A very interesting series of thoughts and
possibilities.
--- SWB <dev@icx.net> wrote:
> First, thinking back on that 'thing' about the speed
> of light possibly being six to ten times faster than
> we ever imagined. While some folks on this list did
> an admirable job of pointing out the possible flaws
> in the testing methods sited; the 'very
> possibility', that there is still merit
> to the premise is EXTREMELY intriguing!
>
> "IF" it is true; then that makes for some very
> important inescapable conclusions, about both the
> nature of light, and the 'aether' itself !!!
Inescapable? Ever hear of the 'Kobayashi Maru'
test...bend the 'rules'...<g>...
> Could it be, that the 'aether' is an impediment to
> the the propagation of light ?!?! Think about it!
> If the 'aether' is more 'viscous' (for the sake of
> a better analogy) in the vicinity of a 'mass'; then
> that speaks volumes about why light is slowed (and
> defracted), when passing through the gravity
> induced 'inversion layer' surrounding matter. So,
> if the 'aether' actually slows the velocity of
> light around masses, then is the 'aether' stretched
> SO 'thin' in deep space, that where there is no
> significant mass, the light traversing the 'thin
> aether' has been racing towards us, at a speeds we
> cannot even comprehend?
An intriguing idea, that aether density slows the
propagation of light and other waves. Where aether
compression produces mass and energy.
I have always viewed it more as a wave phenomena that
is subdivided to ever lower frequencies because of the
way the spectrum works and that we SUSPECT that matter
is frozen or greatly slowed energy which can be
rapidly released using E=MC^. Have to think on this
some more and see what other permutations would result
or if they my long standing view is erroneous, if that
be the case, I'll certainly change. The theory that
is probably closer to the reality is one which points
to practical results from experiment.
> There is also the fact, that the elastic nature of
> 'perceived time' arises from the speed of a given
> object. So, what does that say about what we have
> really been observing, when we look at the heavens?
> It tells me, that light from those stars, would
> have only traveled a FRACTION of the time
> previously thought! Therefore, the universe could
> conceivably be BILLIONS of years younger, than what
> the egghead astrophysicist say it is! I'm sure
> that 'that' doesn't make some of you very happy
> out there, for a multitude of reasons.
Would certainly change a lot of astronomical
observations and inescapables..<g>..so vacuum sucks
light through it faster than it can move through the
refractory index of compressed/condensed aether around
masses....hmmm...now, this is discussion material
bigtime!
> Back to the nature of the 'aether'. SO, what IS it
> about the 'aether', which slows light down? Is
> there an 'electromagnetic' property to gravity?
I think the answer to that one lies in the apparent
viscosity of aether to other energies, kind of a
parametric coupling where high density spikes can
entrain an aether flow.
The confusion, IMO, seems to be between referring to
Aether as a super high master frequency that is
successively divided down to create other energies and
eventually mass
as opposed to;
the mechanical view of Aether where it is treated as a
compressible gas, enough compression and it forms
matter, but it has a refractory index in any of its
forms.
> That seems obvious; but, why can we NOT observe,
> detect, nor measure the 'mechanics' involved
> in 'HOW' gravity actually impedes light? If you
> could point a 'magnetometer' at "gravity", you
> would get NO reading.
You must be referring to the proposed bending of light
by high gravity? Would that not be analogous to
bending electrons to paint the screen in your computer
monitor by using EITHER magnetic OR electrostatic
deflection?
> If you move a wire through "gravity" no
> electrical flow is induced. So, what mechanism
> in the 'aether' induces a physical effect
> on 'light', as it passes through a gravitational
> field / 'thick aether'?
I think that is apples and oranges but the closest
comparison I can envision is that the metal crystals
in iron, copper, etc. function as prisms that SLOW
MAGNETISM to the lower frequencies of electricity when
the metal cuts the magnetic field. We just have to
find what material or energy pattern creates the
greatest disturbance in gravity. I think T.T. Brown
found lead oxide, bismuth and antimony to have the
greatest antipathy to gravity flows.
> I think it must be, that the nature of the 'aether'
> is analogous to Aluminum. (Bear with me now.)
> Aluminum, is not capable of being 'permanently
> magnetized'; but, you can induce a current in it,
> and it will generate a magnetic field of it's own.
> That magnetic field in turn can 'effect' a current
> in other surrounding objects. Have you ever seen
> the science demonstration, where a cylindrical
> magnet is placed longitudinally on a slanted
> (nearly vertical), piece of sheet aluminum? It
> progresses very slowly, instead of rolling right
> down, as one might expect. As it moves, the magnet
> induces a current in the surrounding aluminum,
> turning it into an electro-magnet; but, the field
> strength is not as strong as the force of gravity,
> so the magnet continues to move down the sheet
> metal very slowly. This happens because the magnet
> is fighting with the 'like' poles of the
> electromagnetic properties, induced by it's own
> movement in the vicinity of the 'mass'/'thick
> aether'/'gravity' of the aluminum; thereby,
> impeding it's own progress by virtue of it's very
> own mass, velocity, and gravitational constraints.
It doesn't really turn into an electromagnet but I
won't belabor the point. A hysteresis effect of mass
moving through aether to produce inertia.
> It is this very property of aluminum, in which I
> find a similarities to what is causing the
> impediment, that the 'aether' poses, to the
> propagation of light. But, 'HOW' does it do it?
> If we knew that, then we would know 'WHAT' we were
> dealing with, and we just don't! But, I do believe
> it to be 'knowable'! If it isn't, then we are
> playing with fire in more ways than one!
Yep, inertia, possibly the refractory index of aether
produces inertia? That is, the denser the aether, the
slower the mass and light (which some claim are highly
charged PARTICLES).
> Is gravity equally elastic, for the same reasons,
> that the 'speed of light' and 'time' are?
You know it would 'follow' that all energy, when
concentrated must have density levels with specific
reactions when moving into and through matter as well
as having different characteristics and attributes at
each density.
> Is gravity also a slave to the viscosity of the
> 'aether'? OR - Is the viscosity of the 'aether' a
> result of it's proximity to the gravitational
> force of a mass?
>
> Does gravity arise from the the 'aether'; or does
> the 'aether' arise from gravity? Or, can the case
> be made, that they are really one-in-the-same?
Back to the wavicle question, should aether be
considered as a wave (frequency - phase conjugatable),
as a particle (mechanically compressible).
> Is it possible for us to manipulate either the
> 'aether', or gravity? If so, then 'HOW' do we go
> about manipulating it; and, how much energy
> does 'THAT' take; and, how much 'EXCESS' energy
> can be extracted from the process?
I would think the simple fact of inertia shows that we
CAN manipulate aether. As to the excess, as I
understand the claim, it is an over-thrust due to
entrainment when the 'flow' is suddenly stopped as
described at;
http://www.keelynet.com/energy/pearson.txt
where he says;
....it turned out that the need to conserve momentum
prevented MUTUAL annihilation of energies from
occurring during collisions. Indeed the two
conservation laws of energy AND momentum, which had to
be applied SIMULTANEOUSLY, led to a totally different
result.
....Instead of annihilating, primaries INCREASED in
number! In fact, 18% MORE of BOTH kinds appeared, on
average, from EACH collision of opposites.
Clearly an indication of BUCKING FIELDS. And IMO, I
think it can be ANY energy that collides with itself,
acoustic, magnetic, electric, etc..
> And, 'IF' you do succeed in manipulating it, what
> happens to the 'perceived time' of objects or
> light, which pass through that 'manipulated
> aether'?
In the marvelous sci-fi story 'The Girl, the Gold
Watch and Everything' by John D. McDonald, 1962. The
story revolves around a watch built by his late uncle
which has the ability to slow down everything but the
holder of the watch. He has some fascinating ideas
about how, when the wearer is in this speeded up time
that the world is bathed in a lurid red light and when
he tries to move slowed matter, it resists as if in
glue. The idea of producing a local time field where
only the wearer is accelerated or slowed down offers
all kinds of ideas. That's part of the paper I wrote
on time dilation at;
http://www.keelynet.com/time/tdilation.htm
> What really is the 'Holy Grail' of overunity? And,
> when we find it, how do we actually go about
> 'making hay' with it?
>
> Given, the 'FACT' (if indeed, 'IT' is a "FACT'),
> that the "aether' is an impediment to the
> propagation of 'ENERGY' in it's most vigorous
> forms; I must restate my belief, that extracting
> energy, directly from (what most of you are
> calling) the 'aether' is just NOT possible !!!
The ZPE tapping that Puthoff and others promote
indicates there is a quantum foam of highly complex em
frequencies that appears and disappears all around us.
This foam is what pushes the Casimir plates together
as a mechanical indication that something is really
happening.
The idea of GATING or rectifying any wave means we can
channel the energy by POLARIZING it into two different
forms, positive or negative.
Normally a wave will cancel itself when the positive,
expanding, pushing half of a wave runs into the
negative, collapsing, pulling half of a wave.
A laser reinforces a relatively weak light by
harmonically adding by reflection to increase the
intensity. This additional energy is added faster
than the light normally dissipates so that it creates
an intense COLLIMATED beam.
We should be able to rectify this Brownian motion of
the ZPE quantum jiggle, the zitterbewegung, so that we
have a receiver that collects much of the energy in
each half of every wave that appears.
> In the Genre' of Tesla - Gleaning free energy from
> the static electrical energy in our 'physical
> atmosphere' is one thing. To purport that: we
> live in a "sea of energy" waiting to be tapped,
> which emanates from the realm of an unknown, and
> physically undeterminably dimension" - is a leap
> of faith I am not willing to take.
The patent Tesla has for a photoelectric type effect
using a highly polished plate claims to extract energy
from the highly charged particles and highly
accelerated particles that comprise light.
I realize you are referring to Aether/ZPE, but if we
are indeed saturated with multiple frequencies from
all over the universe, it would seem that polarizing
these frequencies from the AC wave to their dual DC
polarities would extract all the energy we could ever
need, particularly if it was collecting energy from
ANY incoming wave. A rose by any other name..<g>...
> That is NOT to say: that I DON'T believe
> 'overunity' is possible. Manipulating the
> 'aether' for it's effects; and then using those
> effects to boost highly efficient semi
> conventional systems, to produce overunity is
> another matter entirely! That may INDEED be
> possible!
I guess you are referring to some inertial hybrid
contraption...<g>....that'll do but I am totally
infatuated with the idea of a purely electronic
circuit though I suspect the FIRST REAL working one
will be such a hybrid of mechanics and electronics.
> The experiments with the gyroscopic effects,
> on the perceived weight of a spinning mass,
> (mentioned a while back), might hold a key
> here. That approach seems promising to me.
> But still, manipulating the 'aether' itself,
> effectively and productively, will require
> dissecting it into quantifiable, and
> manipulatable forces (not to mention
> explainable ones !!!)
Again, we are back to is it mechanical, is it a wave
or it is some unique blend of them?
> I just think, that the vast majority of you out
> there are looking down a'dry well'; IF, some
> sort of 'flow', directly from the 'aether'
> itself is where you expect to find overunity !!!
Inescapable contusion..<g>... Happy New Year!
=====
=================================
Please respond to jdecker@keelynet.com
as I am writing from my work email of
jwdatwork@yahoo.com.........thanks!
=================================
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
-------------------------------------------------------------
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/
-------------------------------------------------------------