Jump to content

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, TheConsultant said:

Just he alone has more exciting stuff than that lower output fluorescent tube. He is using LEDs to harvest light as they work both ways. He has set up a standing wave of EM along two poles which become an anode and cathode. He has tapped in to the magnetosphere. But I agree, interesting video.

Big oil is so fraudulent you cannot put it in to words.

As for a lightbulb, like all light we do and don't see its just a vibration at a particular speed and as such different elements, gases etc oscillate at different rates with voltage. We call that the visible light spectrum, the rate of vibration determines the colour / hue / spectrum of light. Although I am sure you are going to tell me something interesting regarding a lightbulb now :)

 

Yes I will!

 

If you look at how a light bulb works you will find the input of electrical power causes heat which makes the filament glow. But the thing is, they can't actually explain how heat converts and input electron into a photon.

 

When I looked it up the best answer from a physicist was this, the input electrons travel down the wire into the filament, these passing electrons collide with the orbiting electrons of the tungsten filament and through the strong force, because the input electrons knocked the tungsten electrons out of orbit, causes the nuclei of the tungsten atom to emit a photon.

 

This means the energy we see coming out of a lightbulb is not the input electricity, consisting of electrons, converted to photons by the process of glowing. No, this is the release of stored energy in the tungsten filament being released due to the input electrons acting on its orbiting electrons. This collision obviously causes heat as well. So the oputput of the energy should be measured as its heat, electrons making it back to earth without colliding, and the photons.

 

So the output of the lightbulb, the photons, is different energy to the one going in, electrons, and they can't explain the mechanism by which it happens - but the best guess is the tungsten emits photons due to the interaction of the input electrons. This means the photons are extra energy than what is input into the light bulb. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact you are talking about electrons and photons means you do not understand what light is at all.

They cannot explain it because they are talking about electrons and photons. Its exactly how I described above, no argument. Light is a vibration/oscillation of EM at a particular rate, that is all it is.
 

This guy will explain it far better than I can. Plus its easier to post a video than type a lot.
 

 


Edit:

Zero photons or electrons involved in the Electromagnetic spectrum. Nothing to do with particles at all.

Edited by TheConsultant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

I am using their language, that is all.

 

Thanks for the vid, I'll take a look.

 

 


Quantum mechanics is the study of light and never defines it accurately yet its the most accurate model we have publicly mostly due to the fact they replaced aether with quantum fields or quantum liquid. To say we are lied to and boxed in is a vast understatement.

Edited by TheConsultant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

Yep, incandescent tungsten.

 

Your first sentence, I don;t understand I would ask how heat causes electrons to change to photons. The sentence didn't explain it very well.

 

Your second part says that its the electrons in the filament that emit photons when they drop to a lower level?  Ok, last time I looked they couldn't explain how that happenst and I don't think you've explained it particularly well.

 

I'll give my explanation in the post below to save repeating myself.

 

Heat causes electrons to transition to higher levels (ie. jump to the next higher shell). This however causes instability and it is natural for the electrons to seek stabilty by then transitioning back to a lower energy level. This transitioning emits a photon according to basic Quantum Electrodynamics and has been proven to happen.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, webtrekker said:

 

Heat causes electrons to transition to higher levels (ie. jump to the next higher shell). This however causes instability and it is natural for the electrons to seek stabilty by then transitioning back to a lower energy level. This transitioning emits a photon according to basic Quantum Electrodynamics and has been proven to happen.

 

 

 

Where is the proof that happens? Its concept reification as an electron is not a particle at all anyhow, its a unit of dielectric induction. 

What makes these photons change colour whilst travelling through a denser medium? 
Why is the daytime sky blue? – Chuba Oyolu's Portfolio

Why is blue light more dangerous for the retina? its capacitance is higher, smaller the space higher the capacitance, is a blue light photon smaller? It has nothing to do with electrons and photons and that is not my opinion, I didn't come here to talk opinion predominantly (unless stated as such).

Edited by TheConsultant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, TheConsultant said:

The fact you are talking about electrons and photons means you do not understand what light is at all.

They cannot explain it because they are talking about electrons and photons. Its exactly how I described above, no argument. Light is a vibration/oscillation of EM at a particular rate, that is all it is.
 

This guy will explain it far better than I can. Plus its easier to post a video than type a lot.

Edit:

Zero photons or electrons involved in the Electromagnetic spectrum

 

Can I just jump in here about this Theoria Apophasis/Ken Wheeler guy? I don't rate any of his videos at all. Maybe anyone that thinks they are interesting should first visit this site for a more balanced perspective ...

 

https://kenswrong.com/

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, webtrekker said:

 

Can I just jump in here about this Theoria Apophasis/Ken Wheeler guy? I don't rate any of his videos at all. Maybe anyone that thinks they are interesting should first visit this site for a more balanced perspective ...

 

https://kenswrong.com/

 

 

 

There is a difference between thinking I understand and actually understanding. I read that site regularly.

Feel free to jump in with answers to the questions asked so we can discuss it like adults as is that not what a forum is for? discussion rather than get people to read a blog regarding his videos before actually listening to what he has to say. Lets also not forget that he is discussing people who brought us a lot of our understanding today, steinmetz, tesla, heaviside, faraday, hertz etc not just his random thoughts based on nothing. But hey , we are all free to believe what we wish.

Edited by TheConsultant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, TheConsultant said:

There is a difference between thinking I understand and actually understanding. I read that site regularly.

Feel free to jump in with answers to the questions asked so we can discuss it like adults as is that not what a forum is for? discussion rather than get people to read a blog regarding his videos before actually listening to what he has to say. Lets also not forget that he is discussing people who brought us a lot of our understanding today, steinmetz, tesla, heaviside, faraday, hertz etc not just his random thoughts based on nothing. But hey , we are all free to believe what we wish.

 

I don't mind jumping in and discussing things, whether I think I'm right or wrong about them, but I simply can't discuss ideas expounded by Apophasis because they make absolutely no sense to me. He uses terms and equations that don't exist in the scientific community simply to make himself appear as some kind of 'expert' and that the rest of us are mere muppets. He's a would-be-Jack-of-all-trades and master of none in my opinion.

 

Sorry if that's shattering your illusions of him but this bloke is a menace to true science.

 

I'll have to come back later as I'm shattered (nearly 3pm!) and need to hit the sack!

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, webtrekker said:

 

I don't mind jumping in and discussing things, whether I think I'm right or wrong about them, but I simply can't discuss ideas expounded by Apophasis because they make absolutely no sense to me. He uses terms and equations that don't exist in the scientific community simply to make himself appear as some kind of 'expert' and that the rest of us are mere muppets. He's a would-be-Jack-of-all-trades and master of none in my opinion.

 

Sorry if that's shattering your illusions of him but this bloke is a menace to true science.

 

I'll have to come back later as I'm shattered (nearly 3pm!) and need to hit the sack!

 

 

 

 


My personal views and understanding are not based on his videos, that would be putting a person over information and I do not do that.

Feel free to dive back in at some point to discuss at length. Another question to ask regarding the prism is what make it speed back up again after being impeded? surely that energy was absorbed or taken away from some how if its the sharing of electrons and/or photons?

Edited by TheConsultant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TheConsultant said:

Where is the proof that happens? Its concept reification as an electron is not a particle at all anyhow, its a unit of dielectric induction. 

What makes these photons change colour whilst travelling through a denser medium? 
Why is the daytime sky blue? – Chuba Oyolu's Portfolio

Why is blue light more dangerous for the retina? its capacitance is higher, smaller the space higher the capacitance, is a blue light photon smaller? It has nothing to do with electrons and photons and that is not my opinion, I didn't come here to talk opinion predominantly (unless stated as such).

 

The 'colour' of a photon is determined by it's wavelength, which I'm sure you'll already know. Colour exists only when the retina of the eye reacts to these different wavelengths.

 

Blue light is a higher frequency, higher energy wave so may have more effect but as to why it would be classed as dangerous I simply don't know. I mean, the sky is blue and seems to have more of a beneficial effect on us than not.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, webtrekker said:

 

The 'colour' of a photon is determined by it's wavelength, which I'm sure you'll already know. Colour exists only when the retina of the eye reacts to these different wavelengths.

 

Blue light is a higher frequency, higher energy wave so may have more effect but as to why it would be classed as dangerous I simply don't know. I mean, the sky is blue and seems to have more of a beneficial effect on us than not.

 

 

 

So how does passing through a denser medium change that energy level up and/or down to show the various spectrum of light (which is of course wavelength dependent)? How can something inert such as a dense piece of glass impart more energy on to a source of light? How does the light spectrum then speed back up after it has spread by passing through the medium?

It is an impossibility to describe light accurately whilst discussing photons. Vibration OF a medium such as quantum liquid or quantum foam or quantum fields, sure, we can use than as an anology for aether, and you will get a lot further but it is and has always been aether. Michaelson and Morley experiment didn't prove anything, it was a poorly designed experiment focusing on ONE axial plane while light is a coaxial circuit of electricity and magnetism oscillating on TWO axial planes. Hence the old tv antenna being a co-ax cable, COAXIAL, two. Magnetism and Electricity. Radiowaves are light. Microwaves are light. The whole EM spectrum is light and discussing it in terms of particles of light is impossible. Certainly with any degree of accuracy as far as I understand.

Edited by TheConsultant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, webtrekker said:

White light is polychromatic and the prism simply splits it into its different frequency bands by refraction.

 

Coaxial cable is simply a single copper core surrounded by a foil or braided sheath to reduce interference.

 

 

 

Yes, you aren't answering my questions. The different frequency wavelengths speed back up again after passing through the prism, the light that enters the prism isnt higher energy than the output (i.e. spread spectrum) yet it shows its component parts of higher and lower capacitance and energy levels, why? then miraculously speeding up again. How does a candle produce light at the same "rate of travel" than that of the sun? 

Coaxial cable is no different to fibre optics, only you do not see a visible light glow due to the fact its far lower energy light than which we call "visible light". The EM spectrum is ALL light, it cannot be described as separate things as fundamentally the only thing that changes from top to bottom of the spectrum is the speed of vibration and as a direct consequence of that the wavelength. Just because we dont call it visible light doesnt make the building blocks of the spectrum suddenly morph in to something else entirely. It is a spectrum of same. 

Along the copper is electricity, perpendicular to that is a magnetic field. All electricity produces a magnetic field because electricity, dielectricity, gravity and magnetism are all different expressions of the same fundamental thing. Light.

image.png.a16f15d1bd2888c734d9cbf1d9ce722c.png

The building blocks of the spectrum doesn't magically change in to something different due to us ignorantly calling it something else. Its a rate of vibration measured in Hz. Much like ice water and steam are fundamentally H20, we just call it different things as its in different expression or modality of same.

Edited by TheConsultant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice to see thinkers in action.... My brain is on other semi-crisis things, sorry.... but will come back to this sometime within my lifetime (assuming my energy to lift a finger and click the mouse hasn't expired).... Not that I could compete with most of you lot probably at this time. 🙂 If nothing else, this thread is creating momentum, and soon enough the verbal interaction by itself will create FREE ENERGY! 😉 

Edited by Certified Green of Heart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, webtrekker said:

Then maybe someone else can answer your questions as I don't understand what you're asking. You just seem to be trying to confuse the issue, in much the same way as Wheeler to be honest.

 

So, I'm out.

 

 

 


That is a shame, ironically its far easier to understand than quantum mechanics and it helps explain the entire universe rather simply. It is our mainstream physics and understanding of what light is that is far more complicated than reality. Thanks for engaging whilst you did though, appreciated.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TheConsultant said:


That is a shame, ironically its far easier to understand than quantum mechanics and it helps explain the entire universe rather simply. It is our mainstream physics and understanding of what light is that is far more complicated than reality. Thanks for engaging whilst you did though, appreciated.

 

Well, in light of your polite response I'll come back in with this post ...

 

I don't consider everything in physics to be the absolute truth, especially in the more modern physics where reputations and grants seem to be the driving force, not wisdom and honesty. However I am not prepared to just throw everything I have learned, and which has always stood me in good stead, to one side and waste time on the crackpot ideas of the likes of Ken Wheeler.

 

First off, I just genuinely don't like the man. I don't like his condescending nature. I don't like his meaningless mumbo-jumbo designed to confuse people into accepting his theories.

 

However, he's also just plain wrong most of the time, as in this case, for instance ...

 

Wheeler apparently quotes Tesla (his hero) in saying that light waves are LONGITUDINAL.

 

This is WRONG! Light waves are TRANSVERSE in nature and this is easily proved by the fact that LONGITUDINAL waves cannot be POLARIZED and we all know that light can be polarized otherwise our polarized sunglasses wouldn't work!

 

So, as long as I'm not asked questions based on Wheeler's nonsense then I'll do my best to add to the discussion wherever I can. I know some of you are way more advanced than me in most areas but I can still detect when Kentucky Ken's BS is being put forward!

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, webtrekker said:

 

Well, in light of your polite response I'll come back in with this post ...

 

I don't consider everything in physics to be the absolute truth, especially in the more modern physics where reputations and grants seem to be the driving force, not wisdom and honesty. However I am not prepared to just throw everything I have learned, and which has always stood me in good stead, to one side and waste time on the crackpot ideas of the likes of Ken Wheeler.

 

First off, I just genuinely don't like the man. I don't like his condescending nature. I don't like his meaningless mumbo-jumbo designed to confuse people into accepting his theories.

 

However, he's also just plain wrong most of the time, as in this case, for instance ...

 

Wheeler apparently quotes Tesla (his hero) in saying that light waves are LONGITUDINAL.

 

This is WRONG! Light waves are TRANSVERSE in nature and this is easily proved by the fact that LONGITUDINAL waves cannot be POLARIZED and we all know that light can be polarized otherwise our polarized sunglasses wouldn't work!

 

So, as long as I'm not asked questions based on Wheeler's nonsense then I'll do my best to add to the discussion wherever I can. I know some of you are way more advanced than me in most areas but I can still detect when Kentucky Ken's BS is being put forward!

 

 

 

 

He quotes Tesla "what else can light be other than a sound wave in the aether" not longitudinal. As sound is also transverse. However, you have two axial planes oscillating and there is absolutely a longitudinal component which is what quantum would call quantum entanglement (or spooky action at a distance to quote Einstein who didn't believe it). Point a and b are already connected as is everything. It is understandable through understanding sound, then taking that physics to two axial planes oscillating together. 

Visualised like so:

4PMr6.png
Transverse waves along the E and B field. Aether is provable very easily, take a CRT screen on static, move back 20-30m wave a magnet and look through binoculars at the static shift instantly. A magnetic field of a bar magnet is nowhere near extending 20 metres, its flux is only measurable a few centimetres away depending on strength (oddly enough the stronger the magnet the smaller the magnetic field surrounding it), SOMETHING has to be oscillating along with it. Quantum calls it quantum fields, I prefer aether myself but labelling is irrelevant, the effect is paramount.

Also lets not forget that waves aren't a thing in and of themselves SOMETHING has to be waving, in the case of EM, electricity and magnetism are vibrating the medium at specific frequency. In sound it is the air that is vibrating, no sound is actually emitted, its just the speed in which those vibrations are induced through the air. Hot and cold days affect the speed of sound or should I say the induction rate of sound.

Here is a controversial video regarding electricity. This angered a lot of people.
 

 


See wires as a waveguide rather than carrying the information itself. I had to undo a lot of previous understanding in order to understand unified physics, however, it is absolutely unquestionable. Just takes time to unlearn and change gears, it also makes a lot more sense as well as being far more easily understood and so far not a singular phenomenon cannot be explained by it. i.e. unified. 

Direct quotes of Tesla:

https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/articles/tesla-sees-evidence-radio-and-light-are-sound

Edited by TheConsultant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 11/6/2021 at 1:59 PM, Guest said:

Some interesting thoughts (and a bit of a rant) .... wonder if this bloke is genuine?

 

ROYAL NAVY OFFICER DESTROYED PHYSICS, GRAVITY, NEWTON & EINSTEIN AND 'THEY' DESTROYED HIS LIFE!

 

 

 

Backup Bitchute link:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/3UcUET1o0Jk9/

 

 

I clicked on this link and bitchute has been blocked, with the following message:

" The parent channel of this video is unavailable at your location due to the following restrictions: Contains Incitement to Hatred "

 

Can't see any incitement, the video seems to be explaining a different point of vew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2021 at 8:13 PM, pi3141 said:

he said he could cure cancer and then someone said 'well thats the Pharmaceuticals out of business' - Thats a huge statement, it implies that top scientist's in the Navy are well schooled in Conspirational thought and they 'know' the Pharmaceuticals are running a racket and they are ok with that.

 

I think cancer and a lot of other diseases are caused by the constant posioning of the food supply, the water supply, spraying the air with chemicals and bacteria, that they do. I mean, they used to use fluoride as rat posion and it was very effective at that, now they put fluoride into the water supply, into toothpaste and tell the people fluoride is good for you ???!!!

All this constant posioning must be having some effect on people's bodies, at least a cumulative effect over the years. That's why more people are ill now than at anyother time in this country's. As you rightly say this is being exploited by big pharma, the more people ill and dying, the money they are going to make

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2021 at 4:15 PM, pi3141 said:

And predictably there is now no record of the NASA lightbulb extender. Basically (from memory) they used a Thyristor to limit the input electric waveform to the lightbulb hence it never ran at full power and thus extended the lifespan.

 

NASA got a manufacturer to produce a 'button' that contained thyristors and you placed it in between the bulb base and the holder.

 

Its similar to a project I did in University, we used Diodes to perform half wave rectification and applied the output to a bulb, the diode reduced the input power by half and hence the lightbulb did not run at full power, we predicted this would extend the life of a bulb almost indefinitely. We got distinctions for the project. Then when I came out of Uni I found NASA had already done it years before . Makes you think - there's nothing new under the sun..

 

Still no record of it now on the web, 10 years ago I could find pictures of the original advert, today I can't find a thing about it.

 

Good point. I have built a few audio amplifier for music listening, and they all work better at lower voltages, cool and quiet i call it

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2021 at 1:08 PM, pi3141 said:

 

I think so yes and NASA have been looking into it, look at Shuttle STS75 'Space Tether' basically they deployed a 12 mile electrical cable into our atmosphere from space, the tether collected a huge amount of 'free energy' it was supposed to be used to power Space Station etc but instead it generated huge power and broke off.

 

So yes as well as Tesla, Feynman, Morray and NASA have proved there is huge amounts of energy surrounding our earth which we can tap into. NASA would'nt have invested or tried the experiment unless they were sure it worked and it seems like Tesla's experiment the results were so positively huge the collected energy destroyed the equipment, that shows there is huge amounts of energy we can tap into. All NASA used was a long cable suspended at right angles to the Earths magnetic field which of course induces an EMF in the cable, before the cable broke NASA recorded a huge input of power.

 

So yes it seems all we need to do is put a cable up in the atmosphere and we could tap 'free energy' 

 

But there are also other methods.

 

Maxwell who wrote the theory of Electromagnetic Radiation also wrote a theory called Maxwells Demon where he proposed a free energy system that employed a theoretical demon to order a system. Anyway a similar thing is being done in Norway where they are using Osmosis - a naturally occuring process much like Maxwells Demon, i.e a natural process does some work for you for free, you just exploit it.

 

In truth I think there are many possibillities to tap 'free or radiant' energy and other methods to exploit natural processes to achieve a gain and then there's 'Zero Point Energy' proved back in the 70's by a Physicist working for Phillips Electronics.

 

So to answer your question, yes I think we can, its just they won't, although NASA have periodically tested and invented technologies that could lead us to free energy systems - they even proved the everlasting lightbulb back in the 70's and produced and sold a component that would extend the life of lightbulbs by 10 times, of course it was never picked up by lightbulb makers because if lightbulbs lasted 10 times longer, they would sell 10 times less lightbulbs and thats not good for profits is it.

 

Then there's Bedini and Tom Bearden with their 'MEG' and Bedini's motor generator combination (supposedly debunked by Mythbusters except it wasn't cos there experiment was flawed)

 

I firmly believe all the technologies we need for a paradise on Earth exist, its just financial constraints prevent them from being employed.

 

What do you think would be the way to go to someone wanting to generate their own power for when the system crashes, solar panels? Some kind of generator? I've seen a few youtube videos on how to generate free electricity using magnets

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jack121 said:

What do you think would be the way to go to someone wanting to generate their own power for when the system crashes, solar panels? Some kind of generator? I've seen a few youtube videos on how to generate free electricity using magnets

 

Yeah absolutely- solar and generators.

 

My thinking is this – Fridges work mainly as an inductive load using the Volts and don’t draw a lot of current. A small portable array of solar panels could be positioned in the garden on the ground wired to a battery pack powering your fridge and a single socket. If the shit hits the fan you will have somewhere to store food and a plug to power a radio to listen for emergency broadcasts and a small LED lamp in the night.

 

The main energy expenditure is going to be cooking and heating, you want to try and use natural fuels for that – wood, for instance. So a log burner or even an oven that can be used with alternative fuel source, you can get Oil fired cookers.

 

Then a generator, and if possible, 2, a dual fuel petrol/lpg and a diesel that can cope with Veggie oil and position them in a sound proof box.

 

Think about it, if the lights go out and your house is lit up like a xmas tree with a loud generator going 24/7 or a large solar array on your roof - your going to be a target. Keeping a small array of portable solar panels in the garden that can be locked away securely but enough to power your essentials and a couple of small quiet generators that have multiple fuel options is a good way to go.

 

From there you can build up.

 

If possible live by a stream, you can tap it for energy and have a source of power and water, if not a simple water filtration system and a water butt off your gutters for a water source.

 

The big expenditure is energy storage and the panels – the bigger the battery you can have the better but you don’t want them visible, you want it all stealth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...