Re: [Vo]:It's Time We Talked About the Box-Orbs..
Dear Andrew, Thank you for the information on Falaco Solitons. Is Cartan the one who introduced the idea of "rotating spacetime" into the theory of Relativity? >
Re: [Vo]:It's Time We Talked About the Box-Orbs..
Oh, excuse me :) That message was meant for "Vibrator !" I like what you have to say about electrons. Do you think we could make a macroscopic electron? I mean, one that's a couple feet across? On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 9:10 PM Andrew Meulenberg wrote: > just an interested bystander >
Re: [Vo]:It's Time We Talked About the Box-Orbs..
Are you on the welcoming committee? Perhaps it's time you made liaison with the box orb pilots.
Re: [Vo]:It's Time We Talked About the Box-Orbs..
I have a question about things that rotate: Is it meaningful to speak of "resonance" when something is rotating in only one direction (Clockwise, for example)? When I think of "resonance", I think of a guitar string vibrating back and forth, or a parallel LC circuit, with the current flowing back and forth. In both cases, the stuff is moving first one way, then the other. We can talk about how many "back and forths" it makes in a given amount of time. But what if you are spinning a flywheel in just one direction? Is there some particular angular frequency which is special, based upon other parameters of the system (maybe the flywheel's mass)? I don't think I'd call it a "resonant frequency", but I would call it something. I mean, is there a particular diameter or rate of rotation at which a tornado can form and be stable -- any slower or faster and it would fly apart? It sounds like that is what you are getting at with the electron, Andrew. An old mechanic I used to live with said something to me once to this effect: That there was a particular RPM of the flywheel in an engine at which it was "resonant". That the engine and transmission worked best and were happiest when the flywheel was rotating around this particular RPM. On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 5:01 AM Andrew Meulenberg wrote: > I like your derivation. It appears to be another indication of the > resonance giving stability to the electron at a specific "size". A similar >
Re: [Vo]:It's Time We Talked About the Box-Orbs..
Hello, Are you suggesting that long ago, in the time of Classical Physics, someone performed the same simple algebraic calculation I just did, and looked with consternation upon the result? "Hmm, you guys, this number seems to be off. Let's multiply it by a correction factor. We'll call it the Fine Structure Constant." Or, what *are* you saying? What do you mean, by, "mean something"? I was about to say, "I'm actually not that interested in electrons," but I guess if you're making analog electronics, it may be wise to learn a thing or two about the humble electron. @ @@@ @@ @ @ @ @ @@ @@@ @ @ Sean P. Logan https://spaz.org/~magi Fountain Giving Life paco66551, gmail comWave Articulation Matrices for 503-660-5616Hyperdimensional Light
Re: [Vo]:It's Time We Talked About the Box-Orbs..
Dea Robin, I ran the numbers, and the radius comes out even larger than the "Classical Electron Radius". Here I wrote up my work in Latex so it's easy to read: https://spaz.org/~magi/appendix/electron-latex.html I got an electron radius of: r = 3.863395 x 10^-13 meters Whereas the CODATA value for the "Classical Electron Radius" is: r_e = 2.817 940 3262 x 10^-15 meters which is 2.8 times the radius of a Proton! Please let me know if I made a mistake in my calculations. I thought maybe I did something unsavory with the angular frequency, Omega. But on second thought it all seems legit. Robin sez: > I think that's only if you make the electron smaller than it actually is. > Try doing the reverse. Assume that the maximum > is the speed of light, then calculate the size of the electron that would > be needed to satisfy the equations. > If no one clicked on ads companies would stop paying for them. :) > >
Re: [Vo]:It's Time We Talked About the Box-Orbs..
> > > With a quasi solid core where the speed of rotation exceeds the > information transmission speed of the fluid/field (FLEID). > > Bit like an apple really. :-) > Hurricanes have cores too. Called the 'eye'. Would it be possible to make a macroscopic electron, by stirring the Natural Medium around fast enough? Don't electrons rotate at something like 790 times the speed of light? I mean, if you look at their magnetic moment of an electron, and you know how much charge an electron has, and you say, "Ok, how fast does this amount of charge have to spin around a circle this big, in order to create this much magnetic flux?" And the answer is waay faster than 3*10^8 m/s.
Re: [Vo]:It's Time We Talked About the Box-Orbs..
Ahh, so even atoms are made of this stuff? I like your description of them as ''eddies'' in the liquid. When you're paddling a canoe, as you pull the paddle out of the water, (after a stroke), there is sometimes a little whirlpool flowing away. Didn't Rene Descartes propose the idea that atoms are simply vortices in the aether?
Re: [Vo]:It's Time We Talked About the Box-Orbs..
Robin, Would you like to propose an experiment, to help us learn about the nature of this Ocean? My pet theory is that the medium, through which radio waves travel, exists in more than three dimensions of space. Sean
[Vo]:Stirring a Bucket of Water, Thinking about Hysteresis
Good evening, Have you ever stirred a bucket of water with a wooden spoon? If you go around in a circle, and go fast enough, a funnel will form in the surface of the water. I have been able to make funnels so big, I could stick my hand in without getting wet. It's like a water tornado. I was thinking: "This is what it must look like in the space around a wire carrying pulsed DC." If your electric current always flows in the same direction, never reversing direction, then the magnetic field around the wire will always spin in the same direction. It's like stirring water only clockwise, until the vortex forms. Alternating current would be like stirring the water CW, then CCW, every other stroke: the water would just splash around, and you would never get a funnel. If you have an iron ring around your wire, then with each pulse of current, you're magnetizing the iron in the same direction, over and over. You don't have to overcome hysteresis -- your hysteresis curve is always in the upper right-hand quadrant. Is there something analogous to hysteresis which is a property of the aether? I mean, if you take the iron ring away, and keep sending current pulses, does something start to happen in the space around the wire? P.S. Can you tell me a thing or two about vortices?
Re: [Vo]:It's Time We Talked About the Box-Orbs..
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 1:51 PM Robin wrote: > In reply to Frank Grimer's message of Fri, 8 Jul 2022 10:21:32 +0100: > > >> why do like charges repel, and unlike charges attract? > >Because one is a source, the other is a sink at the bottom of a deep > ocean. > Yes, that's the way I think about it, when I write DIV E = ... But you gotta wonder: Where is the water in the source coming from, and where does the water in the sink go?
Re: [Vo]:superluminal mind
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 7:57 AM Jones Beene wrote: > Sean, > > REF: https://spaz.org/~magi/ > > ... hope this is not off-topic > > Have you tried setting up a pair of identical nested tubes - one as > transmitter and one as receiver, separated by significant distance - in > order to see if there is unusual efficiency in transmitting power? > > No, I only have one unit so far. I will say, you are not the first person who has suggested this. And I think it is a worth while experiment to perform. > The lore of "longitudinal/scalar waves" seems strangely applicable to this > design. Also - how does the resonant frequency scale with smaller and > smaller geometry? > Tell me more about this "Longitudinal Wave"? Can you show me equations, or point me to papers? Last night, out of the blue, an engineer started telling me about this same thing. He showed me a pair of equations from his paper, but asked me not to publish them because they are export restricted. The frequencies of resonance I measured are related to the physical dimensions of the structure. So a smaller geometry would raise the frequency. > It would be a huge challenge to reduce the structure to micro or nano > geometry for lithography but maybe not impossible. Heck perhaps the > operative mechanism can itself be fractalized > In theory you can scale it to any size, as long as you keep the ratios the same. Yeah, may be you could make one with photo-lithography.
Re: [Vo]:superluminal mind
Can you elaborate on how and why a "resonance decays through the Fibonacci spirals of a protein nanotubel" ? Would other structures, whose geometry is related to the Fibonacci sequence, or to a Golden Spiral, also function like this? Would this shape, for example? spaz.org/~magi On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 10:37 AM Don Mitchell wrote: > Hello vortex-l, > > > *Premise:* Penrose-Hameroff *Orch OR Theory *proposed protein nanotube *is > proper*ly identified as the interface of spirit with brain. > > By Penrose logic, the brain does not generate mind, but is a transceiver > interface composed of protein nanotubes that burst into quantum resonance > about 40 times a second. You and me are minds in the aether activating > quantum relaxation oscillators to be you and me, per Sir Penrose and Dr. > Hameroff. > > In the PH model, quantum resonance decays through the Fibonacci spirals of > a protein nanotube to ultimaltely afford 'when' a neuron fires. > > The electrons of the nanotubes resonate with energy within the quantum > noise-floor (my term) between the atoms of the nanotubes. > > Is this a proper grammatical construct for the *Orch OR Theory*? > > > Druthers? > > Assume the signal propagation of mind is in the aether plenum and is > superluminal and scalar (all directions isotropically). > > By that assumption, 'mind' in the aetheric plenum is a zero-dimensional > oscillation over time, I think. > > > Is 'zero-dimensional' the proper notation for a signal that varied in > quality nearly** everywhere at once? > > > **nearly: superluminal is not infinite. > > > Let's huddle. > > If every neuron is synchopated with the aether, then every neuron is > simultaneously aware of the same signal of 0-D mind in the aether. > > If mind is superluminal, then every neuron active in our pulse-field of > brain-mind is tuned as a whole to one signal, our mind in the aether. > > Thoughts, please? > > Might there be some hint of simultaneity that may be sensorized within our > gray matter? > > > -don >
[Vo]:Heavy Water Production using Fungus?
Hello Vortex-L, Has anyone heard of people using a fungus to produce heavy water from sea water? Someone was telling me about "scientists in China or Japan" who are working on "fusion using a liquid that looks like water, but is not water." I assumed he was talking about Heavy Water. He said they are using a fungus to produce the liquid. Does anyone know what he could be talking about?
Re: [Vo]:moire patterns -- beats without waves
Thank you for posting the Mr. Wizard video. It was an excellent demonstration. Here is a simply circuit which performs non-linear mixing of two waves. http://spaz.org/~magi/grh/img/am-circuit-1.jpg The diode is the non-linear circuit element which does the heterodyning. This circuit is an "unbalanced mixer". We used it in EE223 to create AM signals. Another way two waves can heterodyne is if they go through a coil wound on a core which is saturated. On Thu, Oct 15, 2020, 10:11 H LV wrote: > I think in principle it should be possible to generate moire patterns with > fractal characteristics. > > Harry > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 12:05 PM Terry Blanton wrote: > >> Moire is marvelous but fractals are fantastic! >> >> https://youtu.be/vr-jtDjTaIc?t=1680 >> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 8:28 AM H LV wrote: >> >>> >>> Moire patterns are like beats without waves. >>> >>> Moiré Kit >>> 1.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nn1MqCMa1M >>> >>> 2. Moire pattern effect >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZYpEMp87Xo >>> >>> 3. What Are Moire Patterns? (Mr. Wizard) >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8Jf9SVsT38 >>> >>> 4. Freaky Dot Patterns - Numberphile >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAja2jp1VjE >>> >>> Harry >>> >>> >>> >>>
Re: [Vo]:Acoustic demonstration of beats
Sounds fascinating. May I ask: what are you using as your non-linear element, to cause the two laser beams to heterodyne? Is it the target they shine on, itself? On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, 15:19 Bob Higgins wrote: > Sean, > > What you are describing is entirely possible. Also, diode lasers can be > driven into modes that produce sidebands just at the threshold of ordinary > output - but it is hard to control the sidebands without an expensive > "loop" receiver and some kind of lock-in control. > > Using 2 lasers is pretty easy. I am presently working on a dual laser > experiment with 2 tunable diode lasers combined optically onto a single > fiber. The wavelength separation (determines the beat frequency) is > continuously monitored in a high resolution fiber spectrometer. We are > nearly ready to run experiments with this hardware. > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 2:10 PM Sean Logan wrote: > >> Could you use an Optical Parametric Amplifier to create your desired >> sidebands? Using one laser as the "signal input" and the other as the >> "pump" should give you an output containing sum and difference frequencies >> (sidebands, or heterodynes). >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, 12:29 H LV wrote: >> >>> In my estimation Rumford's theory is the seed of an alternate theory of >>> radiation. It could still grow and blossom into a well >>> developed mathematical theory of heat. >>> >>> I am interested in beat theory because it resonants (pun intended) with >>> Rumford`s theory of hot and cold radiation, since >>> both involve _differences_. A beat frequency is given by the difference >>> of two frequencies and in Rumford`s theory two types of differences are >>> important.The first is that the relative difference in temperature between >>> two bodies determines which body is producing more hot or more cold >>> radiation. The second is that the sign and magnitude of the difference >>> between the received frequency and the oscillator's frequency determines >>> whether the radiation increases or decreases the energy of the oscillator. >>> >>> Harry >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 3:21 PM JonesBeene wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The beat frequency they were after was in the THz range and this was >>>> in order to fit Hagelstein’s theory of optical phonons – >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> … and yes - small gain was seen. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> However, in the earlier similar work without beat frequencies – single >>>> laser only - much higher gain (order of magnitude more) has been reported >>>> by Letts/Cravens. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The reproducibility was apparently better in the later experiments - >>>> but I do not think the lower result with the beat frequency is leading >>>> anywhere. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From: *H LV >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Beat frequencies of two lasers irradiating a surface appear in >>>> >>>> _Stimulation of Optical Phonons in Deuterated Palladium_ by Dennis >>>> Letts and Peter Hagelstein >>>> >>>> https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LettsDstimulatio.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Harry >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>
Re: [Vo]:Acoustic demonstration of beats
Could you use an Optical Parametric Amplifier to create your desired sidebands? Using one laser as the "signal input" and the other as the "pump" should give you an output containing sum and difference frequencies (sidebands, or heterodynes). On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, 12:29 H LV wrote: > In my estimation Rumford's theory is the seed of an alternate theory of > radiation. It could still grow and blossom into a well > developed mathematical theory of heat. > > I am interested in beat theory because it resonants (pun intended) with > Rumford`s theory of hot and cold radiation, since > both involve _differences_. A beat frequency is given by the difference > of two frequencies and in Rumford`s theory two types of differences are > important.The first is that the relative difference in temperature between > two bodies determines which body is producing more hot or more cold > radiation. The second is that the sign and magnitude of the difference > between the received frequency and the oscillator's frequency determines > whether the radiation increases or decreases the energy of the oscillator. > > Harry > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 3:21 PM JonesBeene wrote: > >> >> >> The beat frequency they were after was in the THz range and this was in >> order to fit Hagelstein’s theory of optical phonons – >> >> >> >> … and yes - small gain was seen. >> >> >> >> However, in the earlier similar work without beat frequencies – single >> laser only - much higher gain (order of magnitude more) has been reported >> by Letts/Cravens. >> >> >> >> The reproducibility was apparently better in the later experiments - but >> I do not think the lower result with the beat frequency is leading >> anywhere. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From: *H LV >> >> >> >> Beat frequencies of two lasers irradiating a surface appear in >> >> _Stimulation of Optical Phonons in Deuterated Palladium_ by Dennis Letts >> and Peter Hagelstein >> >> https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LettsDstimulatio.pdf >> >> >> >> Harry >> >> >> >> >> >
[Vo]:Finite Element Analysis recommendations?
Hello, Can you recommend software for performing Finite Element Analysis, or Method of Moments simulation of E and H fields around a 3D structure? I looked into FEMM, but that seems to only work in 2D. I am aware of commercial packages like CST, COMSOL, HFSS, etc. I dont have $20k to spend. Can you get a plot of the fields with NEC? Thank you for advice, Sean On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, 11:34 AlanG wrote: > On 10/13/2020 6:03 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > > Have you been able to buy one? > > As you suggested, there's a gap in the wavelength of commercially > available systems. Semiconductor diode lasers seem to be currently > available down to 3.5 um (83 THz) > > https://www.toptica.com/products/tunable-diode-lasers/ecdl-dfb-lasers/dfb-pro/ > > Optically pumped secondary lasers are available up to 7.5 THz / 100 mW, > typically used in security scanners. > https://www.edinst.com/products/firl-100-pumped-fir-system/ > > There appears to be a lot of current research to fill the gap, so > hopefully available soon but not quite yet. >
Re: [Vo]:Interstellar travel
> > > In such a galaxy, everyone would use similar FTL communications equipment, > effectively joined in a galaxy wide > "Internet", so the first thing an advanced civilization is going to try to > teach one that doesn't have it, is how to > build FTL comms gear. > Ever wondered what crop circles really are? FTL comms gear: Spaz.org/~magi They said it would help us have a "healthy civilization". They said the milky way is very old.
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
Thanks for sharing. This is great! On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 6:11 AM JonesBeene wrote: > > > The Shawyer EM drive is not dead but now has serious competition… using > lasers. This is almost a breakthrough but has not attracted much attention > so far.. > > > > > https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2020/09/darpa-laser-version-of-emdrive-has-a-test-result-better-than-commercial-ion-drive.html?utm_source=feedburner_medium=feed_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2Fadvancednano+%28nextbigfuture%29 > > > > Despite the negativism from skeptics (all over the Web), the EM drive > concept is now approaching the status of a solid technology despite NASA > dropping it. > > > > What’s with NASA dropping something like this??? Almost unforgiveable. > > > > Fortunately DARPA/ARPA did not give up and the latest results seem to be > fabulous (when and if they are duplicated). > > > > Long video from Mike McCulloch > > > > https://youtu.be/341Yk4k51uY > > > > From the Next Big Future comments: This is related to Mike McCulloch's > “quantized inertia” QI theory which itself is related yet different from > the usual Mach effect and Emdrive drama. > > > > McCulloch has a theory for inertia that predicts galaxies' rotation sans > dark matter, distant binaries and other anomalies presumably without > adjustment, and it has other several interesting implications. It explains > the Emdrive and predicts several kinds of inertia-based drives using EM > waves of different efficiencies…. To call it controversial is an > understatement. > > > > In a way it is refreshing to get rid of the baggage of dark matter. It has > always smelled a bit like a klutz concept… unless of course it is the > “aether” > > > > > > >
Re: [Vo]:Resonator shaped like a hyperbolic vortex
> > > Now try to imagine a > place where the aether density is less than in the surrounding space. Well, I know that in a tornado (vortex in air), you get high and low pressure zones. That is why, for example, even though the air is moving in circles parallel with the ground, a house gets sucked *up* the vortex. Because there is a low pressure zone inside the funnel. I suppose if you have a vortex made of some other medium than air, analogous phenomena may occur. If you have a vortex of "space" or "aether" or whatever you want to call the medium through which radio waves propagate -- I guess you could have a low "pressure" zone relative to the surrounding volume. > If you can pump enough out to equal the weight of the structure, than the > net weight would be zero. Any less, and it > would be negative and you would have an anti-gravity device, analogous to > a hot air balloon, but capable of operating in > outer space. > I find this fascinating and not ridiculous. Are you speaking from personal experience? I mean, have you operated, or observed the operation, of such a device? Can you of the vortex-l community recommend a good place to publish my data?
Re: [Vo]:Resonator shaped like a hyperbolic vortex
> > You might consider adding a mirror image of it along the axis. Wide ends > together. Maybe then it will generate a > "hole in the vacuum" > Oh? What is a "hole in the vaccuum?"
Re: [Vo]:Resonator shaped like a hyperbolic vortex
Thank you JonesBeene. The thought that the mass of the device may change under certain conditions had not crossed my mind. Can you refer me to some good papers on the Shawyer truncated cone? Yes, I am familiar with Bird Wattmeters. However, in this experimental setup, nothing is matched to a 50 ohm impedance, so I think it may be simpler and more straightforward to simply measure the Drain current I_d. Imagine a simple Class A NMOS amplifier, with n LC circuit between the Drain and the positive rail. In my experiment, the hyperbolic horn structure serves in place of the resonant circuit. The current flows down the central pipe in the middle. The current varies in magnitude, but never reverses direction. Therefore, the magnetic field varies in magnitude, and gives rise to wave phenomena, but does not reverse direction. Therefore, the hysteresis curve stays in the upper right-hand quadrant. I think of it like stirring a bucket of water. If you stir only clockwise and do not reverse direction, you will begin to create a vortex. The surface of the water will dip down and form a funnel, shaped like a hyperbolic horn. On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 6:15 AM JonesBeene wrote: > Very interesting. > > > > The first thought that came to mind when I saw your design, esp with the > golden rule geometry -- is that it could be a more favorable wave guide > than the Shawyer truncated cone (EM drive) for the purpose of directed > thrust using RF. > > > > Mabye this is where your are headed but if you haven’t done so (and have a > very sensitive digital scale), it could be worth the effort looking for any > such small effect. NASA would love to see such a finding as they have taken > some heat, so to speak, over their EM drive testing. > > > > As for power measurement, there is lots of used Bird RF meters and dummy > loads out there (EBay) – but it looks like you have already tried that. > > > > Jones > > > > *From: *Sean Logan > > > >I built, and am experimenting with an EM resonator. Its geometry is > based on the shape of a hyperbolic horn, the natural shape of a vortex in > water. Please let me know if you have any insight into what is happening > inside this structure, when it is excited with RF. > > > >My work is documented here: > > > >spaz.org/~magi > > > > > > Also, if you know of a simple circuit for measuring RF current, I am > all ears. I would like to look for the "dip" in current which occurs when > it is excited at its resonant frequency. > > > > Thank you, > > Sean Logan > > > > >
[Vo]:Resonator shaped like a hyperbolic vortex
Hello, I built, and am experimenting with an EM resonator. Its geometry is based on the shape of a hyperbolic horn, the natural shape of a vortex in water. Please let me know if you have any insight into what is happening inside this structure, when it is excited with RF. My work is documented here: spaz.org/~magi Also, if you know of a simple circuit for measuring RF current, I am all ears. I would like to look for the "dip" in current which occurs when it is excited at its resonant frequency. Thank you, Sean Logan
