It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Mystery of the Bermuda Triangle Solved?

page: 3
11
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2016 @ 09:23 PM
link   
a reply to: playswithmachines

Inside the dielectric, charges around the atoms move in response to the applied voltage gradient. They are simply restrained by the atomic structure to only move a small distance; that is what keeps the dielectric from acting as a conductor.

This movement of charge, even to such a small degree, is a current. That current produces a magnetic field orthogonal to it. If the geometry of the electric and magnetic flux currents is in the proper configuration, a gravitational current is produced as well. According to Einstein, a gravitational current will affect observed time too. All from the action of a voltage on a properly-shaped dielectric.

My research is into using lower voltages in semiconductors materials, properly controlled to provide the correct geometries to the fields. A downburst dissipating as it approached the surface would provide the geometry (or a close facsimile) and ions in that downburst could produce a current. Compared to that produced by a dielectric, the effects of an active current would be thousands of times greater.

TheRedneck




posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: playswithmachines

Inside the dielectric, charges around the atoms move in response to the applied voltage gradient. They are simply restrained by the atomic structure to only move a small distance; that is what keeps the dielectric from acting as a conductor.

Yes, but if the charge arriving (voltage gradient) is high enough, the nucleus is forced to find equilibrium and move in the opposite direction. There is a lot more happening as well, and there are 3 separate theories which may explain this, one is LaViolettes sub-quantum kinetics theory & the other is the new aether theory from some professor i cant remember, and another from a professor who is clinically insane.


This movement of charge, even to such a small degree, is a current. That current produces a magnetic field orthogonal to it. If the geometry of the electric and magnetic flux currents is in the proper configuration, a gravitational current is produced as well. According to Einstein, a gravitational current will affect observed time too. All from the action of a voltage on a properly-shaped dielectric.

Yes i agree on that, but i still think that the displacement of charge goes much deeper, Electrons are after all just charge carriers, they are not the charge itself. Bearden's massless charge theory may have something to it.
The magnetic part is just as complex as gravity. In my mind we have a triangle of forces, at least in these 3 dimensions we are aware of. I believe charge to be trans-dimensional, maybe magnetic flux lines are as well.
Ferrofluid shows us that these lines are in fact spirals. Geometry again.
I like Dollard's work with the Steinmetz method, that is grass roots dimensional analysis, something i learned at college but sadly is no longer taught i think.
I tried some EM cymatics stuff years ago, but moved on to lower frequency (1-1000Hz) for other research, the HF stuff didn't deliver much info. Trying to get a reasonably sized coil to run above 6MHz was rather time consuming, so i went back to HVDC work.


My research is into using lower voltages in semiconductors materials, properly controlled to provide the correct geometries to the fields. A downburst dissipating as it approached the surface would provide the geometry (or a close facsimile) and ions in that downburst could produce a current. Compared to that produced by a dielectric, the effects of an active current would be thousands of times greater.

TheRedneck


I'm interested.
The first (and indeed all) digital camera chips are CCD's or charge-coupled devices, right?
And i figure that there is a lot more behind the CCD than just taking pictures. I hope to have time to go into this some more, but my work has gotten busy again, damn!

Well at least we can discuss this like civilised folks Redneck, most peeps here bite my head off when i mention something, LOL
I don't care what they think, i have done my research, i have recorded my own results, which prove the EG effect beyond doubt. The actual mechanism behind it, well thats always open for discussion, my freind.


PS i tried running the dielectric experiments with magnetic fields of 2T in all axes and i saw no difference, but then i may have had the geometry wrong. I planned a whole series of tests to confirm this tri-force relationship, also the time experiment with electron clouds, but those projects got shelved a few years ago when something more urgent came up.
-PWM-



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 03:22 PM
link   
a reply to: playswithmachines


the new aether theory from some professor i cant remember

It would be wonderful if you could remember. I'm not remembering any recent theories on aether as it applies to inter-field relationships. IEEE should have his research available.

Think, man, think!



In my mind we have a triangle of forces, at least in these 3 dimensions we are aware of. I believe charge to be trans-dimensional, maybe magnetic flux lines are as well.

I actually read a paper a while back about that. In it, the author described the three sub-forces (electrical, magnetic, gravitational) as orthogonal but connected through interaction. He hypothesized that, since we can have gravitational and electric monopoles, but no magnetic monopoles, that meant only magnetism lay solely in our perception. The conclusion was there are additional dimensions to energy we are unaware of.


And i figure that there is a lot more behind the CCD than just taking pictures.

Now I'm the one interested.


Well at least we can discuss this like civilised folks Redneck, most peeps here bite my head off when i mention something, LOL

Whenever that happens to me, I just shut up; minds that are closed to new concepts are not a concern to me.


i tried running the dielectric experiments with magnetic fields of 2T in all axes and i saw no difference, but then i may have had the geometry wrong.

Try thinking in polar coordinates. Cartesian only exists to make orthogonality easier to understand. Nature doesn't work on XYZ axes.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 03:59 PM
link   
My file PC is crashing right now, but i will have the names tomorrow. Whoever it was wrote several books & a 10 page webpage which i have here somewhere....
Yes maybe polar co-ordinates can work, i used to program Heidenhain CNC's that way, only they had a problem since they could only work in planes so you had to first define which 2-D plane you were working in. That worked fine until you tried to apply tool diameter compensation, then it crashed, just like my file drive is doing now. I called Prof. Heidenhain & he said the program worked on their machines, obviously there was something wrong with the parameters on mine.
I quit that job when the boss did not believe me.
Sounds kinda familiar.

Angle & length, rather than XYZ, a long time since i used that, LOL
I will post some files tomorrow, i hope you will find them useful.



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 02:08 PM
link   
How about that, consumer grade "science" got it wrong. Again.

“The editing on this was horrendous,” Cerveny told The Washington Post. “I was really upset when I saw this.”

www.washingtonpost.com... s/



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I found the name, it was Harold Aspden. He wrote a book called 'physics without Einstein' in '97

Here is a short piece from one of his lectures that were posted at energyscience.org.uk
Lucky i saved those pages, that site is now completely empty!


That book disclosed a new law of electrodynamics, wholly supported by empirical evidence, a law that was consistent with the Lorentz force law as applied to electron current flow in closed circuits but one that allowed unification with the theory of gravity. It was explained that the law gave scope for generating forces in breach of Newton's Third Law. That could only mean that the aether could assert or absorb force and the book delved into the structure of that aether to show how it put action into quantum mechanics and provided a quantum theory of gravitation by incorporating gravitons having a mass-energy of 2.587 GeV, thereby allowing G, the constant of gravitation to be derived by pure theory. Empirical evidence was referenced to show that such gravitons do exist. The case presented was aimed at showing that Einstein's Theory of Relativity had been overtaken by something better, something that meant revival of the aether theme, but in a modernized form.

Ever enthusiastic, Marinov aroused our interest by demonstrating odd effects concerning setting things in motion, using magnets and electrical currents, but I saw nothing in his proposals that warranted a commercial interest. Over the years, Marinov had taken to heart what I had been advocating in my book Physics without Einstein concerning the fallacies of the conventional form of electrodynamic law, as indeed had Professor Pappas. Indeed, both Marinov and Pappas made their own contributions in challenging The Lorentz force law. This is a subject which relates to the way in which electric motors work and it has implications where setting up forces as between matter and aether are concerned. This is where Newton's Third Law, the balance of action and reaction, enters into the picture, the issue being the question of whether we can set up forces on a machine by which it pushes against the aether to develop drive power. Forces asserted between the aether and a machine can further imply transfer of energy from the aether to the machine, a fascinating prospect and one which comes into perspective once we see scope for challenging, not just the Lorentz force law, but the earlier Ampere form of law.

So it is here that we come to the theme of prime importance. It is a topic I have discussed from my perspective elsewhere in these web pages, but I am here concentrating attention on the Marinov motor theme. Both Pappas and Marinov became absolutely convinced that the Lorentz force law is incorrect, as applied to interactions involving an unclosed electrical circuit, meaning, for example, one where the action arises from current flow around a circuit path is that of current flow through wire in one circuit segment and that of displacement current through the aether in a another segment of that circuit. If action balances reaction as between current in the different parts of that circuit, then action and reaction forces are asserted between matter and aether and that means that one can devise a machine that moves itself by pushing against the aether.


A lifter does that.
Yes there's ion wind, but that's not enough to lift a lifter, certainly not Naudin's one with the hamster in it.
Since air is the dielectric medium, they should not work in a vacuum, but T.T.Brown's discs did move in a near-perfect vacuum. In fact they moved faster as there was no air resistance, they moved so fast that the project was immediately classified top secret.
That was around 1957

Now there are groups working with discs, shaped dielectrics, multiple series/parallel & graphene nano versions.
There is another EM thrust engine that makes use of geometrically arranged panels with etched shapes, fed by microwaves.
Barium Hafnium Titanate has a K of over 60,000 and delivers a lot of thrust when coated onto a disc & charged to a few million volts. The effect is linear & far more power per watt than any type of engine, including Saturn 5's



The only known film was of the tiny model on quartz threads, the larger models ran over 100kv and reached about 25 Km/H
That is why they coat the B3 and the TR-3b with it.

If you run the jet stream generators on Hydrogen peroxide you can even take them into space, providing you take enough O2 for yourselves

But that's just the electrical side, shall we do magnets now? Geometry, currents, all essential in understanding this.

Plasma is highly inductive, it can create extremely dense magnetic fields, this may be a clue to the BT phenomenon.
edit on 25-10-2016 by playswithmachines because: typo's



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Paul LaViolette;




posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 05:00 PM
link   
a reply to: playswithmachines

Wow.

Give me a little time to absorb this. Townsend Brown's theories were instrumental to part of mine. It sounds like we may be on similar tracks.

And yes, we can discuss magnetic circuits!

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
How about that, consumer grade "science" got it wrong. Again.

“The editing on this was horrendous,” Cerveny told The Washington Post. “I was really upset when I saw this.”

www.washingtonpost.com... s/




To quote your article:


So not only is the Bermuda Triangle mystery not solved, but the guy who supposedly did the solving also didn’t even mean to suggest that it was.


The hack job done here was so bad the Washington Post had to run an article making fun of everyone for it.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 02:05 PM
link   
I worked with Brown's daughter for a while, after reading the first 3 notebooks i reproduced his early gravitor experiments & got fairly good results from low K materials, thanks also to Beau Kitselman's excelent materials analysis.
I have been working with composite materials now & then, but the lab is being packed away for some intensive rebuilding so all projects are on hold for a while.
Still, it will give me time to search out more documents.


ETA; That's 1.5Tb (and growing) of files, mostly PDF's, spread over 9 computers. I'm condensing it onto the Zeus directory which is a stack of 32Gb cards. That will take months.....
And books, about 1200Kg of them.....most still need to be scanned in
edit on 26-10-2016 by playswithmachines because: Addenum



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Back on topic, microbursts are well known, i gather it has to do with inversion layers.
If theres a cold layer above a warm one, at some point the colder air will punch through the warm layer since being denser, it wants to go down while the warm air wants to go up.

So you would get a local, very strong downdraught which would literally punch a hole in the cloud.

Now add electrical activity & things get interesting, it would certainly confuse most aircraft instruments while the downward rush of cold air incapacitates the plane.
But ships? Well lets say that cold column of air hit the sea, right near a ship. What would happen?
I can't see even that rare occurance being able to sink a ship, or magically transport it somewhere.

Fascinating stuff though...especialy the clouds. If there is no wind, the clouds tend to align themselves with standing waves, like the Schumann resonance. On some days you can see 2 or more of these waves intersecting, making beautiful fractal patterns
Geometry, like geography, is everywhere!

PS, i once flew into a cloud at 100mph in a chipmunk trainer above the Bristol channel, it was like going through a brick wall in a Ferrari, LOL
edit on 26-10-2016 by playswithmachines because: afterthought



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: playswithmachines

If you need more space, I'm sure I could come up with a few 8TB drives... (hint hint)

I came across the name Thomas Townsend Brown while reading the (semi-scifi) book "The Philadelphia Experiment: Project Invisibility." Obviously it's not a scientific journal, but the chapter on Brown led me to start researching his experiments. The more I read, the more I realized that his work integrated seamlessly with the mathematical conclusions of Einstein, which I had been studying.

Einstein's theories are incomplete. There are conclusions from those theories that have never been investigated, which shed new light onto the workings of gravity and its relationship with electromagnetic forces and matter itself. I have made a few attempts to create the fields I need, but with very limited success. The expected dissipation patterns of a microburst, especially one which is sustained for a short time, could easily fit the bill for the field geometries I am in need of to experiment on.

My biggest issue is I am self-funded and until April of this year, I did not possess a degree... all self-taught. That makes it very difficult to be taken seriously in scientific circles. Of course, it also means you did not get taught about that box you're apparently supposed to do all your thinking in.

I must have missed class that day. I never learned about this box.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 03:31 PM
link   
a reply to: playswithmachines


But ships?

Suppose, just suppose for the sake of argument, that the interaction of charges in that microburst were sufficient to create a gravitational field in addition to the one we are all familiar with. Depending on the polarization of that field, the ship would either gain or lose weight while the microburst happened, then return to normal. A gain in weight would partially (or possibly completely) submerge the ship, then allow it to regain its buoyancy. A loss of weight would cause the ship to literally rise out of the water and then slam back down again, possibly hard enough to damage it.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck



My biggest issue is I am self-funded and until April of this year, I did not possess a degree... all self-taught. That makes it very difficult to be taken seriously in scientific circles. Of course, it also means you did not get taught about that box you're apparently supposed to do all your thinking in.

I must have missed class that day. I never learned about this box.

TheRedneck


I am self funded too, i don't have a degree but i'm officially a mechatronics machine builder level 3, i can get level 4 if they let me go to uni for a year, lol
My greatest learning has come from having very good schooling and working across Europe dismantling machines of every kind, i can now officially repair, operate, or modify any kind of machine from a microwave to a space shuttle.
I can still turn or mill parts to within 10u manually, not many peeps alive can still do that.
Somewhere in America there is a bridge held together with nuts & bolts that i made, a few of them will have F*** OFF stamped on them instead of the usual serial number. I got angry when a number stamp broke & couldn't replace it... If you see one, it's one i made. I probably made parts for the London Eye as well, enjoy the ride.
I worked on the generator retrofit for the QE2, 3-D milling/ turning production lines for torpedoes. I was at Matrix Churchill in Coventry when they were making Uzi's for Saddam's army, at the Dutch nuke missile base, Dupont where they make some very toxic stuff you don't want to know about, Alcoa, Lockheed, Corus, Heineken, Phillips, just name a company i have worked for them.
Mostly i'm just a dumb mechanic at work, i like it that way.....




top topics



 
11
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join