Peter, whatever happened with Eric P. Dollard?

[Armagdn03]

The use of the term Planck is counter productive to your msg. The Planck as a ratio of energy to frequency of its wavelength is directly tied to to the constant C. Any hope of the Planck helping one find a way out is not going to happen as the Planck is defined by its relation to Einsteins quantum world.
Even Louis De Broglie is adamant about relativity and his work takes on such flavor.

WHAT???? Where did you find this? I believe the plank was described as the product of Phi and Psi, treating one as an "imaginary" number. (Which is in actuality adding a second dimension to "number line" algebra). Think UNIT CIRCLE.

Dewey B Larson was onto something, although also confused. This is the MATH OF ONE

[madhatter]

Heaviside; Adagio, Andante Alegro Moderato

The Aether is a genie in a bottle, it beckons your command. Tell her what you want her to be, and that she will become.

We start with the Faraday contigious particles, the Maxwell's cellular aggregates, Babbitt's Vortex Swirls, Tela's Gas, Heavisides Rotational Model of Variable mu and epsilon, and the blockheaded solid Aether theory. She is all, she is none. Einstein holds the cork in the bottle, the Quantum Mystic seeks a Pandora. What a choice.

My efforts in 6 months of writing here are directed to the practicing Electrical Engineer, not the Quantum Mystic. You were given the Planck as a way out of the Quantum Godess's trap. But she exudes such sweet honey. Engineers do not want Quarks in their capacitors.

Eric, If I may. The use of the term Planck is counter productive to your msg. The Planck as a ratio of energy to frequency of its wavelength is directly tied to to the constant C. Any hope of the Planck helping one find a way out is not going to happen as the Planck is defined by its relation to Einsteins quantum world.
Even Louis De Broglie is adamant about relativity and his work takes on such flavor.

There are some dogs that keep eating fecal matter no matter how many times they get kicked in the head. Steinmetz provided, among many other important concepts, three terms:

1. Magnetic Field
2. Dielectric Field
3. Electric Field

The Electric Field is not thet Dielectric Field, it is not interchangeable, the electric field is the Planck. But it is no use. The dog did it again.

Isn't the dielectric field the capacitance, is it a field or property of the permittivity?
Psi = Dielectric Induction. Wouldn't Psi then be of the electrostatic field and dielectric is a property of the capacitance and inducing capacitance from the electrostatic field is Psi?

would it be correct to define the electric field as the time variant field of current?

Please keep the Quark out of the condenser. There are "less delicate" ways of saying this from a rear end versor position. Capacitance is a metrical dimension, and so is inductance. They are dimensions of space separated by the dimension of time, no more than that, metrical dimensions.

Pounds per square inches as a Farad is obscene. Let us take a dynamical analog, my Corolla. It operates though 3 distinct forms:

1) The inductance, the body of the car

2) The capacitance, the tires of the car

3) The conductor, the road on which the car stands

And since the conductor has resistance, the electrons are that part of the road(the conductance) which wants to move with the tires(the dielectric).

The tires are capacitors, and are rated as such. Three factors present themselves:

1) The geometry of the tire

2) The pressure contained

3) The deflection through which the weight of the car pushes the wheel to the ground

The geometry is the capacitance of the tire 9x10 to 10 to the third centimeters cubed.

The pressure is the voltage of the tire, 44 P.S.I., voltage max rating.

The deflection is the charge or displacement in per c.m.

One way to make pounds per square inch capacitance is to say the pressure contained is the permittivity of the capacitor since the deflection is the result of the weight, or force of it, which then is the applied voltage.

Remember equating the Laws of Physics to the Laws of Electricity can be very misleading and is the principle cause for misunderstanding.

Break more to follow

[skaght]

Eric--This schematic (above) that you outline for the primary of the disruptive discharge circuit seems different than what I would expect. In order to maximize the longitudinal waves shouldn't the capacitors be in series, not in parallel as shown above? I kept scratching my head thinking about this, since based on your videos, I would think this circuit would maximize transverse waves. With the circuit as shown, does the capacitive coupling happen through L1 and the secondary to maximize longitudinal waves? I am planning on building this, and want to make sure I'm correct in my understanding. Thanks!

[Pinwheel]

Thanks for the "ad hominem" rebuttal - don't bother looking it up.

The facts, weather I'm a super douchey debbie-downer or not, remain: even the best and the brightest and educated on this forum don't get it. EPD is basically yelling upwind during a storm to a large audience. It would be more effective if he spoke downwind to a smaller audience. The money analogy was just to use as a comparison - besides the fact that HE HAS TO EAT. Because time is a resource, and subject the the same Adam Smith type laws of economics regarding resources.

If you really gave a fk about the perpetuation of the knowledge that EPD holds then you would also want to see the process happen in the best possible way - with respect to efficiency and effectiveness.

I am also of the opinion that this cult of positive thinking benefits only the status quo. It makes no allowance for valid dissent.

I also didn't say that it wouldn't be open - just selective. If I had 1 condo to rent out I wouldn't just rent it out to any Joe Schmoe that needed a place... because I value my own resources and respect them as an extension of myself. That's why there is credit checks and criminal checks.

The real fool wastes resources in whatever form they are. Trying to teach a resistant crowd of anonymous anybodies, who's only qualification to use up any of EPD's time(a resource) is that they have an interest and an Internet connection, is proving to be ineffective by any non-subjective standard.

Imagine if you had to put just a shred more effort in in order to learn. Imagine if you had to personally e-mail EPD with a specific question? AAAHHHHH!!!! nooooooooo! People who are truly busy don't even have the time for the frivolity that we actually have come to EXPECT from EPD. In my opinion, he shouldn't have time for half this nonsense. Money or no money.

[Pinwheel]

I get depressed almost every time I visit this thread.

Eric, I think aside from any sort of philanthropic-style good feelings that may be generated for yourself, it always seems to me as though you are... basically wasting your time at this place.

Kind of like playing classical piano at a hip-hop concert.

If one wanted to be try and be super unbiased about it, it seems as though, in terms of just amount of available hours in a day when compared to personal productivity, you would actually be better of utilizing a different method of propagating the old sciences.

I think something more effective, in terms of efficient distribution on your part - as well as effective reception, would be an on demand model. Meaning people seek you out to know what you know, rather than you preaching fire and brimstone to a pulpit of followers from a different church. I'm sure your transmissions aren't generating the financial support to justify even passing up casual employment.

Of course, it would be a horrible turn of events, in my opinion, if you were to just go away completely in the same way that Tesla is gone or Heaviside is gone. I just think that the ratio of your personal time spent vs effectiveness in understanding on the part of the recipient, would be more favorable if you were to do things via email and pay per download pdf's and snail mail.

Just thinking in terms of your time in the way that an investor thinks about his money - an investor has 24 million dollars and you have 24 hours. This place just gives me a "pearls before the swine" type of vibe. Life would be easier and more effective, I bet, if there was only contact between you and the non-swine that are here - like Dave and Raui and whoever else.

We could keep talking about numerology or whatever too - whatever floats people's boats. Maybe Harry Potter.

[john_g]

Re capacitor and charge, where is the charge, from 1892 Magnetism and Electricity:

Page 2

Cheers

John

[t-rex]

From "An Elementary Treatise on Electricity", by James Clerk Maxwell

[t-rex]

Continuing to Whip the Dead Horse

Heaviside; Adagio, Andante Alegro Moderato

The Aether is a genie in a bottle, it beckons your command. Tell her what you want her to be, and that she will become.

We start with the Faraday contigious particles, the Maxwell's cellular aggregates, Babbitt's Vortex Swirls, Tela's Gas, Heavisides Rotational Model of Variable mu and epsilon, and the blockheaded solid Aether theory. She is all, she is none. Einstein holds the cork in the bottle, the Quantum Mystic seeks a Pandora. What a choice.

My efforts in 6 months of writing here are directed to the practicing Electrical Engineer, not the Quantum Mystic. You were given the Planck as a way out of the Quantum Godess's trap. But she exudes such sweet honey. Engineers do not want Quarks in their capacitors.

There are some dogs that keep eating fecal matter no matter how many times they get kicked in the head. Steinmetz provided, among many other important concepts, three terms:

1. Magnetic Field
2. Dielectric Field
3. Electric Field

The Electric Field is not thet Dielectric Field, it is not interchangeable, the electric field is the Planck. But it is no use. The dog did it again.

Please keep the Quark out of the condenser. There are "less delicate" ways of saying this from a rear end versor position. Capacitance is a metrical dimension, and so is inductance. They are dimensions of space separated by the dimension of time, no more than that, metrical dimensions.

Pounds per square inches as a Farad is obscene. Let us take a dynamical analog, my Corolla. It operates though 3 distinct forms:

1) The inductance, the body of the car

2) The capacitance, the tires of the car

3) The conductor, the road on which the car stands

And since the conductor has resistance, the electrons are that part of the road(the conductance) which wants to move with the tires(the dielectric).

The tires are capacitors, and are rated as such. Three factors present themselves:

1) The geometry of the tire

2) The pressure contained

3) The deflection through which the weight of the car pushes the wheel to the ground

The geometry is the capacitance of the tire 9x10 to 10 to the third centimeters cubed.

The pressure is the voltage of the tire, 44 P.S.I., voltage max rating.

The deflection is the charge or displacement in per c.m.

One way to make pounds per square inch capacitance is to say the pressure contained is the permittivity of the capacitor since the deflection is the result of the weight, or force of it, which then is the applied voltage.

Remember equating the Laws of Physics to the Laws of Electricity can be very misleading and is the principle cause for misunderstanding.

Break more to follow

[Web000x]

Hi Eric,

Are we done with the Theory of Anti-Relativity?

I have been copy/pasting all your posts into a single document so I can read them in context, but I am not sure anymore where things begin and end.

Thanks.

Hey Amigo,

I transposed The Theory of Anti-Relativity for Eric. There were four chapters in that particular series. Here are the links to each chapter posted in this thread.

Chapter 1: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post167820

Chapter 2: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post168220

Chapter 2 Continued: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post168221

Chapter 3: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post168671

Chapter 4: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post169246

You can see the original scans here: Directory contents of /David/

Dave

[Kokomoj0]

I maintain the pounds per square inch has absolutely no relation to capacitance whatsoever, in the world of electrical engineers. Hence it is absurd. To quote E.H. Armstrong, "They substitute words for reality, and then talk about the words." This is what physics has done. In Electricity, the ideas og Goethe and Wilhelm Reich are much more in accord with electricity, and the formative forces in general. Newton was a materialist and his physics represents an impediment to the understanding of electricity. For those married to "Little Ball Bearings", this is why we have the Planck. Here you can have your beloved E equals mc squared which is so dear to your heart. So use it, don't heap capacitance and inductance with lead weights.

The Aether does not relate to the inertial laws of Newton, but the formative forces laws of Goethe.

73 DE N6KPH

I believe this is why

MIT Physics Demo -- Dissectible Capacitor - YouTube

[lamare]

I maintain the pounds per square inch has absolutely no relation to capacitance whatsoever, in the world of electrical engineers. Hence it is absurd. To quote E.H. Armstrong, "They substitute words for reality, and then talk about the words." This is what physics has done. In Electricity, the ideas og Goethe and Wilhelm Reich are much more in accord with electricity, and the formative forces in general. Newton was a materialist and his physics represents an impediment to the understanding of electricity. For those married to "Little Ball Bearings", this is why we have the Planck. Here you can have your beloved E equals mc squared which is so dear to your heart. So use it, don't heap capacitance and inductance with lead weights.

The Aether does not relate to the inertial laws of Newton, but the formative forces laws of Goethe.

73 DE N6KPH

How about capacitance being related to compression of the aether? Is that really that far fetched?

I think we all agree on the following:

1. A real, physical aether exists which has fluid-like properties in terms of its ability to sustain the various kinds of electro-magnetic fields and waves.

2. All that is physical consists of three principal phenomena in the aether:
a. steady-state flows;
b. waves;
c. vortexes (rotational movement).

All right. If we all agree on this, then mass can only consist of these same 3 phenomena in the aether, can only consist as some kind of dynamic oscillating structure in the aether.

The most fundamental question is: what is the aether like? What does it consist of?

It cannot consist of mass, because mass is a wave phenomenon in the aether. It can also not exist of any kind of electro-magnetic waves of fields, becase these are also phenomenon in the aether.

And since the only way we have to "measure" or interact with the aether is by means of mass and electric phenomena (of which mass is just a particular one) we have no way to determine what the aether really consists of.

But we know it has fluid-like properties in terms of it's capabilities of sustaining the physical phenomena we know as electro-magnetics and mass, which are the following ones in terms of electrical engineering:

A Dissident View of Relativity Theory by William H. Cantrell, Ph.D.

Given that the nothingness of a perfect absolute vacuum is bestowed with the physical properties of a permittivity, eo8.854 pF/m, a permeability, mo4p x 10-7 H/m, and a characteristic impedance of 377 ohms, is the concept of an aether really that outlandish?

However, these are analoguous to the properties used to describe sound waves in acoustic metamaterials, for example:

Acoustic metamaterials - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Control of the various forms of sound waves is mostly accomplished through the bulk modulus β, mass density ρ, and Chirality. The density and bulk modulus are analogies of the electromagnetic parameters, permittivity and permeability, in electromagnetic metamaterials. Related to this is the mechanics of wave propagation in a lattice structure. Also materials have mass, and instrinsic degrees of stiffness. Together, these form a resonant system, and the mechanical (sonic) resonance may be excited by appropriate sonic frequencies (for example pulses at audio frequencies).

And C.K. Thornhill shows exactly what is wrong with the Maxwell equations and that these reduce to the same equations that describe waves in fluids once you remove the ideas that the electro-magnetic fields are caused by "charge" and "currents":

http://etherphysics.net/CKT4.pdf

The real space-time of Newtonian mechanics and the ether concept is contrasted with the imaginary space-time of the non-ether concept and relativity.
In real space-time (x, y, z, ct) characteristic theory shows that Maxwell’s equations and sound waves in any uniform fluid at rest have identical wave surfaces. Moreover, without charge or current, Maxwell’s equations reduce to the same standard wave equation which governs such sound waves.

So, there are various ways to describe the propagation of waves trough a fluid-like medium, which are in essence all the same, apart from the units of measurements being used. And just like you can use miles just as well as kilometers to express distance, you can use density and bulk modules just as well as permittivity and permeability. They are essentially the same when applied to the description of the aether itself. Both descriptions are equally valid, just like miles and kilometers describe the same thing. They are just different units of measurements.

[madhatter]

I maintain the pounds per square inch has absolutely no relation to capacitance whatsoever, in the world of electrical engineers. Hence it is absurd. To quote E.H. Armstrong, "They substitute words for reality, and then talk about the words." This is what physics has done. In Electricity, the ideas og Goethe and Wilhelm Reich are much more in accord with electricity, and the formative forces in general. Newton was a materialist and his physics represents an impediment to the understanding of electricity. For those married to "Little Ball Bearings", this is why we have the Planck. Here you can have your beloved E equals mc squared which is so dear to your heart. So use it, don't heap capacitance and inductance with lead weights.

The Aether does not relate to the inertial laws of Newton, but the formative forces laws of Goethe.

73 DE N6KPH

Eric,
I fully agree, mass has no relation to the dielectric, why should it? The useage of mass for electrical charge is a way to pin down the force and associate the speed of light as the limit due to mass.
going a step further, it's more than just saying that light isn't the speed limit but that the mass relation is not correct. once this is removed it's easier to understand why C isn't a limit. The dielectric is a field, a wave function without mass, then it easier to see the stress of the orthogonal fields Phi and Psi that give rise to electrical phenomenon.

physical matter at it's basic building form is a wave function of the Phi and Psi fields. This will be a confusing contention as matter has mass, how does the stress of the dielectric give rise to mass yet has no mass? excellent question...

The physicist will use reductionism to keep the 'steps' and maintain order of the classical system. The problem is it of course is not that way at all. A wave nature is complex and non reducible, by that I mean the nature of everything is connected to 'everything'. This also gives rise to a few issues of determinism that we won't cover here.

I'll end with gravity, it's mass-less yet has force.

The bigger consequence of this is that the mathematics for this will have no relation to current math as it's replete with adjustments for relativity and based on the particle concept.

[Aether]

Tesla said that electromagnetic waves were like sound waves in the ether, and sound has no mass, right? Here is a quote I from from him.

"The assumption of the Maxwellian ether was thought necessary to explain the propagation of light by transverse vibrations, which can only occur in a solid. So fascinating was this theory that even at present it has many supporters, despite the manifest impossibility of a medium, perfectly mobile and tenuous to a degree inconceivable, and yet extremely rigid, like steel. As a result some illusionary ideas have been formed and various phenomena erroneously interpreted. The so—called Hertz waves are still considered a reality proving that light is electrical in its nature, and also that the ether is capable of transmitting transverse vibrations of frequencies however low. This view has become untenable since I showed that the universal medium is a gaseous body in which only longitudinal pulses can be prop*agated, involving alternating compressions and expansions similar to those produced by sound waves in the air. Thus, a wireless transmitter does not emit Hertz waves which are a myth, but sound waves in the ether, behaving in every respect like those in the air, except that, owing to the great elastic force and extremely small densi*ty of the medium, their speed is that of light."

from this article located here "Pioneer Radio Engineer Gives Views On Power"

[amigo]

Hi Eric,

Are we done with the Theory of Anti-Relativity?

I have been copy/pasting all your posts into a single document so I can read them in context, but I am not sure anymore where things begin and end.

Thanks.

[t-rex]

Mass Free Electricity

I maintain the pounds per square inch has absolutely no relation to capacitance whatsoever, in the world of electrical engineers. Hence it is absurd. To quote E.H. Armstrong, "They substitute words for reality, and then talk about the words." This is what physics has done. In Electricity, the ideas og Goethe and Wilhelm Reich are much more in accord with electricity, and the formative forces in general. Newton was a materialist and his physics represents an impediment to the understanding of electricity. For those married to "Little Ball Bearings", this is why we have the Planck. Here you can have your beloved E equals mc squared which is so dear to your heart. So use it, don't heap capacitance and inductance with lead weights.

The Aether does not relate to the inertial laws of Newton, but the formative forces laws of Goethe.

73 DE N6KPH