Watching video of some of the large forest fires over the recent past, I was fascinated with the video shots that captured the occasional " fire storm" or chimney vortexes created along the sharp inclines of mountain slopes as the fires intensify. The suuden updraft vortex of flame shoot skyward at something above mach 10 if my calculations are close. The amazing part is there appears to be "NO" inertia at the start of the event. The visible spiral flame appears to form the vortex and move without any hesitation caused by an enertia... hmmm .. gravity cancelled. There are recorded accounts of witnessing of these type events during WW2 bombing of London and the " fire storms " reported.
Perhaps science must displace the terms light and gravity with something more descriptive. I am beginning to suspect gravity is merely a function of " light" or at least a manifestation thereof. The examples of 3 strand helix in nature may often be clues to deeper insight into the complex. The DNA spiral helix may actually be " braided" rather than " twisted" which could give the people in drug research an entire new focus.
Consider the studies in " bending" light. If light were actually composed of 3 components then one or more component may pass through any mass, be it earth or whatever, while one or more component may be blocked..... BUT.. and a very big BUT.. that component(s) blocked may reform at a point beyond the block and lend the appearance to an obligue observation as a " bend". Assigning properties to a gravitational constant has been shot with danger way to long in theoretical physics.
Light may indeed play an unseen role( pun intended).
One must maintain a humor when discussing subjects of this nature or risk the tar brush. Only Vortexians are immune.
Richard
----- Original Message ----- From: "Grimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 8:20 AM
Subject: Re: Spiral helixes
At 10:40 pm 28-04-05 -0500, you wrote:Observing the vortex produced in a clear plexiglas tank of water by a high speed rotating member facing down with a clockwise rotation I notice the cone of the vortex is at the surface and counterclockwise due to the vortex curling 180 degrees from the face of the rotating member up to the surface. The diameter of the vortex remains near constant until it approaches the water surface when it expands to the familiar parabolic form. a measured amount of air can be induced at the member due to vacuum. The air allows the many shed vortices to become visible in the water that move in many directions.
A water vortex is made up of many spirals some of which appear to be flowing opposite from the main bands.
These spirals remind me of a model of a DNA molecule.. hmmm.
Reading a recent research paper where light was " frozen" reminds me of what happens when a water vortex is disturbed.. it collapses.
Thinking of the frozen light experiment, I try to imagine what is taking place. I have considered the event may be similar to impinging on a water vortex... " IF" light is actually in spiral helix form and interrupting ( impinging) the helix may be what causes the light to freeze. If light is actually composed of 3 components it could better explain why sunlight can heat a surface after traveling the distance through space at near absolute zero temperature.
The water vortex may reveal one of the " capacitor" properties of water. If water and light have 3 components and are spiral helix in form there may be a way to " interrupt or impinge on one of the bands to " trigger" the capacitor.
Looking at Ecclesiastes 4;12 I read a sentence made by the Teacher.. " a cord of three strands is not quickly broken".
may offer a clue.
Some of the most unseeming comments expressed in this group have led to stimulation of thought which is the real worth of
the VortexL.
Richard
Hi Richard,
I think your point about the third dimension is crucial. We have always to consider, not only A and B, but also the interaction term AB. In the real world 2 + 2 does not equal 4 since to the extent that "adding" represents something physical, there is always an interaction term which has some real value. Often, of course, this interaction is so small that it is below the threshold of measurable (though not intellectual) perception.
To take a simple example of what I mean, if we have two gold coins and we bring them together then they have lost some gravitational potential energy and gained some internal energy (inverse inertia).
Indeed, even in the symbolic representation of 2 + 2 = 4 one can see that there is a loss of information (negative interaction) in going from the LHS to the RHS of the equation.
Your "a cord of three strands is not quickly broken" quote is interesting. Could this have referred to a braid or plait I wonder
=========================================== Braiding of fiber yarn creates a strand or rope that is thicker and stronger than the strands would have been separately. Braided ropes are preferred by arborists and rock climbers because they do not twist under load, as does an ordinary twisted- strand rope. These ropes consist of one or more concentric tubular braided jackets surrounding a single untwisted yarn of straight fibers. ===========================================
Here again, it is the interaction introduced by the bending of the individual strands which gives the AB, AC, BC and ABC interaction terms. Though tenuous in the extreme these interactions are truly physical just as much as the flavours of a well cooked meal or a vintage wine.
I suppose it is this difficulty to pin down the physical nature of the interaction between magnetic and electric field which makes the identification of the third component so difficult. The "right angles" characteristic of E and M ensures their virtual independence from each other - and yet this independence cannot be complete or they could not interact at all. The angle must be pi/2 (+/-) delta. The situation is modelled by the flows in a closed vortex (e.g. smoke ring). In the case it is easy to see that the flow of material in the skin of the ring cannot be exactly at right angles to the flow along the axis of the ring.
It seems to me that the reason the interface term is so difficult to get to grips with is that whereas the A and B terms are relatively voluminous and static, the interaction term AB is at the opposite boundary, spatially tending to zero and extremely dynamic. In short it is responsible for maintaining the enormous flows between A and B which maintain their separate identities. In symbols A <> B so the symbol <> represents the interaction term. I will resist the temptation to go OT by not pointing out the obvious analogy.
Now since with Tom Flandern I am confident the speed of gravity is manifestly vastly greater than the speed of light the only thing that I can see which could possibly fill the role for the interaction term between E and M is G.
Though SMOT is probably a non-starter I feel sure that it is looking in the right place. However, as Ing.Saviour has shown, mass is dependent on one's orientation with respect to the "fixed" stars. Any experiments which attempt to isolate M-G interaction will have to take this effect into account since one will get different results at 9 am than at 9 pm.
Cheers
Frank Grimer
