My approach to this idea of tapping aether is from basic understandings
relating to the excellent paper by Puthoff/Haisch/Rueda which equates
inertia as being simply entrained aether/zpe.....something pushes you
against the steering wheel of that car when you slam on the brakes at 60
mph.
It fits perfectly with how mass moving through other media will draw
some of that media into the path behind it...we see it in high speed
photos of bullets traversing smoke filled chambers and in many simpler
demonstrations.
Even rotating medium in the form of the torus shows how it can be
sampled, caused to flow in a given path and sent on its way. These
torus projectors are fun to play with and you can easily throw an
invisible torus 20 feet or more, even to knock things over.
With the inertial drive pioneered by Dean, the idea of momentarily
braking a heavy spinning mass to produce lift or thrust fits this
entrained aether/zpe principle, where the mass literally pushes against
itself.
I recall the remarkable video of the Thornsen device mounted in a simple
enclosed plywood box and placed in a canoe. No paddles, no propeller,
nothing in the water except a rudder to guide it and two people, one on
each end, the box in the middle, sitting there making a clackety-clack
sound and the canoe MOVES across the water, picking up speed over time,
eventually reaching 80 feet per minute.
The theory is since entrained aether IN THE MASS being thrown off to
push against ambient aether, it does not require an outside object or
material to push against, that with sufficient SPEED and mass density,
the thing will literally jerk itself in small steps upwards and into the
air.
This simple demonstration IMO is using the accumulated aether/zpe inside
the mass and throwing it off in pulses to push against the ambient
aether/zpe
much like a jet thrust causing the object to move in the opposite
direction.
In the aero documents left by Dellschau, he refers to one of the Sonora
Aero Club engines as a 'sucker-kicker' which is like a pulse jet engine,
and this back in 1860! Of course that wasn't aether/zpe related, just a
means of creating a pressure, releasing it, letting another pressure
wave build up and releasing it...ad infinitum to produce a series of
thrusts.
So many claims of free energy and levitation have revolved around high
voltage discharges. That I think is my correlation to the 3,000 year
old Dendera tubes where a high intensity plasma discharge doesn't have
to exit the tube, simply originate on one end, and traverse the length
of the tube from one electrode to the end.
I also think there is at least one optimum frequency based on the
restorative abilities of the ambient aether.
You see, IMO aether has viscosity, therefore once you create a region of
less aether by condensing from one area to project to a target, then the
ambient aether MUST refill that area of lesser density.
The speed at which it fills up the partially evacuated area is what will
play a part in operation of the Dendera tube.
In other words, you have to let it fill up so you can collect and dump
it again, you certainly don't want to try pulling aether/zpe from the
area while it is filling...
It functions like a capacitor. Let it charge up, discharge it, let it
charge up, discharge it.
Now, again IMO, this accumulation, compression and projection of
aether/zpe in the vicinity of the tube towards the target will act to
CHARGE the target with more aether/zpe than it can normally handle.
Since all mass is constantly absorbing aether/zpe at a rate determined
by its volume and density, then all mass must have either a return flow
that occurs at a regular rate OR is being precipated as more mass,
depending on the 'life cycle' of the mass.
That means if we start filling the mass up with MORE aether/zpe than it
can normally absorb by virtue of the projected beam from a Dendera like
tube, then the mass will react in one of two ways.
One way is for the mass to radiate the excess aether/zpe much like a
light bulb radiates excess electrons as photons. Except the physical
effect will be a lessening of weight in the mass depending on how much
aether/zpe is being pumped into the mass. Beyond a certain amount, the
mass will levitate.
The other way is interesting because mass is normally held against the
planet surface by the aether/zpe influx into the mass which holds it
together as well as the planetary influx which gives it 'weight'.
This second way would make the effect of 'weight' follow in a given
direction, so that if the tube is projecting the aether/zpe onto one
side of the mass, it would cause its natural weight to be redirected
AWAY from the beam.
Note, the pictures show TWO tubes aimed at each other which could mean
one tube on either side of a heavy stone, both projecting with
synchronized pulses so that the weight of the mass is cancelled by equal
pulses of aether/zpe, thus making the mass lose weight and be easy to
move.
Of course, all of this is based on PUSH gravity as caused by the high
pressure aether/zpe background energy, which flows into the 'holes' in
space in which matter precipitates.
However, using the basic premise above, it follows that ANY ENERGY that
can couple to the aether, including the simplest of matter absorption,
could be used to take advantage of this entraining effect. That means
sound, magnetism, electric current or simply rotating masses.
In the unified field theory paper released by Einstein in 1929, that was
later recalled, he states that electricity, gravity, magnetism and
INERTIA are all interchangeable. I think inertia results from the
modern term of matter currents which is likely entrained aether in the
presence of mass in motion and most pronounced when the mass is stopped
while at high speed.
Using this basic entrainment principle, Keely's acoustics and
Searl/Hamel's high voltage could all be using aether entrainment rather
than some mysterious unknown action.
---------------
"W. G. Barker" wrote:
>
> Hi,
> There are many concepts about aether or a primary force. They may be
> called by other names/terms - aether, ZPE, electricity, energy, etc,
> etc. What do these concepts have in common that might lead to a sound
> hypothetical concept of a primary force. Often concepts are separated
> by verbal semantics and the common denominators are overlooked. Can we
> surface the many concepts for discussion? I believe we need to focus
> on simple, realistic concepts in the quest of discovering the primary
> force --- and before fitting it to the mathematical constructs of
> physics.
> W. Gardner Barker
-- Jerry Wayne Decker - jdecker@keelynet.com http://www.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------------------------------------------------------------- To leave this list, email <listserver@keelynet.com> with the body text: leave Interact list archives and on line subscription forms are at http://keelynet.com/interact/ -------------------------------------------------------------