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.

 

"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

page: 107
39
<< 104  105  106    108  109  110 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
If you find any physics on pages 9 and on, please give a reference. Thank you.


I will do that.

I am trying to find out who Ramsay is. And I will try to find out information about Bearden's references.




posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by buddhasystem
If you find any physics on pages 9 and on, please give a reference. Thank you.


I will do that.

I am trying to find out who Ramsay is. And I will try to find out information about Bearden's references.


OK, just don't forget to find physics in that paper you referred me to. Shouldn't take long, should it?



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Blake's paper is on math. He states that Rodin also worked with scientists and engineers.

What's your point?



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Blake's paper is on math. He states that Rodin also worked with scientists and engineers.

What's your point?


My point was that Blake rather dramatically failed to support his claims about alleged special physical properties of the coil. I pointed that out, you referred me to a bunch of 9,6,6,3 and you what.

And you admitted that "work" of Rodin and some mysterious "scientists and engineers" did not produce any result at all. That is true, Mary, and quite pathetic.



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Blake is saying magnetic field is leaking


Please quote from the scribd.com document.



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Blake is saying magnetic field is leaking


Please quote from the scribd.com document.


Please take care to actually read preceding pages of this thread, the quotes are there.



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Quotes of Blake?



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Quotes of Blake?


I was referring to your own post, where you quoted Blake re: magnetic properties of the torus. It's truly sad that people don't care to even read and hopefully digest what they post on ATS.

edit on 31-10-2011 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 



Originally posted by buddhasystem
Blake is saying magnetic field is leaking


Where?



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 04:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
And I will try to find out information about Bearden's references.


Col. Bearden states:


Rodin is apparently going by elementary electricity concepts but augmented by excellent native intuition. What he really is doing is attempting to separate the A-potential (i.e., the magnetic vector potential A) from the B field, and utilize the curl-free A-potential as an independent field of nature in the central "crossover" region. It is known in physics that this is possible; the well known Aharonov-Bohm effect depends upon precisely this separation. It appears that neither Ramsay nor Rodin are aware that a tightly-wound torus performs this "curl-free" separation of the A-potential, by trapping the B-field inside the coiled wiring, so that in a very good torus coil most of the B-field can be contained within the coil, and the curl-free A-potential will still radiate from the coil (both to its inside or center space and outside and beyond into space).

A great deal of work on this use of the "curl-free A-field" was done by Gelinas, who patented several patents in this area which were assigned to Honeywell, Inc., the firm for which he worked at the time. . . .


Bearden states that his references are from approximately 300 or more pertinent papers in the literature. The first reference is the Gelinas patent:

U.S. Patent No. 4,429,280



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
And I will try to find out information about Bearden's references.


Col. Bearden states:


So the curl-free A-potential is actually a part of the Stoney/Whittaker scalar electromagnetics I have so long advocated.


From Wikipedia, I see that:


George Johnstone Stoney (15 February 1826 – 5 July 1911) was an Anglo-Irish physicist most famous for introducing the term electron as the "fundamental unit quantity of electricity".[1]


In his references, Bearden cites Stoney's Letter to the Editor of Philosophical Magazine "On a Supposed Proof of a Theorem in Wave-motion" from the year 1897. I could not find that shared free online.

Bearden's reference for Whittaker is "On an Expression of the Electromagnetic Field Due to Electrons by Means of Two Scalar Potential Functions," Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, Series 2, Vol. 1, 1904, p. 367-372.

I found that on 4shared.com. (Scroll down and click "View document.")



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem
 



Originally posted by buddhasystem
Blake is saying magnetic field is leaking


Where?


Right there, Mary.
edit on 1-11-2011 by buddhasystem because: typo



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


I'll take that as a he didn't say it; you misspoke.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


I'll take that as a he didn't say it; you misspoke.


I take it that you aren't capable of understanding what's written there.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Since the word "leak" or "leaking" doesn't appear anywhere in the document, the onus is on you to justify what you've said.

You're copping out. But that's okay. That's your prerogative.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Bearden states that his references are from approximately 300 or more pertinent papers in the literature. The first reference is the Gelinas patent:

U.S. Patent No. 4,429,280
I'm not sure why this is significant.

You can buy an FM radio. I still have an old AM radio. Now you can buy satellite radios, though I don't have one. Gelinas patent says he can make a different kind of radio, or something along those lines.

Unless it offers advantages over the existing types of radios, it's just a curiosity to me. In fact I'd say even if it offers a slight advantage, it still probably would have difficulty gaining momentum because of the infrastructure investment in existing technology. Perhaps if it offered some dramatic improvement it might be implemented.

Now if you set all that aside, it still doesn't explain how Bearden thinks he can get free energy. That patent of Gelinas doesn't imply anything remotely like free energy.

You can put out an antenna and capture enough power from broadcast antennae to power a digital watch, but it's not really "free" energy in the sense that the power is really coming from the broadcast antennae and not "the vacuum". But it's "free" in a different sense than the term "free energy" in that you personally don't have to pay for it. But whoever is paying the electric bills for the broadcast antennae is paying for it.

The Aharonov–Bohm effect doesn't imply you can get "free energy" from the vacuum as far as I can tell, despite Bearden's apparent claims to the contrary. Now if he's powering his home with his gadget and has disconnected himself from the grid, then I'd consider what he's claiming and ask him if I can come over and look at it myself. Has he?

He seems content just selling DVDs.He's not even updating his MEG progress anymore as far as I can tell. So I don't know why you're going on about this when Bearden himself seems to have dropped it.

I also get the impression from the changes in Rodin's website that he's also dropped making his claims that were previously on his website.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I'm not sure why this is significant.


Bearden talks about the patent in terms of the work done by Gelinas on the use of the "curl-free A-field," and that the curl-free A-potential is a part of the Stoney/Whittaker scalar electromagnetics that he, Bearden, has been advocating for.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 09:36 AM
link   
Would three be a better number then 9? I mean at 12 you get 3 and 15 you get 6 and at 18 you get 9 3x3 9 3x2 6 3x1 3 so you could actually account for sporadic changed that could be directly defined. Maybe its me but its seems much more linear. If you use his system you have no margin for Error. Without Error it would be perfection. And if it was perfection then where is humanity in that equation? We are certainly not perfect...



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 

I noticed you didn't answer the question about whether he's taken his house off the grid and powered it with this magnetic potential known as A. So again I ask you, has he?

Wikipedia covers this magnetic potential in this article:

Electromagnetic four-potential
It's not like Bearden is the only guy in the world who knows about the magnetic potential A.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I noticed you didn't answer the question about whether he's taken his house off the grid and powered it with this magnetic potential known as A. So again I ask you, has he?


I've never researched that.

Searl got into a lot of trouble using his own technology to power his house. But that may not be relevant.

What I'm interested in is the research that Bearden has done into the history of electromagnetism and electrical engineering.

From Bearden's correspondence for 2001, the document "On Building a Howard Johnson motor," Bearden states:


There are over 200 effects in magnetic materials; it is not a simple subject at all [5].


Here is footnote 5:


E.g., Robert C. O'Handley, Modern Magnetic Materials: Principles and Applications, Wiley, New York, 2000 gives an extensive coverage of modern magnetic materials effects and their theory. See also A. S. Borovik-Romanov and S. K. Sinha, Eds., Spin Waves and Magnetic Excitations, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1988; M. G. Cottam, Ed., Linear and Nonlinear Spin Waves in Magnetic Films and Superlattices, World Scientific, Singapore, 1994; A. G. Gurevich and G. A. Melkov, Magnetization Oscillations and Waves, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, 1996; V. S. L'vov, Wave Turbulence Under Parametric Excitation: Applications to Magnets, Springer Series in Nonlinear Dynamics, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1994. See also E. Schlomann, "Generation of spin waves in nonuniform magnetic fields, 1. Conversion of electromagnetic power into spin-wave power and vice versa," J. Appl. Phys., 35(1), 1964, p. 159; — "2. Calculation of the coupling length," J. Appl. Phys. 35(1), 1964, p. 167; — "3. Magnetoelastic interaction," J. Appl. Phys. 35(8), 1964, p. 2382.




top topics



 
39
<< 104  105  106    108  109  110 >>

log in

join