[t-rex]

Cosmic Ray Detector

My transmission capabilities are very limited at present, therefore my responses are also limited.

The Tesla Cosmic Ray is something unique. Another name for it is the Le Sage Particle, which is postulated to be the cause of Gravity.

These particles are the cause of radioactivity in matter, according to Tesla.

An alternative viewpoint is given in the book "Evolution of Matter", by Dr. G. Le-Bon. Both Tesla and Le-Bon theories are in opposition to the notions of Physics.

The purpose of the Photo Tube is to provide a Secondary Emission Surface. A Le Sage Particle strikes the Photo Cathode, dis-lodging an Electron. This creating a current to the trigger in the 0A4-G. (A Western Electric 313-C will also work, but it is radioactive).

It is my theory that this will detect a Cosmic Ray, a theory only. Some other means may work better; Tesla used Almagmated Metal Plates for this. This is why I recommended starting with a conventional G-M tube.

The Capacitor size to fire the 0A4-G is based upon Capacitance, C, times Potential, e, is Dielectric Induction.
Hence a 1000 pico-Farad condenser at 100 volts has the same "charge" as a 100 pico-Farad condenser at 1000 volts, 10 pF at 10 KV, 1 pF at 100 KV, and etc.

How much charge is required to fire an 0A4-G, 313-C, etc?
Find this out for me and make a graph of Capacitance vs Voltage to fire the tube.

Break,
More to follow:

73 DE N6KPH

[dR-Green]

Eric: I hope you're recovering well from the surgery, and it's nice to see you back! I have a question or two regarding the CRI if you don't mind, which I'll post shortly.

Sputins: Excellent tip with that silicon tape, should come in handy for all kinds of stuff. Bought a roll years ago I think after someone suggested something similar for experimental use but always forget I have it, so thanks for the reminder.

John: Sorry to hear about the bad news, hopefully you will get everything sorted and back to normal soon. Thanks for posting the infos.

[dR-Green]

This is a clip from a BBC program called "Nature's Weirdest Events". The point of the program is mainly in the fact that "weird natural events" are now captured on camera and put on the internet, when before the claims could be dismissed as the rantings of a lunatic.

This clip discusses lights in the sky in relation to earthquakes, the cause of which is said to be massive electrical currents/discharges produced by rock when it's under extreme pressure, such as is the case leading up to or after an earthquake, +/- up to 2 weeks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLHH7GqPiwA

Now if only someone could devise a system that responds to the electrical activity...

[Marcus Neuhof]

Eric,
It is good to hear you are recovering.

The post was lost in the server move, but another user had posted a very interesting question in a new thread on this forum.

The question was approximately this: the "double slit experiment" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double...dual_particles) shows that there is indeed a particle quality to the so-called electrons.

If "electrons" are the terminating ends of aether tubes, how is it possible for them to display this property?

[Aaron]

Eric Dollard update

Today, Eric and I recorded a 1 hour general update. Will post on YouTube soon.

[Aaron]

Eric Dollard 2015-01-20

Here is the new update from Eric Dollard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF3-NHhKGvA