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.

 

Tesla, Atomic Signatures, and the Artificial Rendering of Matter

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2009 @ 05:10 AM
link   
In 1930, Tesla wrote an article in which he explained his vision for Man's Greatest Achievement. He felt it would one day be possible to understand material substance so well, it could be manipulated. In his final years he was known to go on about how manipulating electromagnetic energy "a certain way" into a "wall of light" would give one control over matter, gravity, etc.


What has the future in store for this strange being, born of a breath, of perishable tissue, yet immortal, with his powers fearful and divine? What magic will be wrought by him in the end? What is to be his greatest deed, his crowning achievement?



To create and annihilate material substance, cause it to aggregate in forms according to his desire, would be the supreme manifestation of the power of Man's mind, his most complete triumph over the physical world, his crowning achievement which would place him beside his Creator and fulfill his ultimate destiny.


www.rastko.rs...



For a long time I have wondered: "If everything is made of the exact same things (protons neutrons electrons), how is it that such a vast array of properties result?" Hearing his idea about em being used in an idealized matter rendering process interested me. Seeing as the electrons are held into the atom by the electromagnetic force, one has to assume that the photon is also a fundamental particle. Not knowing where to go with that, I decided to make simple mathematic signatures for the elements by comparing quarks in the nucleus to the electrons in an atom. (this would be a lot more presentable if I could copy and paste all my tables).

Example:
Hydrogen---Quarks---1 Proton---0 Neutrons--Total---Electron ratio---Electron Difference
Number 1-----Up----------2-----------0--------------2---------3 -1/1----------1
Mass 1-----Down----------1-----------0--------------1---------3 -2/1----------0

If you're wondering why the ratio is expressed in terms of 3 (extremely inproperly at that): From helium up until the very heavy elements just before radioactivity sets in, can easily be expressed in terms of three and a remainder. The other question I've always wanted to know was: "Why do radioactive elements only stay stable for so long and then suddenly change into another element?" While I've only charted the 79 most stable and common isotopes of each element (did you know tungsten doesn't have a stable isotope?), I have seen that as the ratio shifts towards 3 and 4 and with increasing neutrons (down quarks) instead of 3 and 3, radioactivity is almost completely assured. I believe the ratio and difference numbers can be used to understand the photon and em activity at this level.

My idea is this: The chemical properties that we witness matter exhibit everyday can be attributed to the net interaction of its components and an exterior force (the ether, other em levels, I'm not sure). If we graph every elements isotopes (both stable and unstable) and then crunch the numbers, I'm sure we'll see a pattern that can be used to isolate (for lack of a better scientific term) the "property force/field".

The end result is that we could then simulate the interaction against this force/field and have an amount of synthetic matter that is stabalized by constant energy input instead of a nucleus. Because the energy input is strictly regulated, we could change it from one element to another (different arrangement) or even increase the amount of that element (more energy input). The molecule phase is a bit more complex but if this is accomplished, making molecules would be just a good idea away. I say with confidence that the energy requirements for such an experiment would be astronomical and in the end completely unfeasible. I just thought I'd share with everyone the stuff I try to figure out when I'm bored. Thoughts?

Note: I don't want this turning into a Tesla conspiracy thread. There are plenty already I'm sure.

[edit on 26-5-2009 by Eitimzevinten]




posted on May, 26 2009 @ 07:23 AM
link   
If I understand you post correctly, you are stating that one element could be changed into another, such as lead into gold. It can be done, and has been, but it is cost prohibitive.
What I would like to know is what happened to Tesla's papers. It is my understanding the government agents essentially raided his apartment after his death, and took all of his papers, journals, every scrap of paper.
Why? And why have we heard nothing of his research, except that which was known before his death?



posted on May, 26 2009 @ 07:48 AM
link   
Eitimzevinten

AWESOME POST

"If everything is made of the exact same things (protons neutrons electrons), how is it that such a vast array of properties result?"

I've often wondered the exact same thing. Very interesting ideas. I've often wondered how this species could alter matter.

I've wondered the power of the human brain and it's capabilities. I think that if everybody in the room could SERIOUSLY not notice an object it would not physically be there. A sort of think your own reality if you will.

The human brain is powerful and litterally will see how and what it wants.



posted on May, 26 2009 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by kettlebellysmith
 


The key is that he is rumored to have come up with a wireless energy transfer system as well as a new very abundant power source. Those two items are almost essential to undertake a project such as this which is also his idea. I believe he put it all together a bit too late.

Yes changing the nucleus to get a resulting chemical change happens all the time. I'm talking about nucleusless (what an ugly word) chemical properties. The ability to directly change energy into matter with the chemical properties of one's liking. The real amazing aspect of this is if the approach can also be applied to molecules. Molecular properties on demand. New materials that are naturally impossible could be made. Newer stronger metal alloys. These could also be integrated with natural matter. In fact the process may inadvertantly teach us how to apply it to already existing matter.



posted on May, 26 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Im not educated much in physics but it was my understanding that matter has different properties because of string theory.I thought the strings of energy that vibrate oscillate at different frequencies which gives all matter different properties?



posted on May, 26 2009 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 


Thats if you believe in string theory which I reject at the highest possible level. Anything that contains the utterance of the word "graviton" just doesn't seem plausible to me and any type of theory that would allow for its existence either mathematically or otherwise I simply cannot support.

edit: M-theory When I watched this, I was actually onboard up until they showed the reaction in which the "graviton" transcended our normal dimensions and went into string dimensions.

Then there's the practical side: If all this is controlled by extra-dimensional "strings" there's not a whole lot we can do about it. This approach would allow us a huge understanding of matter and how it works if correct. I'm not saying this has to be true just because it has more upside but, it's worth looking into. I haven't came up with all the numbers for the thousand plus isotopes. When they are all graphed, I'm hoping the trend is blatantly obvious. You will notice when observing isotope by mass, there's a wave like function to its stability in most cases.

[edit on 26-5-2009 by Eitimzevinten]



posted on May, 26 2009 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Eitimzevinten
 


This is some good stuff, and i am going to have to read more of it after work. However, i would point out that a "crowning achievement" of man would not be transmuting matter, but rather transcending matter. To glimpse, at will, the other side of the veil, another reality or quite possibly THE reality.

Transmuting matter would make us lord over this universe, but the ultimate achievement is to lord over all that is...the multiverse and beyond.



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 02:20 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


This is a step in that direction. If we can render matter via an energy interaction, then we'd know what dictates how matter must act. Upon knowing that, it may then be possible to pursue other types of reactions with the same thing.



posted on May, 27 2009 @ 03:08 AM
link   
Here's something interesting I just found: Claytronics: Programmable Matter

Its basically a nanotechnology that combines computer information and physically interactive atoms (dubbed "catoms") that are not intended to transfer an object or take on its chemical properties. Its basically being penned as the best modeling material ever invented.

My other Idea for rendering matter was to somehow transcend digital information into physical existence but I abandoned it some time ago after I couldn't think of a media that could do such a thing. If we were to combine this technology (which by the looks of it is far from perfected or even functional at the moment) with a seperate nanotechnology that could regulate the energy interaction I stated above, controling matter doesn't sound all that far-fetched.



posted on May, 28 2009 @ 05:07 AM
link   
Tesla was on the right track.

Most everyone else is beating around the bush in the dark.

If you want to start manipulating matter and our physical universe, you have to start going into the subatomic universe....

The problem is that when scientists look at the subatomic universe, their response is, at its core, akin to the comments below a You Tube video. A whole lot of people arguing with nothing about nothing, for the sake of nothing.

I like to visualize the universe in a rather simple manner. You have a room - a giant echo-chamber. A single sound is set-off, which reverberates off of the walls. Eventually, you establish regions of positive and negative interference that give rise to complex systems across a number of conceivable physical dimensions. As the reverberations increase, the number of 'pseudo dimensions' can be observed to have activity.

That visualization is not all-encompassing, but it sets a nice, open foundation for the concept of particles and particle-interaction, as well as the concept of time.

Now, if you want to start manipulating matter - you have to figure out how to play a different tune with the same orchestra.

I would start with using various EMF sources (signal generators) set up to create a region of space with 3d standing waves that exceed Planck Frequency. I have my suspicions that the fabled Hutchinson Effect was similar to this concept - if not reaching Planck-frequency; it reached a level where the normal operation of matter was interrupted.

In theory - were a source of EMF to exceed Planck-Frequency, a strong-force singularity would form and engulf the photon(s) and evaporate with as-of-yet unknown results.

I would also be curious about creating 'pseudo-dimensions' using radiation sources and seeing how various materials and space, itself, reacted to it.

But my budget is limited, and the concept of creating a "sea of black holes to produce exotic particles" would probably convince many people that I am not to be trusted with anything more than a hundred-watt light-bulb.

I'm sure some of them would recall Rodney McKay fussing over how those exotic particles made for unstable matter-bridges and other star-system-dooming tears in space-time.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 


This is the first I've heard of the hutchinson effect but there are interesting things I noticed upon looking it up. For instance, the levitation of heavy objects. Under the assumption that gravity is a special type of em, that makes a lot of sense. The radio waves would inhibit the attraction by disrupting other em waves.

It's also promising in the idea that matter's properties are an em rendering because of the fusion of unlike materials (breakdown of physical surface). Without displacement, those effects cannot be attributed to simple melting. That fact that this again all leads back to tesla is promising.

Instead of sound, I'd like to think that the universe is a simple em creation (with a few extreme cirrcumstances). If I was stronger at very complex math, I could probably prove such a thing.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   
"Computer"

"Earl gray tea.....HOT!"


Yesssssssssssssssssssss


I can't wait!



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Eitimzevinten
 


I use sound to visualize as it's a little more tangible than radio waves (even though I'm an avionics person).

Additionally, it's very difficult to envision four+ physical dimensions (I can do it in "flashes" of understanding.... but nothing I can really sit and 'play with' ).

I wouldn't say matter is purely electromagnetic.... but that electromagnetism can be used to "punch into" what I call "sub quantum flux." One could say I don't subscribe to the Higgs Bosom - "the particle of space."

Modern quantum theory can be described as viewing the universe as a giant hex-grid (like in many turn based strategy games). Particles are able to move on this grid each 'turn.' Each turn takes place in one Planck-Time unit.

It's more complex than that (three dimensions, for example - not to mention the numerous other states and positions that constitute additional physical dimensions within each "hex") - but that's the meat&potatoes of it.

Which, I find the model to be quite silly considering the issues we've had with quantifying subatomic behavior in the past. Subatomic particles express both particle behavior and wave behavior. By their very nature - waves are impossible to quantify as their influence extends beyond the definition of the quantifiable substance they compose.

I contend that there is, 'below' our particles, a system of mechanics that is unrelated to the quantifiable nature of our universe - a system of influence that may or may not experience time and space. Perhaps this is simply my ignorance of the nitty-gritty details of the subject.

However, we still don't completely understand electromagnetism and how it fits into the newer understandings of our universe - much less, gravity.

But, I would imagine that developing EM fluctuations that violate Planck-Time, or come close to it, would cause erratic behavior in our physical universe.

I recall a 1-ton shelf in John Hutchinson's workshop bumping around and set swaying by some unknown influence during a Discovery Channel interview with him attempting to reproduce the effects.

In all honesty.... I think the guy is a little...... lost..... and probably didn't know what he was doing when he first discovered the effect, anyway (or if he did, he doesn't now....) - but he's not been able to reproduce it.

But, it doesn't mean he didn't hit on something really cool.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Eitimzevinten
 


Good stuff, I am a subscriber to M- Theory, well something like it anyways. I think that strings and branes make up everything and by using as of yet unknown EM frequencies we can tap into the quantum world and change the strings frequency, thus creating anything we want. I also think that there is a 'sub-space', or "spacetime foam" as some call it that controls the quantum world, or at least is where these elementary particles exist and cause the effects on the macro world.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 




Additionally, it's very difficult to envision four+ physical dimensions (I can do it in "flashes" of understanding.... but nothing I can really sit and 'play with' ).


It's basically impossible, it is like trying to imagine something that doesn't exist- you can't do it. We have never lived or experienced any spatial dimensions above 3 so there is no way to visualize past maybe brief (like you said) 'enlightenment', but really it is pointless to try, it is best to describe them and understand them by mathematics IMO.



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 12:24 AM
link   
I don't have that article by Tesla.
I'll have to run it by some researchers.

Tesla energized the ether consisting of something the acted toward
his high voltage and high frequency electrostatic devices that acted
like 'charges in an insulating fluid'.

The fluid would beak down exposing even more charges than the
normal mobile electron.

There could be low currents involved but later said any potential
may be used with a new bulb, that acts as a beam projector, and
capable of high currents.

Today we might speculate about crop circles and dead cattle as
getting a beam treatment. The Tesla material locked up in 1943
fell into the Nazi scientists in 1945 and seem to have worked on
the Tesla technology with success.

ED: Check one of Tesla's last birthday announcements.
He claimed a way of making Radium. This from the powerful
bulb. Why, Radium makes Helium and alpha and beta charges for
current generators. Cost was dollar a pound, or some estimate.
Radioactivity he claimed from cosmic particles and non radioactive
elements can be made radioactive by particle or UV or rays.



[edit on 6/1/2009 by TeslaandLyne]

[edit on 6/1/2009 by TeslaandLyne]



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 


I'm not saying matter is completely em, I'm saying its properties result from the em contained within the atom acting on (suspected em) forces outside the atom and the idea is to simulate the interior forces against an exterior force to have the properties of matter without a proper nucleus.

The Higgs Boson and Graviton just don't seem plausible to me as well. All other types of particles can move in and out of an atom given the right stimulus so what mystical force would stop these two from moving (perhaps read: exchanging) as well? I would think the moving of any amount of either particle from an atom would compromise that atoms constitution. And what happens when the atom is destroyed via anti-matter reaction, Is there going to be a massless particle floating around exhibiting gravitational pull (the source of any mini-black hole speculation I'd assume)?

reply to post by jkrog08
 


That's definitely something I'll have to consider. While I don't follow that thought process, the fact that the same idea could be applied given the string theory model of the universe is reassuring. Gathering all the signature data might lead to the discovery of a frequency that can only be attributed to strings. I'm confident some kind of wave pattern can be (mathmatically) found that would then be used to figure out what the exterior aspect of the reaction would have to be. Maybe its em and maybe it's strings, I'm not so proud to allow my beliefs to stop me in the pursuit of finding the right answer (atleast when it comes to science).

reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


The article was from the new yorker and I know of a couple sites that host it in it full form.

Is the second paragraph refering to some sort of plasma?

Radioactivity is another issue. Something should either exist or not exist, the fact that certain (actually most) atomic nuclei break down would suggest some sort of "friction" is accumulating over time. I'd be interested in finding out how string theory views atomic stability and radioactivity. I've also heard that protons supposedly decay. If building blocks decay, is it then possible that there is no such thing as a truly stable element that will maintain its properties indefinitely unless acted on by an outside force? If thats the case, maybe exposing the atoms to rays, etc. isn't "making" them radioactive, its just expediting the process.

[edit on 1-6-2009 by Eitimzevinten]



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 


LOL, to bad "Dr." Hutchinson doesn't "take notes", I mean he might be smart and on to something, but without notes to remember complex processes it is no good. I too saw the Discovery episode.



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Eitimzevinten
 


The reference second paragraph:



Tesla energized the ether consisting of something the acted toward his high voltage and high frequency electrostatic devices that acted like 'charges in an insulating fluid'.


The ether the caries EM according to Tesla (which is nothing according
to the Relativists) is a sea of insulative fluid with carriers.

Some how I think ether was thought compressible as Tesla said
radio waves were like sound waves. When Tesla thought what based
on what experiment I'm still trying to put together as his most important
notes must be held back so I have to rely on Lyne and others as to
what Tesla did, stated and theorized.

Ether would be the finest matter thousands as dense as air and
very reactive to electricity. Its inter atom presence might explain
gas reactions and isotope reactions and mass formations.
But again standard science does not have ether.

The Ether disturbed by Tesla coils is some kind of plasma perhaps
as the insulation is ripped away and the carriers are exposed.
Thus all the lightning from the coils that people are calling plasma.



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


This would all work a lot better if someone could come up with a modern explanation for an "ether". The name itself just sounds too mystical and while it may exist and contribute to the physics of the universe, I'd like to believe modern science would be able to relate it to something we already know.

[edit on 1-6-2009 by Eitimzevinten]



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join