"Of the Very Nature Of Space, Time, Energy and Matter"

[Khwartz]

So let's define these conceptual errors so we have something concrete to discuss:

I claim that space (and time) of our daily lives are just geometric reference systems and their only properties are magnitude and direction.

You on the other hand, seem to claim (and correct me if I'm wrong) that space is a 3D container that envelops us all and is endowed with myriad of properties, such as permittivity and permeability and is filled with something called Aether that acts as a fluid or gas and has the following properties (list them) needed to support propagation of light between atoms as waves.  You do not address the properties of time at all, other than its one-dimensional nature.
Most likely you think that time represents one dimension of some 4D continuum, while space represents three dimensions of the same continuum.

I realize that I'm putting a lot of words in your proverbial mouth but this is to provoke you to revise the paragraph above according to your framework of understanding the physical universe.
Much groundwork would need to be covered first.
Read this with a rigorous understanding and follow the links in it (even if it takes you a week), but remember that this is not my framework.
While I agree with most of Mathis' conclusions, my framework is much more fundamental because it addresses the composition of charge, photons as well as the nature of space and time (Mathis' framework does not).

I'm starting with somebody's else's framework because you have mentioned Dirac's concepts and they need to be addressed first (Mathis addresses legacy concepts much better than I) before we jump into the more fundamental framework of mine.
As a teaser of what's coming when we get to it - I will ask you a simple question:
What is "motion" and what are the units of it?

P.S.
Let's create another thread for such discussions before we upset people here with this off-topic stuff.

Hi dear Verpies!

Very thanks for your answer and the very rigourous and constructive approach looks to me you take.

I will open soon the new thread where I will probably paste our former posts here on the subject so that the discussion could be understood from its beginning, and let you know. I will take too the necessary time to study the material you gave me. And yes, I do understand your way to put in my mouth words so I could react and so specifying my point of view.

Thanks for the opportunity you give me to discuss this very fundamental subject.

Cheers, Khwartz.

PS: did you have look on my suggested schematic-test for possible EM pumping effect?

[forest]

I agree with Tesla : space is abstract used to measure nature. It has no own properties. All is defined by metric. About time I'm not sure. Aether surely exists and it's properties are responsible for all forces in nature.

[TechStuf]

Perhaps it's time to reconsider the phrase that started it all.  "Let There Be Light"....and there was light.  "Light" or EM waves encompass all that we know.  Of course it includes the visible spectrum, but goes much further than we know.  Upon consideration of the experiments of John Hutchison and many others, one begins to see that matter itself is truly a form of condensed energy. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOi5RMM7wVc

The magnetic beam amplifier of Lockheed Martin also exhibited similar results.  The miracles mentioned in the Bible, become easier to understand in light of the demonstrable fact that subtle energies are often used to control what we consider more potent forms.

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - A.C. Clarke

And with advanced technologies come advanced directives and commensurately advanced responsibilities.  Those now exercising such powers on our planet are sorely behooved to consider Who came before, what was foretold, and what is promised to come AFTER.....

ALL is belief.  And what is accomplished through belief based upon accurate knowledge is incomparable.

Strong Faith, based upon accurate knowledge IS a form of "subtle" energy that directs much greater perceived energies.  Man only glimpses these truths as he is currently unfit to gaze at length upon them. 

"For the wisdom of this world is nonsense to God, for it is written: "He has seized the wise in their craftiness."


Blessings


TS

[verpies]

Here I have a schematic.
What happens with the electric field of the capacitor in- and outside of the Faraday cage?

I do not like discussing things that are not defined.
The electric field is a spatial field of various hypothetical forces that would move a test electric charge, if it was there.  Formally, it is a derivative of the electrostatic potential.
When the test charge actually is located in that electrostatic field, these forces are transmitted to it by bombardment ( no, not by Aether - read this if you care by what ).

A test charge is compelled to move from a high electric potential to a low electric potential.  In other words it reacts to difference in potentials, just like dust is compelled to move from a point of high air pressure to a point of low air pressure, by uneven bombardment of air molecules (air pressure differential = wind).

When Faraday's cage is closed, its inner surface becomes equipotential because it is conductive and matter affects the direction of the charge bombardment, mainly because of its nuclear structure (that's why different elements affect the charge interactions differently).

Equipotential means that the same electrostatic potential is everywhere on its inner surface (but it is not zero!).
When potentials are the same, a test charge inside the Faraday's cage has no reason to move (zero electrostatic potential differential).  That creates an illusion that no forces act on it, and for the mental construct such as the "electric field", "no forces" means "no electric field".  However the charge bombardment still occurs all around - it is just equal in all directions thus it has no preferred direction (there is a word to describe this situation - it is "pseudoscalar"). 
Fish also don't feel the pressure of water because the pressure acts on them from all directions equally (in that analogy water pressure is equivalent to the electrostatic potential)

When you open the cage, the bombardment of the charge stops being pseudoscalar (uniform in all available directions).  It becomes unequal in some direction and that means that unequal electrostatic potential is created on one side of the test charge in the cage.  Now the charge is compelled to move away from the direction of higher potential (away from more intensive bombardment).

[Zeitmaschine]

And now what does that all mean in reference to the Faraday cage on Kapanadze's table? Each time I point out that there is a Faraday cage (an old Sadolin pot) in plain view right in front of the camera on Kapanadze's table that subject gets quickly buried under tons of unrelated stuff. What could this tell us?

Could this »spatial field of various hypothetical forces« have something to do with the high output current of that paint can? Does Miles Mathis know the principle of work of the Kapanadze device? Maybe he should study the Kapanadze equations as soon as they are out.

So I have a cage and this cage is bombarded (by something). Then how to convert this bombardment into an electric current? It should be so simple you'll ...