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.

 

Extreme Water -Science Observes H2O Acting Weird

page: 4
71
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Well it makes sense if you consider sound waves at the speed of light.
The pressure waves coming from electricity.
One electricity to pressure example I found to be radio or TV vacuum tubes
that shook themselves loose and had to be pushed back into their sockets.
I saw a wigged out radio that had tube holders screwed down to the sockets.
It seems anything coming from electricity is moving at the speed of light so I
suppose the buildup of pressure takes time unless the voltage pressure is high.




posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
Well it makes sense if you consider sound waves at the speed of light.
The pressure waves coming from electricity.
One electricity to pressure example I found to be radio or TV vacuum tubes
that shook themselves loose and had to be pushed back into their sockets.
I saw a wigged out radio that had tube holders screwed down to the sockets.
It seems anything coming from electricity is moving at the speed of light so I
suppose the buildup of pressure takes time unless the voltage pressure is high.


A common misperception is that electricity is composed of this stream of electrons moving through wires at the speed of light. Actually, the velocity of the electric charge is measured in feet (or meters) per day. And like all things physicsy (Yeah, I made that up.) there is math involved. Like, V=I/QeR^2pi, where V is the charge velocity in cm/second, I is the current in amperes, e is the charge of a single electron in Coulombs, Q is the number of mobile charge carriers (electrons, for wire) per cc, R is the radius of the conductor, and pi is 3.14159 or thereabouts. Now the charge of a single electron (e)is 1.6x10^-19 coulombs. Assuming the wire is copper, each copper atom has 1 free electron which can act as a charge carrier. The number of electrons (one per atom) for copper is 8.5x10^22 per cc. Now let's assume the wire is .1cm in radius. If you work through the math, you end up with the charge moving at about 2 meters (6 feet) er DAY. Not really the speed of light, is it?
Now when you hit the light switch in the kitchen to get your beer out of the fridge, you don't have to wait 3 days for the charge to go the lightbulb. That's because the wire is more like a pantry shelf crammed full of cans of beans, so that there is no more room. Shove one more can onto one end of the shelf and a can falls almost instantaneously off the other.
By the way, the above is only correct with respect to direct current. With alternating, the charge just sort of vibrates back and forth, with the electrons not really going anywhere.
Have you ever wondered why there are any electrons left in the wires in your house after 30 years of electric usage. Now you know. They really don't go anywhere.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by 4nsicphd
 


Nice explanation.

Isn't there a physics conundrum involving a rigid rod, and faster than light travel? Something like a rigid rod 1 light year long, where you nudge one end and the other end instantaneously reacts, but according to relativity it is impossible for that to happen? I can't remember the conundrum, but I know we discussed it at the same time we discussed the electron movement in wires.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by 4nsicphd
 


Nice explanation.

Isn't there a physics conundrum involving a rigid rod, and faster than light travel? Something like a rigid rod 1 light year long, where you nudge one end and the other end instantaneously reacts, but according to relativity it is impossible for that to happen? I can't remember the conundrum, but I know we discussed it at the same time we discussed the electron moveme.nt in wires.


There really is no conundrum. FTL travel is restricted by special relativity as a result of the mass transformation rules that apply at relativistic speeds. The relativistic mass equals the rest mass divided by the square root of one minus velocity squared divided by the speed of light squared. So you can see that as v increases and nears c, relativistic mass increases asymptotically toward infinity. Therefore to accelerate an infinite mass takes infinite energy, and the energy available is finite. So, can't go there. Since a wave, which is what travels down the steel rod has no rest mass, mass transformation doesn't apply, and no prohibition is there.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   
The problem with Tesla patents and electricity is you must learn from the master.



If Tesla said Radio was sound waves at the speed of light and you focus the
electricity for collection that is about all one can get from his discoveries.
His extensive study in the matter has only proved worthwhile to the people
holding on to his electrical science and not telling us.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Mayura
 


And how exactly would earth 'shift frequencies'

More to the point, no, that's not what would happen. Stars and planets are formed by different processes. They can't interchange between one another



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by predator0187
 




Excellent! The water bridge one's a doozy. Kind of an example of enhancing the amplitude of the magnetic field (gravity). Inducing a stronger "Gravitational" field between the two poles. Brilliance.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by xacto
 


At ten kilovolts, this has far more to do with electrostatic potential than electromagnetic fields... and electromagnetic fields have, essentially, no relationship to gravity.

Water is a polarized molecule, and a number of its characteristics are likely due to its very stable nature combined with this polarized structure (most polarized molecules tend to be rather unstable... most hydrogen-based compounds are very unstable and corrosive - as is oxygen; a very peculiar molecule, water is).

Other polarized compounds, like carbon dioxide, tend to be gasses and not exist as a liquid at room temperature - and are outside the realm of these types of experiments for most people.

Now, if only I could figure out how to make use of this.... it may not be the "light bridge" concept depicted in a number of sci-fi universes... but a "water bridge" would be pretty darn cool. The megavolts of charge required to create a large-enough bridge would probably kill anyone who got close enough to walk on it - but logic should not ruin my scientifically implausible ideas of fiction. .... And would you be able to -walk- on this bridge... or would you end up swimming in it? I'm not catching if the surface tension or viscosity increase, or not. If the water doesn't "get stiffer" - then you'd end up having to swim across this bridge.... which would be absolutely awesome in a theme park.... until you swam through the bottom.... that would be a weird experience...



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   
thats nuts m8, good post



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 12:18 AM
link   
This is a interesting read im just thinking about how they could use that in real life



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Mayura
 

Jeez,why is there always someone who wants to turn everything into "shifts in consciousness" and/or 2012? Puhleez, give me a break. I'll take you up on your silly star bet though if you like. You're going to look really silly come the end of December 2012 when everything is exactly the same as it has always been.

edit on 29-12-2010 by RMFX1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by 4nsicphd

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by 4nsicphd
 


Nice explanation.

Isn't there a physics conundrum involving a rigid rod, and faster than light travel? Something like a rigid rod 1 light year long, where you nudge one end and the other end instantaneously reacts, but according to relativity it is impossible for that to happen? I can't remember the conundrum, but I know we discussed it at the same time we discussed the electron moveme.nt in wires.


There really is no conundrum. FTL travel is restricted by special relativity as a result of the mass transformation rules that apply at relativistic speeds. The relativistic mass equals the rest mass divided by the square root of one minus velocity squared divided by the speed of light squared. So you can see that as v increases and nears c, relativistic mass increases asymptotically toward infinity. Therefore to accelerate an infinite mass takes infinite energy, and the energy available is finite. So, can't go there. Since a wave, which is what travels down the steel rod has no rest mass, mass transformation doesn't apply, and no prohibition is there.


I saw an old thread on that whole why you can't go faster than light ordeal.

Here it is...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by againuntodust
This article makes me wonder if Jesus had some electrical properties that let him walk on water. Seems plausible. We all have electricity, if one could harness it maybe they could walk on water? Cool thread.



As I read the Bible, I realized something I never noticed before. Most of the bible, the Old Testament, is describing that something is very, very strange. When the Old Testament talks about God, it doesn’t say, ‘and God,’ it says, ‘in the Ark of the Covenant of God.’

It turns out that the whole Old Testament is describing the comings and goings of the arks of the covenant, except for Genesis which described the start.


As I look at the Ark of the Covenant in the bible, the ark that they call the ark of God, they give dimensions of that box. It’s like a box-like object that’s got gold on the outside, wood in the middle and gold on the inside. Well, that’s a capacitor. A capacitor is an object that holds energy when you charge it. Just like a battery, it holds energy except that a battery can only discharge the energy very slowly. A capacitor can discharge the energy in an instant.

So I thought, ‘That’s a really large capacitor. It would have really high voltage and be quite heavy, extremely heavy. In fact, it would be way too heavy to lift up with two flimsy poles.’ It would weigh over 3 tons because of all the gold on it. I noticed that the dimensions of a box that was found in the remains of King Tut in Egypt. Then I noticed that those boxes were the exact appropriate boxes to fir inside the sarcophagus inside the Grand Pyramid of Giza, meaning that the box size is the perfect fit so that you can lower the ark inside the sarcophagus, inside the Grand Pyramid and then push the poles without having to touch the capacitor, which would zap the crap out of you.

The outside dimensions of the sarcophagus are twice the volume of the inside dimension. It’s a perfect octave. If you measure the ark that’s described in the Bible, that’s again, twice smaller than the inside measurement of the sarcophagus.

I started to think, ‘What would you want to carry in a capacitor like that?’ There must have been some extremely powerful energy source, energy device inside the capacitor. Moses supposedly didn’t build that capacitor until he was on the other side of the Red Sea at Mount Sinai.

Look in the preface of the bible. The word is translated from the word tetragrammaton. Tetra means 4 and “grammadon” has a root word of grammar. This was thought to mean Yahweh but I dug deeper. It actually means grav, or in today’s terminology, gravity.

God = ‘The structure of a tetrahedron creating a gravitational effect.”


Source

Maybe you aren't too far from the truth.

-B.M
edit on 29/12/10 by B.Morrison because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 08:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Mayura
 


Hmm, I hate to burst your bubble, but it is pretty much clear how Stars are born. There is no chance that the Earth will ever become one.

And even IF it would, do you think you would still want to be here then?

On Topic: This is a very fascinating thread indeed! I am familiar with the works of Victor Schauberger, although the most fascinating inventions of him are still clouded in mystery (The "repulsine" for example).

I was a little shocked to read the sentence that they were able to ignite saltwater. It is a very easy to say and write sentence, but the implications are incredible!! I would love to see this developed.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Nightaudit
 


It "WAS" pretty much clear how stars were born, until this month. Recent discoveries messed up all the theories of star generation. It is not necessary to have a "nursery" and many stars are born alone in space from mysterious forces. I'm not saying the Earth would ever have enough mass to become one, and we are far too close to the sun anyhow, but I am saying that NOTHING is "pretty clear" when it comes to science and astronomy. Everything we know is just theory and speculation.

Edit to add:
WOW! Hard to find, but here is the article showing that Some Massive Stars seem to be Born Alone in space.

edit on 29-12-2010 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mayura
reply to post by againuntodust
 


Ah, the mighty scientific institutions are still in kindergarten concerning the consciousness that exists all around us.


I bet 2012 will be the year when Earth shifts frequencies and ignites into a being of light, aka a STAR.

Any takers?
I will take that bet. 1 million dollars. And just exactly HOW are you going to collect if you're right?



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mayura
reply to post by againuntodust
 


Ah, the mighty scientific institutions are still in kindergarten concerning the consciousness that exists all around us.


I bet 2012 will be the year when Earth shifts frequencies and ignites into a being of light, aka a STAR.

Any takers?


What you bring here is a personal theory, opinion-view and personally believe this to be possible. The Mayan calendar shows us they predict life as we know it to change..I have considered a world wide awakening becomming totally aware of our inner selves/ conscious and sub conscious levels.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by prexparte
 


i though that the mayan calender simply ends on 2012.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   
I bet the next question is did it help Moses part the waters... better yet, Moses was an alien with electronic water bridging device that helped him part the waters before he caused a flood and saved two of each animal in the Ark.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by 4nsicphd

Originally posted by mr10k






1: He did say it could be the smallest difference, he wasn't sure
2: Organic Chemistry deals with the molecular structure of carbon-based elements. You will learn alot about water in all types of chemistry
3: Yes, it is the most capable of dissolving of all the elements.


With a lack of precision, a discussion is just more or less random words. Water will not dissolve "all" the elements. Carbon is an element. Drop a diamond in water and watch nothing happen. In fact water doesn't dissolve any elements. It can dissolve compounds if they are polar. Water dissolves table salt but that isn't an element, it is an ionic compound of sodium and chlorine. Water will dissolve sugar (sucrose) but that isn't an element. It is a covalently bonded compound of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen. And water won't dissolve in the least a non-polar or hydrophobic compound like, for instance, your skin, or most waxes and fats or hydrocarbon chains.
edit on 26-12-2010 by 4nsicphd because: quotes misplaced

edit on 26-12-2010 by 4nsicphd because: (no reason given)


Sorry, I meant compounds. Out of ALL the compounds, water can dissolve the most. even if it can't dissolve fats, it still can dissolve the most out of any other element.



new topics

top topics



 
71
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join