Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Little HAARP's

page: 12
10
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by hellobruce
 

No one either animal or human can "manipulate" frequencies.A frequency is the period over which an event repeats itself.Radio waves,visible light,and the radiation used to cook food in a microwave oven all have a specific frequency but no physical form so can't be manipulated by any living being.Waves in a pond have physical form and can be manipulated by simply wading into the pond or lowering say a piece of wood into it.




posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   
**ATTENTION**

Please keep to the topic at hand. No need for off-topic comments regarding each other, or other topics.

Thank You.

~Tenth
ATS Mod



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Imagewerx
No one either animal or human can "manipulate" frequencies.A frequency is the period over which an event repeats itself.Radio waves,visible light,and the radiation used to cook food in a microwave oven all have a specific frequency but no physical form so can't be manipulated by any living being.Waves in a pond have physical form and can be manipulated by simply wading into the pond or lowering say a piece of wood into it.


oh dear, so in your world no one talks, or sings, or makes a noice. All done by manipulating frequencies.

Radio is done by also manipulating a radio frequency, either by Amplitude, Frequency or Phase modulation. etc.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 




I put up a picture of what the IRI looks like when it is transmitting. I don't know if it was transmitting at the time but it doesn't matter because that's what it looks like whether it's transmitting or not.


Aren't you at all curious about what HAARP looks like when it's on? Has social media wizardry so clouded your sense of discovery that information like 180 towers on 23 acres, connected by sF6 spark gaps doesn't make you go dang, what does that look like when it's on?

The photo of Tesla in the camp chair that I previously put up is only a 22 foot arc. We're talking 180 towers on 23 acres for heavens' sake. The noise alone must be deafening.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by Phage
 




I put up a picture of what the IRI looks like when it is transmitting. I don't know if it was transmitting at the time but it doesn't matter because that's what it looks like whether it's transmitting or not.


Aren't you at all curious about what HAARP looks like when it's on?


You should read what he wrote. He knows what it looks like when it is "on". And thanks to that photo so do all of us - even those who do not want to admit that we know.


Has social media wizardry so clouded your sense of discovery that information like 180 towers on 23 acres, connected by sF6 spark gaps ......


Since the aerials are not "connected" by "spark gaps" at all, the rest of your post is nonsensical.

Spark gaps "connect" pats of a circuit that are designed to be connected by a spark that arcs over the gap at some preset voltage.

These aerials are not designed to be connected in such a way at all - they are radio transmitters. Certainly a spark gap is also a radio transmitter - but not all radio transmitters are spark gaps.

The space between the aerials is no more a "spark gap" than the space between you electric oven and your microwave.

BTW even if these were spark gaps they would not ba "SF6 spark gaps" - these would be "air spark gaps" - since the insulating material between them is air, not SF6 (Sulphur Hexafluoride).



The photo of Tesla in the camp chair that I previously put up is only a 22 foot arc. We're talking 180 towers on 23 acres for heavens' sake. The noise alone must be deafening.


You can't hear radio waves without a radio - if you find it deafening turn the volume down, or even turn the radio off



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 

The antennas are not connected to each other with spark gaps.
edit on 12/27/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 


Seriously, why are so hung up on sparks? There aren't any.
Pray tell.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 

It's one of those sciencey sounding keywords. Doesn't matter that HAARP doesn't have them.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   
If you go back to page 1, the op was about HIPAS testing spark gap powered radiators.

They have SF6 filled gaps in the center, the halves of the dipole are charged to a very high voltage then they fire it with a laser pulse. It's not very flexible since it only operates at the dipole frequency and the amplitude's not very adjustable. You also only get little naturally damped blurps instead of CW. You can, however, make a phased array sort of by carefully timing the laser pulses. I think they've done something like 6 at a time. I'm not sure what the advantage is. Gakona, of course, does not do this.

edit to add: i know the hipas phased array is no longer operating but this seems to still be going
edit on 27-12-2012 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


And as well as it no longer existing, it is also not HAARP - HIPAS had antennas that were horizontal and 53m long, and since the spark gap is pressurized SF6 you wouldn't see it unless looking through a built in window in the container anyway!



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bedlam
If you go back to page 1, the op was about HIPAS testing spark gap powered radiators.

They have SF6 filled gaps in the center, the halves of the dipole are charged to a very high voltage then they fire it with a laser pulse.


Cool. If I remember correctly, we used a laser in a similar fashion to trigger our Marx generator. The generator itself was a little messy since most of it was submerged in oil, so to fix and adjust it, even after it was drained, was like working in a crankcase. The size of a couple of bathtubs. But you can't beat 2.5MV over 50ns for dramatic effect.
edit on 27-12-2012 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 02:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by Bedlam
 


And as well as it no longer existing, it is also not HAARP - HIPAS had antennas that were horizontal and 53m long, and since the spark gap is pressurized SF6 you wouldn't see it unless looking through a built in window in the container anyway!


No doubt, just pointing out where it's coming from. Not sure what the allure of spark gap transmission is, power is (relatively) cheap in this frequency range.

edit to add: I guess it could be that first half-cycle - it's a doozy - but while it's got red hot peak power, the total beam power is diddly compared to gakona. Maybe there's some experimental process that needs a lot of peak power but not average power.

Also, SF6 is anti-helium, in that if you inhale it, you become a contrabass for a few seconds. Very entertaining.
edit on 28-12-2012 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 05:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by Imagewerx
No one either animal or human can "manipulate" frequencies.A frequency is the period over which an event repeats itself.Radio waves,visible light,and the radiation used to cook food in a microwave oven all have a specific frequency but no physical form so can't be manipulated by any living being.Waves in a pond have physical form and can be manipulated by simply wading into the pond or lowering say a piece of wood into it.


oh dear, so in your world no one talks, or sings, or makes a noice. All done by manipulating frequencies.

Radio is done by also manipulating a radio frequency, either by Amplitude, Frequency or Phase modulation. etc.

Yes of course they do,but any natural sound is amplitude modulated (AM) and NOT frequency modulated (FM),therefore they do not "manipulate" the FREQUENCY of the sound to make it.
Again an electronic circuit can in a way "manipulate" a frequency (superheterodyne receivers for example).But if you want to be pedantic,it can't actually change the frequency of an electromagnetic wave as it is travelling invisibly through the air.It can receive it and re-transmit it a different frequency or with a different type of modulation,but it can not be done on the fly.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 




BTW even if these were spark gaps they would not ba "SF6 spark gaps" - these would be "air spark gaps" - since the insulating material between them is air, not SF6 (Sulphur Hexafluoride).


So, Gaul, in the interests of building the HAARP array from the ground up, and understanding the difference between HIPAS and HAARP and why HAARP would content itself with less than half the ERP that HIPAS was capable of at the time it disappeared into the night: how exactly do you know that there are no spark gaps of whatever type at HAARP? And if the gap is filled, with SF 6, how is it a gap?

Please appreciate my dilemma: I know that you know absolutely squat about HAARP. I have openly admitted knowing just slightly above squat about HAARP in the first thread on HAARP I ever made. We know that Tesla and Eastlund understood HAARP. We know that one of the few people able to actually contribute salient points in this thread had a number of their posts removed. Where does that leave us?



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by luxordelphi

Aren't you at all curious about what HAARP looks like when it's on? Has social media wizardry so clouded your sense of discovery that information like 180 towers on 23 acres, connected by sF6 spark gaps doesn't make you go dang, what does that look like when it's on?



In the same way I'm curious what a radio telescope looks like when it's on. Or a radar array. Or a TV transmitter. Or a mobile phone mast. Or a kettle ......
edit on 28-12-2012 by AndyMayhew because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by luxordelphi And if the gap is filled, with SF 6, how is it a gap?


It's the nature of spark gaps to have fill gas. Otherwise, it wouldn't break down and arc, which is its design function.

SF6 has a hellaciously high arc voltage, which is why you use it for HV gaps. And you can trigger it with a laser, thus it is why you would choose it for that duty.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by luxordelphi

So, Gaul, in the interests of building the HAARP array from the ground up, and understanding the difference between HIPAS and HAARP and why HAARP would content itself with less than half the ERP that HIPAS was capable of at the time it disappeared into the night:


But what you got for a high ERP at HIPAS was a very low duty cycle and low average power output. It's the nature of that sort of transmitter. You get about a half-cycle of high ERP, then squat.



how exactly do you know that there are no spark gaps of whatever type at HAARP?


It's not that sort of transmitter. Hertzian dipoles don't really HAVE a transmitter in a classical sense, it's a tuned dipole with a spark gap. Gakona is a CW output rig using stock class AB finals. You don't need or want spark gaps in that sort of rig.



We know that Tesla and Eastlund understood HAARP.


Tesla didn't live into the tube age, he would not have understood phased arrays, he likely didn't have a clue about the ionosphere. So to say "he understood HAARP" is incorrect. Eastlund probably did - he designed that sort of thing.




Where does that leave us?


With a half dozen posters who know what they're talking about?



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bedlam
Tesla didn't live into the tube age, he would not have understood phased arrays, he likely didn't have a clue about the ionosphere. So to say "he understood HAARP" is incorrect. Eastlund probably did - he designed that sort of thing.



Some sources say he did predict ionosphere, i.e. he did have some clues.

Of course, a lot of his intuition did result in anything practical or true. But let's give him a tiny credit for the ionosphere prediction.


edit on 28-12-2012 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 




BTW even if these were spark gaps they would not ba "SF6 spark gaps" - these would be "air spark gaps" - since the insulating material between them is air, not SF6 (Sulphur Hexafluoride).


So, Gaul, in the interests of building the HAARP array from the ground up, and understanding the difference between HIPAS and HAARP and why HAARP would content itself with less than half the ERP that HIPAS was capable of at the time it disappeared into the night:


Because it does not need the power for its purpose.


how exactly do you know that there are no spark gaps of whatever type at HAARP?


I do not know there are no spark gaps of any kind at HAARP - sorry if I gave that impression.

However I am quite confident here are no spark gaps in the IRI - the Ionospheric Research Instrument because there is no need for spark gaps in radio transmitters, and the IRI is a radio transmitter. Similarly with the VHF and UHF radars, HF receivers, and optical cameras. These also need no spark gaps.

And the antenna array, which you seem to think should be sparking and arcing because apparently you think it comprises spark gaps between the antennas, also has no need of spark gaps.


And if the gap is filled, with SF 6, how is it a gap?


In the same way the gap between you and the computer monitor you are reading this on is filled with air.


Please appreciate my dilemma: I know that you know absolutely squat about HAARP.


Apparently I know HAARP is a radio transmitter - so that would give lie to your presumption. So yeah - I can see you have a dilemma continuing to hold that though as true - I believe the term is cognitive dissonance.


I have openly admitted knowing just slightly above squat about HAARP in the first thread on HAARP I ever made. We know that Tesla and Eastlund understood HAARP.


Lots of people understand HAARP - the technicians and scientists who work on it, people who study its results - why be so limited with your list??


We know that one of the few people able to actually contribute salient points in this thread had a number of their posts removed.


Perhaps s/he should have made salient points in those posts then.

In fact a lot of people have made salient points.


Where does that leave us?


I think it leaves you in a quandary - since you have all these problems to sort out, despite having been given answers to at least some of them ages ago, and the rest of them in this thread.

Especially since you apparently know what I know purely by some interactions on here where you have generally shown that you have no idea what I know at all.

But that's your problem - I will continue to provide you with such information I do know from time to time when it seems like the appropriate answer - but whether you choose to comprehend and/or believe it or not is entirely up to you.
edit on 28-12-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)
edit on 28-12-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: fix quoting



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 




But what you got for a high ERP at HIPAS was a very low duty cycle and low average power output. It's the nature of that sort of transmitter. You get about a half-cycle of high ERP, then squat.


HIPAS was not using the electrojet as an antenna extension. Wrong location. Gakona = right location for that use. Also, "...half-cycle of high ERP, then squat." makes no sense if you're continually transmitting or, as in this case, pulsing. (The power falls off if it's not continually injected.)



It's not that sort of transmitter. Hertzian dipoles don't really HAVE a transmitter in a classical sense, it's a tuned dipole with a spark gap. Gakona is a CW output rig using stock class AB finals. You don't need or want spark gaps in that sort of rig.


Sorry...still not understanding. What are you saying here? HIPAS was an accidental transmitter? Whereas HAARP, openly transmitting RF, doesn't require spark gaps? They were for show then, on HIPAS, in order to fool us into thinking that HIPAS was what?



With a half dozen posters who know what they're talking about?


Don't be hasty. In my mind, if Eastlund and Tesla were with us in this thread today, we might grant that they know what they're talking about. I think that a video, with audio, of HAARP in operation would be a starting point. Then we, those who have a glimmer about just what a nasty gadget HAARP is, would have something to debunk. Further, those who have actually seen and heard HAARP in operation would have a measure by which to guage just how far afield claims of no impact have taken us.

Just out of curiosity...lounging within the HAARP array would be extremely hazardous - agreed. But what about a remote video - they don't function there either? Get their guts fried, do they? Part of the problem with trying to harness or even study the ELF from lightning is the hazard of equipment proximity.





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join