"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

page: 206
39
<< 203  204  205    207  208  209 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Yes, I will lecture you. You've earned it.





posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   
A good discussion of problems with using DMM at frequencies higher than the mains.

The YouTube poster also likes to use radio shack digital multimeter 22-813 in his other videos, and it's rated for mains frequency according to the user manual, which is 50-60Hz.

In the above link, assuming dB numbers are similar, one can expect a seriously incorrect reading in the kilohertz range, and 200kHz it's just a crapshoot. Which, by the way, is demonstrated by the scope reading.



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Yes, I will lecture you. You've earned it.


Quite the opposite. I'm using "salt" (i.e. critical thinking) all the time, whereas you've never done this in my memory, while making all those pseudo-science posts.



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


"Pseudo-science" is the mainstream's label to erroneously engage in censorship and suppression.



posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


"Pseudo-science" is the mainstream's label to erroneously engage in censorship and suppression.


I don't have any desire or authority to censor or oppress anyone at all. I simply have respect for the scientific method and the culture of thinking that is associated with it, just like I appreciate good hygiene and healthy food. To extend the analogy, what I see in Rodin and many other such endeavors as the mental equivalent of greasy burger diet and not brushing teeth since teenage years.



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 04:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose


What sort of multimeter are you using? Is it rated to measure 200kHz?

buddhasystem 1 hour ago


I see that DanielNunezMind responded. People who are interested can follow the conversation here.



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 06:43 AM
link   
This web page on electromagnetic coils lists 16 types.

It is interesting to search for the Rodin coil on this page. It comes up under "Torus Knot (Entangled Poloidal/Toroidal)" and "Multi-Phase Torus Knot."

Under "Torus Knot . . . " it is interesting to watch the animation and read the description of it. Here is what the author then states:


The Dynamic Flux of a Toroidal to Poloidal Convolution

J.L. Naudin[5] discovered a spiral symmetry of the rotating magnetic flux of a 2-phase Rodin Coil[6]. The magnetic flux is obviously confused.
Flux pattern of a Rodin Coil

(C) J. L. Naudin 1999

A poloidal winding, wrapped around the large diameter of a toroid, would produce a polarity above and below the torus hole. A Toroidal winding will produce magnetic flux that connects in a ring, with no external flux present in a well constructed toroidal electromagnet. However, when the entangled windings of a torus knot are energized with current flow, a flux is created that has some of both influences —toroidal AND poloidal. Naudin discovered this external flux in Rodin Coil tests, and also found that the Rodin coil will couple to ferrite material (iron compound) in the center hole of a torus knot coil, which is atypical of a toroidal coil. The spiral pattern may be produced from the rotating magnetic field of the bifilar windings each being energized at different moments in time (typically at 90 degrees phase separation).



Multi-Phase Torus Knot

The Rodin Coil is a two-phase (12,5) torus knot pattern, with a spacing on the winding pattern left open for a missing third phase. The illustration on the right shows the geometry of the Rodin Coil, as two phase-coils 120 degrees separated, with a missing 3rd coil position. The inflated Rodin Coil is scaled-up vertically by the golden ratio (1.618...)inflated into an elliptical toroid.

Missing phase theory: —a conjecture needing testing with pulse-harmonics akin to Marin Soljacic's work at MIT applicable to 3D (optical) resonance within an electromagnetic power envelope, and by design affords an electromagnetic expansion-zone for the harmonic envelope of a resonant torus knot. Without this built-in decompressive-topology, a high-Q resonant envelop would become more chaotic and uncontrollable as the center-point of 3D resonant dwell is approached.

This author's approach to nucleosonic quantum refrigeration applied science experiments details a programmable power source, wherein a 3-phase pulse supply could modulate a non-sinusoidal component into the wave form over time (wave-shaping). The spectral-variation of the power-envelope is anticipated to afford a non-sinusoidal resonance against the non-linear inductive patterns associated with the cross-talk between torus knot loops as a conjugal-pinch effect. Resonant envelopes in this scenario are a geometric progression of frequencies. The power-envelope of this progression, again, via programmable pulse control, are immediately available for vector analysis over a live-instrumentation of the resonant envelope.

The concept of the Golden Error Phase Wave entails a control theory wherein the missing phase may be programmatically imprinted into any 3-phase power envelope with controlled duty cycle and depth, and also rotated between the phases with precision.

It is a programmatic control of the missing phase that may avail the creation of valence patterns within the magnetic resonant field.

DonEMitchell 06:14, 23 February 2012 (MST)


An Inflated Rodin Coil




posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 07:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


Why do you think it is interesting? Do you understand what it actually means? If so, what is "nucleosonic quantum refrigeration"?



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 07:43 AM
link   
reply to post by -PLB-
 


Yes, I noticed that term, too, and was mystified. Made me think of the Randy Powell statement about needing special materials to engineer the Rodin coil.

You are asking a sarcastic question, which I don't appreciate. You know (or should) that I'm a researcher and am trying to elicit explanations from members who can explain things in layman's terms. My role here is not to mouth-off about things but to bring out the best in others who have information to share.

Go away. You're no help.



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 07:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


It is not a sarcastic question. You have a very negative vibe around you, this is not the first time you come with such a response with no reason. It was a sincere question, even though I was already pretty certain of the answer. Basically, you find something interesting without having a clue what it means, nor being able to explain why you find it interesting. Its fine by me, but the worst part here is probably that you are lying to yourself.
edit on 10-3-2012 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by -PLB-
 


I read things that are fascinating to me and persist in trying to understand them by asking questions of knowledgeable people. Too bad you don't understand. I really don't care.



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by -PLB-
 


I read things that are fascinating to me and persist in trying to understand them by asking questions of knowledgeable people.


As PLB said, you are lying to yourself, and that applies to that aspect as well. You are not "asking questions of knowledgeable people", you simply go around proclaiming that people with actual science background are a part of some evil government agenda. Just like in other cases, you do a "dictionary hijack" -- just like by "black hole" you don't mean "black hole" at all, you don't mean "knowledgeable" when you say "knowledgeable". It's like parallel reality where things are not what they normally are. I haven't seen a single person in this thread with any semblance of physics knowledge, who would read "nucleosonic refrigeration" without laughing out loud. Just like when listening to Rodin with his stone cold stupid proclamation of being able to manufacture black holes on demand, with some "divine guidance". Like, seriously.



I really don't care.


Yeah, that's the scary part.

Now, the description of the coil that you quoted is a prime example of meaningless word soup, peppered with scientific sounding terms while making no sense at all. What's even worse, I have a feeling that whoever wrote this knew that and were trying to impress ignorant members of the public...

The spectral-variation of the power-envelope is anticipated to afford a non-sinusoidal resonance against the non-linear inductive patterns associated with the cross-talk between torus knot loops as a conjugal-pinch effect.

...and they apparently succeeded.



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Your opinion matters not. You will always have a negative, sarcastic, irrelevant retort. I'm immune. Carry on. Do your thing. Continue with your tunnel vision.

Others will supply meaningful posts, perhaps. Others will contribute.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 06:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

The spectral-variation of the power-envelope is anticipated to afford a non-sinusoidal resonance against the non-linear inductive patterns associated with the cross-talk between torus knot loops as a conjugal-pinch effect.


Smart people, as opposed to your "ignorant members of the public" referenced, follow up by investigating what is meant. Yes, this is work.
Might have to put some time in. Might have to click on the link and do some additional reading. Might find things that challenge your belief system. Oh well.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Your opinion matters not.


Not to you, of course not. But visitors to this thread who have a functional brain between their ears will find it useful.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
If so, what is "nucleosonic quantum refrigeration"?


By clicking on the link I provided and then clicking on links within the text quoted, I pulled up two additional pages. First, "nucleosonic." It doesn't list a definition but it gives clues, by way of the
Pages in category "Nucleosonic":


The following 5 pages are in this category, out of 5 total.
D

Stan Deyo

V

Vibratory Physics

Z

Znidarsic Theorem
Frank Znidarsic
Znidarsic-scale engineering

Vibratory physics is a reference to the work of Dale Pond. I also recognize the name Frank Znidarsic. His paper is mentioned in a post of mine on page 131:


Originally posted by Mary Rose

I also recommend making a review of Frank Znidarsic's Work:

www.scribd.com...


For "quantum refrigeration," I found this statement about what it is, on the "User
onEMitchell" page:


Quantum refrigeration (electronic coupling as a 3D antenna to the thermal motion of the nuclei)


(You'll have to find the link yourself because it wouldn't work in the populated post, although it worked when I previewed it.)
edit on 03/11/12 by Mary Rose because: Problems with link
edit on 03/11/12 by Mary Rose because: Interesting: The smiley populates for the "D" of "Don."



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 07:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


Not very illuminating. I have no idea what this has to do with a programmable 3 phase system (I have actually worked on the design of the phase-shifter of a polyphase multipath software defined radio. This system actually exists, and is a clever way to filter out the higher harmonic distortion components in a transceiver. Just to point out I am not a complete layman on the subject).

Another question: why did they inflate the coil by the golden ratio, and not an arbitrary other ratio?

Note that I can ask such a question for about every line of the text you quoted. I suspect you won't be able to answer these questions, nor will you find any answer that makes sense using Google. You can categorize asking critical question as sarcasm. You can also start to question your source material, and wonder why you get angry when I an ask questions about the actual content. Its up to you.
edit on 11-3-2012 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
Note that I can ask such a question for about every line of the text you quoted.


I'm sure that you can, but I'm also sure you're not interested anyway, except to discredit and ridicule the content.

You've made it clear on this thread that you love mainstream science and technology, do not believe that there has been suppression of technology, do not believe that there is any conspiracy going on in the world, usually referred to as the New World Order agenda, and you're content with your knowledge as is.

So, I don't expect any contributions from you on alternative science and technology, although I do appreciate your contribution earlier in the thread when you pointed out Buturff's error in his video.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by -PLB-
Note that I can ask such a question for about every line of the text you quoted.


I'm sure that you can, but I'm also sure you're not interested anyway, except to discredit and ridicule the content.

You've made it clear on this thread that you love mainstream science and technology, do not believe that there has been suppression of technology, do not believe that there is any conspiracy going on in the world, usually referred to as the New World Order agenda, and you're content with your knowledge as is.

So, I don't expect any contributions from you on alternative science and technology, although I do appreciate your contribution earlier in the thread when you pointed out Buturff's error in his video.


You are totally wrong and are operating from baseless assumption. I am in fact very much interested in alternative, non-mainstream science, as long as it is indeed science and not fiction by people who are clearly ignoring the scientific method. I really do hope that a "fringe" scientist makes a wonderful discovery that gives us unlimited free energy or cure many diseases. In fact, I have witnessed certain successful medical treatments being "suppressed", just not at all by some imaginary secret world power as you are claiming, but just by ordinary people who are either stubborn or have invested interests in other treatment methods. It is a shame that happens, but it is just silly to generalize from such cases that this is status quo. Actual progress happens, and on rate never seen before in history. If anything, our current "system" is the best we ever had.

The main difference between you an me is that I can discriminate between actual science and made up nonsense. Well, at least most of the time, I can also be fooled sometimes. With you it is rather the opposite. You want to be fooled. You require just two conditions to find a text interesting. 1) the writer must be someone who opposes "mainstream science", and 2) the text must contain science looking words that you don't understand. That is the only consistent criteria you have been showing throughout this thread. And it is a shame, you are not at all interested about what is real and what is not. People pointing out and explaining that you are looking at nonsense are not wanted, you just want to believe without opposition or putting any critical thought in it.

Like I said, I can accept that you want to believe in stuff that is easily demonstrable to be nonsense (like for example pi=3). I rather have you don't though, as I like to see the people on this world not to be mislead by this nonsense. Just don't pretend that you are doing anything meaningful, all you are doing is committing to dogma. You act as if you are "better" than the people criticizing the texts you come with. All you do is attacking those people with insults, you never go into the actual contents. It is sickening. On top of that you make all kind of false assumptions about your "opponents". Just to make it easter for you to regard those people as bad or evil.

I think that if you actually were open minded, and listened to the people who are criticizing those texts you quote found in your "research", you could learn a great deal. Until now you have only showed how very closed minded you are.
edit on 11-3-2012 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by -PLB-
 


So be it. "Different strokes for different folks."






new topics
top topics
 
39
<< 203  204  205    207  208  209 >>

log in

join