On Fri 4/19 Alex said [snip] I continue to have a difficult time accepting the
concept that there is one special velocity to use as a reference.[/snip].
Alex,
That is not what I am saying, in fact the velocities are so
different below the Planck scale we have wormholes forming to relieve the
differentials throughout the quantum foam..but by the time we reach the
physical scale all this turbulence has averaged out to an isotropic value that
can only vary slowly with gravitational changes. The point I was trying to make
is that we are never aware of the variations because out time quantum is based
on our local value..the twin Paradox being the extreme case but it indicates 2
things, first-- that we are obviously unaware of "our" local vector angle
between time and space [always perceiving our selves at 0 degrees in the
spatial plane], and second-- that this 4th dimension is still physical space
regardless of dilation factor [matter doesn't suddenly come unglued]. It makes
a case for catalytic action and gas loading based on accessing this additional
volume of space and is what ZPE proponents are seeking to exploit. In the macro
world it would equate to exploiting Lorentzian contraction which is difficult
from practical considerations of both velocity and only ONE spatial
direction/dimension being contracted..it is a spatial vector in a trig
relationship with C where the ether is moving through our plane at the rate we
always perceive of as "C". ["compressing" the raindrops against the windshield
from the Haisch Rueda analogy]...BUT in "suppression" via geometry you don't
need velocity and the effect suppresses the ether on all 3 spatial axis.. My
posit is that virtual particles grow into and shrink out of existence via
symmetrical Lorentzian- like contraction on all 3 axis. I say "Lorentzian Like"
because there are 3 key differences, One-- the "velocity" is "equivalent" like
an alternative Paradox where the Twin stands at the bottom of a deep gravity
well instead of accelerating to near luminal velocities. Two-- The equivalent
velocity is negative from our perspective because we are still experiencing the
full average "rate" of ether passing through our plane [we experience the
isotropic "average" at the macro scale] while inside the Casimir geometry the
rate is suppressed ... so from the perspective inside the cavity we outside in
the macro world are equivalent to that twin standing at the bottom of a gravity
well and we slow down in time [age slowly] while from our perspective the
observers in the cavity appear to accelerate [age rapidly]. Three-the occupants
of the cavity appear to shrink in all 3 dimensions allowing us to load much
more into them than would seem plausible for their available volume... they use
pressure and temperature to try and explain gas loading but my posit remains
that this is due to a relativistic interpretation of Casimir effect and
likewise the hydrino is actually relativistic hydrogen exactly as Jan Naudts
wrote in 2005. There really is more room inside these cavities than we perceive
from the outside and as more hydrogen poors into the cavities they see the
walls shrink away as they migrate out onto the temporal axis.
Fran
From: itsat...@gmail.com [mailto:itsat...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Alexander
Hollins
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 12:44 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
I apologize, I just started reading these posts.
That is an interesting idea, but I continue to have a difficult time accepting
the concept that there is one special velocity to use as a reference.
Really? I'm going to have to delve into this, because my primary issue with
relativity and physics in general as I've learned more and more about the
relations between time, mass, and velocity is the statement that there is not.
To my mind, I cannot conceive of a universe in which there is not a single
center point, either "stationary" or moving, but by moving causing everything
to move in relation to it, so appearing to be "stationary" that we can relate
too. A specific velocity that matches that ground state that, once reached,
mass should approach zero and the effects caused by increasing mass (time
dilation) vanish.
Thank you for another interesting line of discussion VO!
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:30 AM, David Roberson
<dlrober...@aol.com<mailto:dlrober...@aol.com>> wrote:
John, Fran,
I see that you two believe in some form of ether that modifies the space around
us. That is an interesting idea, but I continue to have a difficult time
accepting the concept that there is one special velocity to use as a reference.
Just about everything in the universe is moving relative to everything else
that is not directly, and physically attached to it. It makes more sense to me
to just accept the fact that there is no absolute reference frame about which
everything develops.
On many occasions I find it quite advantageous to visualize myself residing
within a certain chosen frame to understand what is taking place during
collisions, etc. When chosen carefully, the observations that can be made
reveal behavior that is hidden by the complexity normally encountered when a
convenient one is randomly picked. The same laws of physics must be followed
for each observer so one that chooses wisely can obtain a great advantage.
When you speak of time variations that each observer encounters you are getting
into a truly exciting subject that is endlessly interesting. Of course, each
observer detects nothing unusual about the way time unfolds in his constant
velocity world. It is only when he observes others living in other reference
frames that are moving relative to him that he notices strange behavior. I
suspect that taking this aspect into consideration might unlock some of the
mysteries that keep us asking questions about nature. For instance, I have
mentally adjusted my frame of reference on occasions to include moving at
nearly the speed of light relative to some experimental setups to see if it can
be used to explain what occurs. So far I have hit difficult barriers but I
hope to one day gain information that clarifies these events.
I suppose that our main task is to continue to ask questions and not accept the
current descriptions of physics without adequate proof. It is safe to assume
that there is much left to be learned in the sciences and that new
understanding begins with good questions. We should encourage discussions
about the behavior of time, ethers, and whatever else comes into focus even if
they do not agree with our current understanding.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Roarty, Francis X
<francis.x.roa...@lmco.com<mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com>>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>>
Sent: Tue, Apr 16, 2013 10:57 am
Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
John,
I think Ed Storm coined the NAE as a Nuclear Active
environment.. not really defining how the lattice geometry does what it does
but rather just defining the area where it occurs.. these hot spots do
sometimes produce trace amounts of nuclear ash but not enough to account for
the anomalous energy claimed... I am a neo Lorentzian theorist, IMHO the ether
is moving through our 3D plane at a rate that defines our basic unit of time
and is why we will always experience C as 300 million m/s -if the ether were to
vary we would be blissfully unaware of it as our "awareness" will always match
the rate of the ether passing through our plane..in effect it is our time base
and is why we have the odd time dilation effects where the paradox twins are
unaware of each others differences in inertial frames until they get back
together and realize they were living at different rates.
Fran
From: John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com<mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com?>]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 9:42 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
NAE is not an acronym I am familiar with.
I see it can mean nuclear active environment.
Have you tried the image?
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Roarty, Francis X
<francis.x.roa...@lmco.com<mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com>> wrote:
John, I never left the path..perhaps this makes me a nutty troll but didn't
Tesla already treat this like an electrical science, He proposed that super
high voltages could stiffen or "solidify" the ether. If I recall the story
correctly Lorentzian theory was never proven wrong only less elegant than
Einstein's but with equivalent results and later in life Einstein did embrace
ether theory. Casimir theory is an example of this where the results can be
adequately explained from either perspective and when it comes down to brass
tacks ..does it really matter which theory you choose? I choose ether theory
because it is easy to visualize and requires less math skill to make a point.
I like the Haisch - Rueda example of a car accelerating into a rainstorm
increasing the pressure and resistance to forward motion with acceleration as
being equivalent to acceleration through the ether..approach C and the pressure
increases at a Pythagorean rate between time and space pushing the vector up
from zero toward 90 degrees on the time axis [time dilation occurs in positive
direction -slows from our perspective].. What IMHO is occurring in these NAE
-and it agrees with the Naudt's paper which redefines the hydrino as
"relativistic" hydrogen, is that the "rain" in the Haisch-Rueda experiment
which defines the "baseline" of rainfall- ether at zero velocity is actually
capable of being "shielded" at the nano scale.. Casimir plates like all macro
world matter experience ether intersecting our plane at 90 degrees from all
spatial directions but can take advantage of conduction and geometry to shield
a tiny cavity where the "pressure" as Puthoff would call it is reduced..
putting the passengers in that car at a lower pressure than what we consider
the baseline in the macro world.. the hydrogen atoms are those passengers and
do not need to accelerate to achieve relativistic effects..instead of
compressing the rainfall by accelerating the NAE is simply suppressing the
rainfall - much easier to do without any energy requirements other than to
build the geometry in opposition to stiction forces. Of course any hydrogen
migrating in and out of these NAE cavities will translate back and forth
through different inertial frames and gain nothing without some asymmetrical
process that opposes the migration in one direction vs the other..allowing us
to tap the translation for energy as if the car was changing velocities... also
note that the vector for occupants of this NAE - car is now toward negative 90
degrees and it is we who appear to slow down from dilation from the perspective
of the occupants in this lower pressure environment..
Regards
Fran
From: John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com<mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com>]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 3:21 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
I have been in Vo's ugly nest of believers for a very long time.
I think in general a more accurate sentence might be a nest of skeptics and
jaded ex-believers (oh, and some nuts and trolls, and nutty trolls).
Anyway I have some developments in the direction of influencing the aether
sufficient to make it felt by most people.
My goal is to make this into a science, not dissimilar too electrical
engineering.
And I am hoping to gain suggestions and other intput, and since this is very
easy to experiment with some may wish to collaborate.
I can probably prove the reality of this to anyone interested with the
investment of only 2-3 minutes and no materials needed.
This is the science of the future (and perhaps the past) that will provide Free
Energy, Antigravity and a Star Trek level technology in general.
Anyone want to take the path less traveled?
John
