Tell the guy to prove it! Sounds like he's never done the proof of
principle to me.
Dan
At 05:22 PM 7/10/99 -0500, Jerry W. Decker wrote:
>Hi Bill et al!
>
>I sent an email to Joseph Hiddink at vliegschotel@yahoo.com enclosing
>your question about Bill McMurtry's comment;
>
>"In every HV experiment I've done, where charged plates are capacitively
>coupled to either an oppositely charged plate or to ground, I have
>always observed an attractive force between the ground plate and the
>charged plate - whatever its polarity. Perhaps Joseph is refering to
>something different when he relates this information about mutual
>repulsion between a charged plate and ground?"
>----------
>That's what I don't get about this either...how does one get
>electrically 'deeper' or lower than the earth ground??????? Seems like
>you'd get reversed lightning, where energy would move towards the
>greatest negativity.
>
>As I understand it;
>
>The earth is the master reference of ground, meaning the lowest energy
>level, the lowest negative. When clouds build up a charge that is high
>enough in 'pressure'/voltage to overcome the capacitive dielectric of
>the air, it discharges to the lowest negative well, which is the earth.
>
>Lightning sends out a very thin, almost invisible streamer, scanning the
>earth for the lowest potential, looking for an ingress through a point,
>if it can't find it, it will take whatever path it can find to relieve
>the pressure. And there is reverse lightning that moves from the earth
>up INTO the clouds.
>
>http://home.bre.polyu.edu.hk/~bs520180/thunder.htm
>
>As I understand reverse lightning, the earth is like a giant body of
>compressible fluid (electricity) which moves through the earth in
>pressure waves. Stubblefield and others who claim to have successfully
>tapped these currents as 'earth energy' say that mountain ranges and
>such act like a beach on which waves of these moving currents break,
>creating intensifications that can be tapped.
>
>Its a matter of connecting a load from a low energy density to a high
>energy density so that the differing pressures will equate THROUGH the
>load to do work.
>
>I think the problem here is the idea of what is a stable reference? And
>there is NO stable reference to my view, since the earth energy
>concentrations do change perhaps in clouds or waves and therefore the
>ground reference level must also change.
>
>The reference is the lowest energy level when compared with a higher
>level, that creates the difference of potential and if there is a
>conductive path, the higher potential MUST flow into the lower potential
>until they both are equal.
>
>So plus and minus are confusing, when really it is high potential
>flowing to low to simply achieve equlibrium OR is it this plus/minus
>thing coming to a neutral state OR is this comaring apples to oranges?
>
>That is the premise of aether tapping, that it is a high potential that
>is flowing into the lower potentials (holes in space) of matter, trying
>to fill it up, it precipitates as matter which must eventually
>redissolve back into energy (probably based on spin direction) because
>the mass eventually charges up so much with energy that it will dissolve
>matter back into energy, to again become one with the background aether
>energy level.
>
>Joseph says you charge up a mass to such a high negatively polarized
>potential that it must repel from the earth since it is negative also.
>
>I can't see this happening because high voltage will eventually
>discharge in the form of a bolt of energy into surrounding lesser
>potentials, in this case the earth except that these are electrons that
>he is speaking about and they always repel other electrons.
>
>Even Ken Shoulder's charge clusters are electrons that are foced to
>stick together like a bunch of grapes until they hit a conductive mass
>and then they explode in all directions due to the mutual repulsion.
>
>Now he could be referring to some kind of coulomb current except that
>implies positive to negative OR electric field lines but then again, it
>might be a direct aether/zpe interference which I doubt at this point
>since all prior reports of f/e or antigrav anomalies I've seen require
>alternating current, not the electrostatic DC.
>
>electroscope n : detects electric charge; two gold leaves diverge owing
>to repulsion of charges with like sign
>
>http://shomepower.com/dict/e/electricity.htm
>
>Electrostatics is the study of charges, or charged bodies, at rest. When
>positive or negative charge builds up in fixed positions on objects,
>certain phenomena can be observed that are collectively referred to as
>Static Electricity.
>
>The charge can be built by rubbing certain objects together, such as
>Silk and Glass or Rubber and fur; the friction between these objects
>causes Electrons to transfer from one to another with the result that
>the object losing electrons acquires a positive charge and the object
>gaining electrons acquires a negative charge.
>
>Electrodynamics is the study of charges in Motion. A flow of electric
>charge constitutes an electric Current. In order for a current to exist
>in a conductor, there must be an Electromotive Force (EMF), or Potential
>difference, between the conductor's ends.
>
>Two particles of like charge, both positive or both negative, repel each
>other; two particles of unlike charge are attracted (see Coulomb's Law).
>The electric Force between two charged particles is much greater than
>the gravitational force (see Gravitation) between the particles.
>
>Many of the bulk properties of matter are ultimately due to the electric
>forces among the particles of which the substance is composed.
>----------------
>Hmmm....the greater the charge....as in the more electrons, the more
>repulsion from the earth.
>
>This leads me to CONCENTRATION OF CHARGES in a given area. The earth is
>a vast body full of electrons but SPREAD OUT over a wide area. If you
>measure the electron concentration in one area, it would be relatively
>weak, but taken as the whole body of the earth would be enormous.
>
>So, if you could provide a concentration of negative charges as claimed
>by Hiddink, would it discharge into the earth as a lightning bolt? Why
>if it is pure electrons/negative charges which mutually repel? And that
>is the source of my puzzlement;
>
>if electrons repel electrons and
>positrons repel positrons
>then
>how does difference of potential come into play
>since
>like charges repel, no matter what energy density they are?
>
>Wouldn't this mean that the higher quantity of electrons MUST flow into
>the lower quantity of electrons by virtue of difference of potential
>trying to come to equilibrium?
>---
> Jerry Wayne Decker / jdecker@keelynet.com
> http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science"
> Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501
> KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187
>
>
Onward and Upward to a New Science of the Ages,