Electric Winds on Electric Worlds

originally posted by: ConnectDots
Wal Thornhill regarding gravity:

What is gravity?

Gravity is due to radially oriented electrostatic dipoles inside the Earth’s protons, neutrons and electrons. [18]

[18] R. Sansbury, The Common Cause of Gravity and Magnetism, p 1. See
www.magna.com.au/~prfbrown/news96_f.html

www.holoscience.com...

OMG. Not this nonsense again.

Mr Thornhill obviusly has got no clue about dipoles, and neither do you, it seems.

But you don't mind reposting his BS anyway, because its so anti-mainstream. ROFL.

originally posted by: playswithmachines
I'm not a great proponent of Thunderbolt because there's not enough real science involved, a lot of wishful thinking certainly.

There is real science in their SAFIRE Project.

Their annual Electric Universe conferences feature speakers on the cutting edge.

And their research into the misinterpreted and unappreciated science of the past is invaluable, in my opinion.

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment
I find that the community which is promoting the theory are actually doing damage to their own credibility by stretching their interpretation via pure speculation (non-science) when they attempt to conclude that the ancient people of Earth witnessed plasma discharges from planets & thereafter referenced these effects as 'dragons', etc. They should stick to the solid, debateable & proveable theories of the root physics, and leave all mythological speculations totaly alone. They really do harm their case with that sort of thing.

I worry about that, too.

But I think there is a place for other inputs besides pure science when trying to understand the universe. It doesn't hurt to consider other evidence besides scientific evidence.

I feel the same way about anecdotal evidence when considering scientific theories. Personal experience is a powerful teacher, in my opinion.

I think we've been too conditioned to bow down to scientists as authority figures, as if science is all there is.

originally posted by: playswithmachines
So the electric universe theory is right in places but has tons of faults also.

My understanding is that torsion fields need to be incorporated into the theory.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Thanks for sharing. I believe that much of the electric universe model is genuinely a true reflection of the nature of the physical universe. I find that the community which is promoting the theory are actually doing damage to their own credibility by stretching their interpretation via pure speculation (non-science) when they attempt to conclude that the ancient people of Earth witnessed plasma discharges from planets & thereafter referenced these effects as 'dragons', etc. They should stick to the solid, debateable & proveable theories of the root physics, and leave all mythological speculations totaly alone. They really do harm their case with that sort of thing.

Absolutely
Now about the films;
"Electric wind stripping the atmosphere"
I take it they are not confusing this with the solar wind which is a stream of charged particles emitted by the sun?
Vague to say the least.
In Earth's case, our magnetic field is strong enough to pull most charged particles back down, whether they came from Earth or from the sun, hence the Northern Lights.
The upper stratosphere of our planet is charged to at least 60Gv (that's giga-volts) so any particle wanting to leave must have an enormous amount of energy, otherwise this planet would have boiled dry aeons ago.Where they got that 10v from i have no idea.

So what are they defining as 'wind' exactly? A flow of charge from point A to point B, that is how we understand electrical currents. Their paths can be altered by a magnetic field, but only at a fairly close distance.
Loose oxygen atoms in the atmosphere tend to clump together to make ozone, which i would deem too heavy to be moved by solar wind (although it can be moved by HAARP in small areas) and of course there will be loose hydrogen atoms that will re-group with the oxygen atoms.

Why would a region of empty space exert a pull on these particles in the first place? Outdated our physics may be, but the basic law still holds that anything that has mass also has gravity & every particle is attracted to others, that's how stars get born. Gravity is the only force strong enough to overcome the opposite charge in particles (yet in electrical terms you need very little power to render something 'weightless') now there's a conundrum.

"The electric field of Venus is very stong"
Not very surprising, the atmosphere is very thick & rotates at great speed, and there's no magnetic field to speak of, so gases get ionised much easier. Venus is actually losing it's atmosphere, but not quicker than expected, the planet is denser than Earth, surface pressure is 93 times that of Earth.Since oxygen is much lighter than the other gases on the planet, it makes sense that the O and H atome rise to the upper atmosphere & get blown away by the solar wind, i doubt if Venus ever had much water to begin with, it could never have existed in liquid form anyway.

"Where does the heat come from?"
Venus gets it's extra heat possibly from it's rotational energy, which for some reason is always overlooked by astronomers.Same reason all the planets are getting warmer. This is a gravity issue not an electrical one.

Part2.
The theory that Venus is a relatively young planet & therefore has no water, i find that a bit far-fetched, likewise that Venus was an electrically active comet that somehow got trapped in a near-perfect circular orbit.
However the electrical approach to gravity in the video is more or less accurate IMO. The sudden distortion of electron orbits allows the nucleus to move towards electrical equilibrium, thus towards the retreating electrons. It is this electron-proton interaction that accounts for mass, note that smaller particles behave exactly the same way.

"As a comet, Venus was discharging massively"
Discharging to what? Empty space? Charge needs to flow from a higher energy state to a lower one, just as heat does. Unlike radiation, charge can not flow from somewhere to nowhere (well it can if you push electrons through time but that's another thing entirely) Otherwise Earth with it's 60+Gv would be shooting lightning bolts into space day & night. This does not happen because there is nothing for the charge to flow to.

"Water is activated electrically by infra-red light, or warmth"
Say what??

"Mars is our closest planet in the solar system and shared the same cosmic womb". Yes, but Venus isn't? I cannot see the logic that assumes Mars to be the same age as Earth yet considers Venus to have been a wandering, highly charged comet.
To be continued....

ETA; there are 'currents' in space, these are strings of charged particles following, or more exactly moving at right angles to, very weak but vast magnetic currents.

The impact of cosmic rays on dielectric materials changes their resistance & allows small electrical currents to flow.Gravity waves have the same effect. This occupied Brown right up to his death, amazingly it was a side-effect of his electro-gravity work but he seemed to have been much more interested in this phenomenon than with the implications of his antigravity research.

a reply to: 3danimator2014

Show me the equivalent of maxwells wave equations and you will have my attention

Which ones? The originals or the ones mangled by Lorentz & Heaviside?
Check out the argument between Heaviside & Poynting, it turns out Poynting was right, but you won't read that anywhere.

Show us ONE device any of you guys built using your science and you will have my attention

Lifters work, gravitors work. Podkletnov produced electrically a gravity wave powerful enough to bend 2 inch thick copper & steel plates. All that work is very well documented.
It is a fact that some mathematicians consider charge to be a dimension unto itself.
Da gubmint knows exactly how gravity works, believe me.

ETA; Eric Dollards use of the steinmetz method was good, it showed the 4 pairs as they should be, funny thing is Dollard is a big fan of Heaviside, for some reason......

Another funny thing, Dollard claimed that the first transatlantic signal sent by Marconi was actually a scalar Tesla type setup, and he give some very compelling evidence of this (i'll get to that in a moment) but he is also screaming conspiracy that the receiving station in the US (i forget the name) was being systematically dismantled & all tesla-like adaptations being removed.
I went to the transmitter site in Cornwall in 2014 & found some of his evidence, including old pictures of the original antenna, and more importantly the massive complex ground wire system. These ground wires are his proof that it was a tesla set-up because the signal would have gone through the earth, not through the air as normal Hertzian EM waves.
The ground cable system was still there in the UK and is pretty good evidence in favour of Dollards claim.

Yet there has been no attempt to remove it or even cover it up.

Call me a conspiracy nut, but if i was wiping out all traces of this tech i would dismantle both sites right?

a reply to: ConnectDots

Hey i will keep an open mind on it, but when i see discrepancies i will pounce on them

Ah torsion fields, well that would be todays name for the rotational energy i was waffling about earlier

We may crack it yet!

a reply to: playswithmachines

Do you research the secret space program at all?

My understanding is that's where one has to go to find out the true extent of what is already known in science and technology.

a reply to: ConnectDots

I do, theres a whole mix of tech out there, Ours, Theirs. I believe Bob Lazar at least.
Not because of John Lear, but because i know what Bob is describing, and because i have seen analysis of his films that show the craft as being transparent, and also on it's side when in deta mode.
But there's such a web of counter & dis info out there, i have been trying to pick out the truthful bits for 40 years now.

I concentrate on the tech side, and verify or debunk when i can

This is the Solar Orbiting Advanced Reactor, the plans have been around for some time, i have no idea if they built it or not, but the fact that it's a fusion reactor and probably fueled by Helium-3 is also the reason they are mining the crap out of the moon. And they have fusion powered rockets from the same era.
And that's just OUR tech!


When Von Braun said the shuttle is obsolete, he wasnt talking about the new HGV rockets.....

This is an experimental D2 fusion reactor, one of 3 models i'm playing with.



He3 can't be used safely on Earth, too many fast neutrons, but you get a bigger bang for your buck.
He-3 is very difficult to make on Earth but the moon has tons of it.
D2 can be used here, and this reactor needs ony minimal shielding.
I didn't design it, i merely put it in the case & wired it up. The design is from a professor in the UK who wil remain anonymous, if you are smart you can find him.

I know they were experimenting with fusion powered aircraft as possibly far back as the early 60's, Boyd Bushman showed us a picture of a helicopter fishing a wierd object out of the sea, it was the core magnet of another type of reactor. The plane must have had quite some shielding to protect the crew!

ETA: 1 gram of D2 has the same power as 76 tons of dynamite! yet it is quite common in seawater, and more can be made by injecting hydrogen into the reactor, so it makes it's own fuel.
I am waiting for a bunker to be finished where this thing can be safely tested, i have no wish to vapourise the street i live in, it would not go down well with the neighbours

I have distanced myself from forums of late, way too many problems, both physical as mental, i decided to do what i always do; go it alone, and disclose stuff now & then.
I got involved with all kinds of peeps from the science & conspiracy worlds, many of them known to you peeps.
To know where i'm coming from you should read my early threads here like this one and this
I hate plugging myself but....
With great respect,
-PWM-

a reply to: playswithmachines
Final post.
I had access to 4 1/2 of the 7 reported Townsend Brown notebooks, half of notebook 3 was destroyed by his daughter at his request, there is still a deep mystery surrounding that tale.
I spent 10 years on Searle and his SEG/IGV project, i spoke to him & offered some samples of rare alloys i had collected from my work for cryogenics experiments etc. The SEG has still not been proven to work, to my satisfaction, however the IGV is a more interesting idea as it has close ties to the ARV/Flux-liner story.
I tried for a long time to talk to Hutchison, in the end i was contacted by his wife to help reproduce his anti-radiation ray gun. I won't go into that, but i have ceased my research in that area for now.
I helped debunk STEORN and Rossi's Ecat...not proud of that but it had to be done, these peeps are shysters & conmen.
There's so much more, but that will do for now, i guess....
I have stuff to do, the fight against cancer has taken up most of my time, but rest assured i will get round to examining everything else (if the gods let me live long enough, LOL)
ETA no i don't have cancer, but i'm working on a cure, thanks to a dear departed freind.

originally posted by: playswithmachines
I have distanced myself from forums of late, way too many problems, both physical as mental, i decided to do what i always do; go it alone, and disclose stuff now & then.

The fact that there are paid agents purposely trolling on threads, plus rude and sarcastic defenders of the status quo to contend with, does make participation on forums bad for one's health at times.

But thank heavens we have the internet.

a reply to: ConnectDots

More than that, i have been mentally attacked in what is known as the nosebleed incident.
At one point there was a deliberate attempt to stop my heart from a very powerful mind, i kid you not.

Luckily, and with training from others, i have survived this & all subsequent attacks, and that is why i am uploading a few details now. I want to test their reaction, and their strength.
Yes it is in some ways a dangerous move, but to this date everything i have said IS freely available on the net, if you want to spend the time looking.

I guess i will become a bit of a lurker after this, i want to see what happens next, i sent links to these threads to all the important peeps 20 minutes ago. Let's see what happens
-PWM-

a reply to: playswithmachines

You are one of the movers and shakers of this world.

Take care of yourself!

originally posted by: ConnectDots
My understanding is that torsion fields need to be incorporated into the theory.

Secret space program whistleblower Corey Goode has been interviewed once a week on an internet TV program called Cosmic Disclosure for a year, and continues to be interviewed, by researcher David Wilcock. (Yes, I’m aware of Wilcock’s unpopularity on ATS. I think it is unfounded. As far as I’m concerned, he’s a researcher extraordinaire.)

During an episode of the program entitled “Electric Sun,” Corey Goode stated:

CG: . . . The sun is electric. The people that are talking about the electric plasma model of the universe, they are correct.
DW: But that model usually excludes torsion fields.
CG: Yes it does. There is some stuff that needs to be... some information that needs to be married. Obviously torsion fields are involved and not only the stars, the planets, the galaxy. I was shown that our entire universe is a giant torsion field.

www.spherebeingalliance.com...