Lock Down

[Mikado14]

Does this mean the forums are locked down again?

Mikado

[Trickfox]

So, everybody, can we have a discussion about this? Can we find any other source that can credibly make the case that Maxwell is...(at best) incomplete?

And when I say everybody, I really mean everybody that's tuned in here. Langely and Nate, you guys are great researchers... what can you find. Trickfox, you've got as good a handle on the math that circulates through this stuff as anybody here.

Gee Paul.... I sure wished I had seen this earlier. I guess I will have to respond now however.

Paul
As soon as you say "Bearden", You are loosing me altogether. Bearden has always been good for drawing the interests of pseudoscience and philosophers but serious mathematicians have never really followed his work because he has no real foundation or a reputation couched in classical math or physics. I did read a bit about Bearden however I was told that his work is of no consequence to anything I've been researching.

As soon as you say Maxwell you are bound to get into trouble because Maxwell constructed his foundation from Faraday and Coulomb. Heaviside is now being used by modern day revisionists who are trying to introduce conspiratorial conflicts to justify their pet theories about everything and anything.

It is my opinion that you will NOT FIND anything wrong with anything Maxwell said until you begin looking at Einstein/Rosen/Podolski paradox (EPR paradox). That is the last thing Einstein was working on and it remains incomplete to this day. There is plenty of evidence to proove that macroscopic scale rules of physics and science are justified by everything we have learned in classical physics and math. Maxwell was relatively unknown when we started in the sub-atomic realm so the theory of everything has never been realized from Maxwell to Einstein because everyone is stuck on "ELECTROMAGNETISM and SINUSOIDIAL WAVES......which involves Trigonometry and defines Frequency and Spectrum.

At the moment all of this post Einsteinian science has been extended to include Superstring theory, and Supersymetry. the bottom line as of March 2009 is the LHC and the "God particle" (Higgs Bozon)..... That whole classical physics and math foundation will explain the theory of "Nearly" everything mathematically.

But you see there is this pesky little phenomena called "ACTION AT A DISTANCE".... That is the issue that bugs everyone.
of all the known forces Gravity is the one which proclaims "ACTION AT A DISTANCE". But you have to define "Action" then you have to define "distance", so round and round you go with Einstein, Lorentz, Minkowski, Levi-Chivita,Wheeler, and a host of other pure theorists because the basic quantitative and qualitative definitions are ALL based on three primary units. MASS, DISTANCE, and TIME.

THAT's IT....... THREE PRIMARY UNITS DEFINES ALL OF REALITY AS WE KNOW IT!!!!!!

MASS.....Distance..... and TIME = all of our objective reality
Does anyone in this whole universe of experts have an argument against what I just said..... PLEASE, OH PLEASE, speak up!!!

Let's throw out our arbitrarilly selected references for MASS (like pounds, ounces. etc.) Let's use a single PROTON as an absolute universal reference for MASS.

Let's use the DISTANCE unit that is used to define an electron when it jumps orbit. this is called the Planck length
In physics, the Planck length, is a unit of length, equal to about 1.616 252 × 10-35 meters. Let's use the Planck length as the absolute reference for DISTANCE.

This leave only ONE SINGLE DEFINITION LEFT TO DEFINE....... TIME...!!!!!

According to the "Copenhagen Interpretaion" and the foundation of all modern classical physics TIME is defined by the Mikowski interval which was found using a principle called the "invariance of the interal". The mathematical relationship used to define time/space is probably the most controversial theorem in all of science and it's called the "the Time-Space Continuity" Theory. see: http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0310/0310055. There is plenty more to review but Zeno of Elea is where you can begin if you want a nutshell explanation about the polemic nature of the definition of TIME

Conclusion
In summary, it was shown there is a necessary trade off of all precisely determined physical
magnitudes and values at a time, for their continuity through time, although with the parameter and
boundary of their respective magnitude and value being determinable up to the limits of possible
measurement as described by the quantum hypothesis,(1) but with this indeterminacy in precise value not
being a consequence of h and quantum uncertainty. This illustrated that in relation to indeterminacy in
precise physical magnitude, the macro and microscopic are inextricably linked, rather than being a
variable only directly associated with the quantum world. The explanation provided was also shown to be
the correct solution to the motion and infinity paradoxes, excluding the Stadium, originally conceived by
the ancient Greek mathematician, Zeno of Elea.(9) It is not necessary for time to “emerge” from the
“quantum foam” present just after the big bang at approximately (Gh/c3)1/2 scale,(2-7) and the proposals of
“Imaginary Time”,(2, 3, 5-7) and “Chronons”,(2, have been shown to be incompatible with a consistent
physical description, and would appear to be superseded on a theoretical basis.

And the beginning of all this modern science is the simple formula F=MA. The most simple and oldest of all math formulas came from Newton himself...... it simply states; FORCE=MASS times ACCELERATION..... simple right?

BIG mistake......

That is where the problems begin and the definition of FORCE become subject to several interpretations

When elecricity was discovered, Coulomb began to incorporate Newton's math into his own work. The electric Scalar and it's physical effect upon atoms

Coulomb's law, sometimes called the Coulomb law, is an equation describing the electrostatic force between electric charges. It was developed in the 1780s by French physicist Charles Augustin de Coulomb and was essential to the development of the theory of electromagnetism.

Now let's look at Maxwell gain:

Nevertheless all four of what are now described as Maxwell's equations can be found in recognisable form in vol. 2 of Maxwell's "A Treatise on Electricity & Magnetism", published in 1873, in Chapter IX, entitled "General Equations of the Electromagnetic Field". This book by Maxwell pre-dates Heaviside's and other publications

SEE......Heaviside's influence is UNIMPORTANT at this point..... It's Coulomb nearly 100 years earlier that is important here.

Remember Willoughby Cady????

Mr. Brown has no theory for the effects that he has demonstrated or claimed. He has advanced an empirical explanation for the magnitude of the force on a suspended condenser, but has not advanced supporting evidence.

That's correct T.T. Brown did not publicly define the mathematical relationship which defines the "FORCE" with reference to Newtonian principles....in other words; NO MATH so....NO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE.

That's OK....that was in 1952...... surely someone else tried later on......right?

Now let's seee.... The ARMY did something in 2003!!!! I found this on the net but I'm sure it's on Andy's website also:
http://members.fortunecity.com/jlnaudin ... index.html but.... here is the important page we should be looking at: http://www.psychopropulseur.com/asymetric.pdf It states. The FORCE due to IONIC wind is at least 3 orders of magnitude too small......and further on.....More experimental work is needed to gain an understanding of the Biefeld/Brown Force.

That was 6 years ago Paul....

Now here is another paper which came out just recently:July 4th 2007

From the theoretical analysis by the zero-point field theory, it is considered that the origin of the
dynamical Biefeld-Brown effect might be attributed to the interaction of zero-point vacuum fluctuations
with high potential electric field impressed to the capacitor. This result suggests that the pulsed
electric field applied to the capacitor may produce artificial gravity sufficient for practical application
to the space propulsion technology.

This time they proclaimed that the FORCE itself originates for "Zero Point Energy"..... Fnny thing...ZPE is the new "holy grail" for SOME proponents of FUSOR energy also, so the MATH which defines the FORCE is again riddled with inconsistencies, (of course others think that's a load of shit too) so it's no wonder you will find the same old polemic arguments about "the FORCE definition" again....

Stop listening to those people who THINK they found THE "one and only" answer in ZPE because they are still using classic definitions or the FORCE reference originated by Newton... F=MA.

Besides...this latest theory came about AFTER you began to write your book....

What good is that?

This is supposed to be a historical biography, NOT a justification for a "discovery" that is STILL purpously being controlled through "born Classified" disinformation tactics . How many spooks have you met since you started into this rabbit hole? How many experts are ready to lead you into any direction that feels good or follows someone's else's pet agenda?

F=MA Paul... that is all you need to question.
WHAT IS FORCE????...... DEFINE MASS.....THEN DISTANCE....THEN ACCELERATION....and THEN..... DEFINE TIME!!!!

Don't listen to anyone who tells you it's all "etched in stone" by Newton and Einstein because the THEORY OF EVERYTHING DOES NOT EXIST YET. Ask Richard Hull if you don't believe me!

Remember...... HELLO STUPID???
Unless and until you understand ALL the DATA.....and ALL the MATH.... and ALL the Physics.... you don't stand a chance against the organized attempt to discourage your written word on the subject of Biefeld/Brown FORCE.... so ..... let it continue to be an unsolved mystery....and let others duplicate the experiments in vacuum. THE FORCE IS THERE....It's REAL.... but it HAS NOT BEEN EXPLAINED IN PUBLIC LITERATURE YET. So just let the empirical explanations GO....for now. Concentrate on the Biography instead.

Take it from there Paul...... I'm done on this forum and this was my final post just for you....

You are either DONE with this shit or you are not...... MAKE A CHOICE BUDDY.... the ship is leaving.

Farewell to all who read this.

Trickfox

[Langley]

So, everybody, can we have a discussion about this? Can we find any other source that can credibly make the case that Maxwell is...(at best) incomplete?

And when I say everybody, I really mean everybody that's tuned in here. Langely and Nate, you guys are great researchers... what can you find. Trickfox, you've got as good a handle on the math that circulates through this stuff as anybody here.

Gee Paul.... I sure wished I had seen this earlier. I guess I will have to respond now however.


Shucks. Blush. Mietner understood Hahn. And she saw from Hahn's Feb 39 report of the finding of Barium (lighter than U) that Krypton would probably the other bit of the broken U, whereas convention had it that when one fired a neutron into U you made a bigger nucleus, not two smaller ones. Ida Noddack had seen it earlier, but noone listened. So the women understood what the men couldnt see. Fermi's great mistake. And Meitner (I can never get Lise's name right freehand) also saw the energy release when the U fissioned - as she and Frisch called it - was an application of E equals MCsquared. Now. in there is Maxwell somewhere (light and its frequency to start with I guess). velocity is distance over time. The E & M "stuff" has a context of time defined by the velocity of light.

I dont know enough. But I keep getting back to the Nazi Bell in my thinking. That somehow, the Nazi program in atomic research onto something completely different to that of the Allies. And it related not so much to the E and the M but to the C squared. The "stuff" was there alright in Germany. But the program and the reported findings of alsos dont make sense. Least what Ive read and know about them. Anyway, that line of thinking takes to Nick Cook and that takes us to alternative German tech. And I believe that Nick mentioned a particular German officer, Kessler. Well, today, after emailing Mr Frame at Oak Ridge Associated Universities re my bag of "what was known and when" prior to 1942, I was kindly directed to the ORAU on line Library page.*
http://www.orau.org/ptp/museumlibrary.h ... matomicage
http://www.orau.org/ptp/articlesstories/u234.htm
So here's some interesting articles from an authorative source which touch things and stories told (the thorium toothpaste as mentioned in Paul's book and Kessler aboard U234 enroute to Japan with U on board, plus ME262 jets.
http://www.orau.org/ptp/articlesstories/alsos.htm

* I wasnt very humble in my initial communications with ORAU. It always pays to realise I dont actually know what I dont know. Most of the time.

"On May 14, an American boarding party took over and directed the U-234 to Portsmouth, New Hampshire. Despite tight security, the arrival of U-234 at the docks became a major news event. Considerable coverage was devoted to the ship’s most illustrious passenger, Ulrich Kessler, e.g., "typical Hollywood version of a German general . . . as he strutted off the gangplank he casually looked around . . . and swaggered to a waiting bus. He wore a long leather great coat which reached to his ankles, highly polished leather boots and an Iron Cross." Much of U-234's top secret cargo, 240 tons of documents and war materials, was shipped to Washington and opened out of sight of the press’s cameras. A good deal was what might be expected, e.g., armor piercing antiaircraft shells. There were surprises, e.g., two Me-262 jet fighters. But, the biggest surprise of all came when 10 containers marked "Japanese Army" were opened. They contained 560 kg of uranium oxide!

Had the uranium reached its probable destinations, Osaka and the Riken Laboratory in Tokyo, enrichment via thermal diffusion might have been attempted.* Successfully enriched, the product would have been, by activity, mostly U-234!

Postscript: When General Groves, head of the U.S. atomic bomb effort, first learned of this submarine, it seems he was mistakenly informed that it was designated U-235, an idea that almost gave him "apoplexy." end quote. Sources as noted at the ORAU.
Anything that gave Groves apoplexy is fine by me. But thats just me.
Good bedtime reading. Night Jimbob.

[Radomir]

Ahoy Langley! How have you been, amigo?

R.

[Langley]

Ahoy Langley! How have you been, amigo?

R.

Greetings Radomir! Hope you and yours are well. Not bad, still trying to get my head around history. And this vague and queasy feeling that the guys into fission had/have things in negative. While Brown had them in positive.

Let me try and explain. As it has to do with one of the themes of thread. (Is Maxwell adequate etc) (maths isnt my language, if I cant visualise it. forget, which is why I guess I spent so many hours lying underneath my VW marvelling at the modular integration. (I'm cheap to entertain) Didnt stop my rolling three or four till I got the hang of it. Oh, I said, so that's what High Polar Moment of Inertia Means and kept the next 18 upright. (But Im expensive to run).

OK . Hang on to your hats.

"Miss Meitner was very much interested in this phenomenon and immediately
attempted to analyze mathematically the results of the experiment.
She reasoned that the barium and the other residual elements were the result
of a fission, or breaking, of the uranium atom. But when she added the
atomic masses of the residual elements; she found this total was less than the
atomic mass of uranium.
There was but one explanation: The uranium fissioned or split, forming
two elements each of approximately half of its original mass, but not exactly
half. Some of the mass of the uranium had disappeared. Miss Meitner and her
nephew O. R. Frisch suggested that the mass which disappeared was converted
into energy. According to the theory advanced in 1905 by Albert
Einstein in which the relationship of mass to energy was stated by the equation
E = mcz (energy is equal to mass times the square of the speed of light),
this energy release would be of the order of 200,000,000 electron volts for
each atom fissioned." (not much else I add to that by way of emphasis eh. - Source: pdf page 13 "40th Anniversary edition of "The First Reactor"******, US Dept of Energy, 1982, Original authors By Corbin Allardice and Edward R. Trapnell. (MED, AEC) Available at the ORAU online library.

OK everyone who went to High School in the USA, rummage out your copy of John Hersey's "Hiroshima". Let's find the page where Hersey reports the survivors commonly remembering that after the bomb, the whole place smelt of ozone. Page 35 "...they all thought (probably because of the strong odor of ionization, an "electric smell" given off by the bomb's fission)....." end quote. Vintage books, ISBN 0-679-72103-7.

On reading the official the Symth report, the official account of the atomic bomb program (Atomic Energy for Military Purposes (The Smyth Report) The Official Report on the Development of the Atomic Bomb Under the Auspices of the United States Government By Henry De Wolf Smyth at http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/Smyth ... ndex.shtml) the same theme pops up. That the forces are fundamentally ELECTROSTATIC. TT had serious lung problems because of ozone. Ionisation by electricity. Though today the whole thing is thought of in terms of the Nuclear Force, the binding energy and mass conversion, its actually electrostatics. Go back to the OLD nonclemanture - what things were called and why they were calld it, and we find a postive and a negative application of the same deal. Especially when one goes back to what has been said and refenced about neutrons in these forums. A malleable collective thing formed from sub sub particles seemingly as required. As if the boundary between "this side" and the "other side" is responsive and self stabilising. But capable of unleashing ferocious forces when manipulated brutally or of seemingly to transcend the laws of physics. But that actually an oxymoron. Or something. We dont tell the cosmos what to do. (have a go, see what happens). We have to observe and apply that which has always been.

Its like, huh? Two Donald Campbell's in two Bluebirds on the same Lake Eyre doing the same 400 mph on the same but opposite vectors.

And there was a vanishing point where they met. Just a flash, a twinkle and they were gone from public view.

Which is not say I think TT was involved in the bomb. He wasnt. Now I cant verbalise my feelings on this any better than I have. Im just laying underneath it all looking up and marvelling. I aint gonna drive it any distance at all. Just in case. Ill let someone young and immortal do that.

We live in an expanded singularity. Just beneath what we call reality, there is a field. Everything comes from it. It is the field of the Singularity. But its stretched out. It connects each point with every other point as if it were still a singularity. Had the MED guys "gone the other way", it wouldnt have been a bomb so much as breach in time and space. Hiroshima would have disappeared. No smoke, no flames, no nothing.

There, it starts and idles, but no way am I taking out on the street. Id be tempted to lay serious rubber.


***** Why oh why didnt they call it 40th anniversary edition of "The First Pile"???