Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder

[twinbeard]

Hi Rosemary,

You may find some interest in the featured uploads on AlienScientist's youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/AlienScientist#p/u

Particularly: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4I5mgBKPZY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rr_s28wIOzQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJJ-4lnwrck
and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-ruFNzr7kk

This young man does his homework;)

Cheers,
Twinbeard

  Hello Cat.  Always a pleasure to see you around and the more so when we're also on the same page.  And very relieved to learn that at least one reader isn't getting hot under the collar.   

Kindest regards,
Rosie

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Ok guys - to the 'dwindling readership' that may be going on here.  I think I'm at my penultimate if not ultimate argument.  LOL

Which brings me round to my favourite topic and to another 'inconvenient truth' - to borrow a phrase from Al Gore. Around about the time when Heisenberg and Bohr were forging the foundations of Quantum mechanics, Zwicky, a Polish immigrant to America - saw something that was only enabled by a new found access  to new and improved telescopes.  What became evident were galaxies, in the millions, where prior to this there was nothing beyond our Milky Way Galaxy.  And what was also evident was that the mass measured in the galaxies, was simply NOT enough to hold those galaxial structures together.  If gravitational principles were to be universally upheld - then by rights - those great big star structures should have unravelled or should be unravelling.  Neither was evident.  He then superimposed the requirement for what he called 'missing matter'.

Over time those early results have been systematically ratified and refined.  In effect - many scientists - our leaders in the field of astrophysics - have proved, conclusively that galaxies themselves are held bound by what is now referred to as dark mass - from what is proposed to be dark energy.  In effect -  they've uncovered a new - hitherto unknown FORCE.  No longer are there four forces.  There appears to be every evidence that there is this fifth force - and like a fifth column - it's well hidden but pervasive.  But the new and insuperable puzzle is this.  It's invisible.  Yet it's everywhere.  And we have no reason to doubt this evidence.  Our scientists' ability to measure and observe is unquestionably exact.  But, and yet again - they then make yet another nose dive into yet another explanation for the inexplicable.  All around are frantically searching for its particle - the 'darkon' equivalent of the 'graviton'.  We are back to an Alice in Wonderland world - looking at an upside down reality - a bizzare universe that must first and foremost, obey any and every rule that our mainstream scientists propose - no matter their inherent contradictions.

Why should the particle be visible?  Is this still to do with the obsessive requirement to disallow faster than light speed?  Are we getting ready set, go - to confuse the hell out of another hundred years or more of theoretical physics - simply to adhere to relativity concepts?  Has the time not come - with respect, where we can concentrate of 'field' physics and explore the implications of this - rather than impose a 'field' condition on known particles that none of them are able to constitute a field.  No known stable particles are able to move together.  Electrons and protons are, effectively, monopoles.  Neutrons decay within twenty minutes.  Photons irradiate outwards and can only share a path when their rays are deflected unnaturally.  Nothing known is capable of sustaining a field condition.  So WHY do our learned and revered insist on imposing a standard particle construct on a field?  It is the quintessential condition of forcing a square peg into a round hole - of fitting one incorrect fact into another incorrect fact - in another endless circular argument.  Again, with respect, has the time not come, in fact LONG overdue, to revisit - not so much our answers, which are increasingly shown to be incorrect - but to revisit our questions about physics?  I personally, think that time would be well spent in exploring the conditions required for a sustained field.  And I think the evidence now is overwhelming that the field itself holds matter - and, for obvious reasons, this unhappy, this uncomfortable, this inconvenient truth - needs to be fully explored.  Just perhaps a whole world exists out there that remains out of touch of our actual realities.  It leads - we follow.  It proceeds in one time frame - and we interact with it in another time frame.  That way - just that one small inclusion into our theoretical constructs - and we would be able to reconcile so much with what is evident.  I suspect it's our aether energies - and reference to this has now been long been considered to be politically incorrect.  Perhaps the time is now that this poor, abused concept be revisited and revitalised by our theoreticians.  Certainly we may then salvage some logical coherence that is entirely exempt in current thinking.

Regards,
Rosemary

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hi Rosemary,

You may find some interest in the featured uploads on AlienScientist's youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/AlienScientist#p/u

Particularly: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4I5mgBKPZY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rr_s28wIOzQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJJ-4lnwrck
and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-ruFNzr7kk

This young man does his homework;)

Cheers,
Twinbeard

Hello Twinbeard.  I know this man's work well.  In fact I've been in correspondence and in conversation with him.  He's very good.  But he's way too classical.  It is a fact that it would be entirely IMPOSSIBLE to reconcile over unity results within known classical paradigms - which is what he's trying to do.  His presentations are very scholarly - but listen close and you'll find a great number of 'skipped' logic steps - that he uses to support his argument.  What I like about him is that he's at least questing albeit within a classical framework.  I sincerely believe that this compulsive reach that we all have in all these forums is to answer a deep intellectual, emotional, psychological need for a coherent explanation to those many contradictions in physics.  And I sincerely believe that these needs are answered very simply indeed, in aether energies. 

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

[twinbeard]

Hello Twinbeard.  I know this man's work well.  In fact I've been in correspondence and in conversation with him.  He's very good.  But he's way too classical.  It is a fact that it would be entirely IMPOSSIBLE to reconcile over unity results within known classical paradigms - which is what he's trying to do.  His presentations are very scholarly - but listen close and you'll find a great number of 'skipped' logic steps - that he uses to support his argument.  What I like about him is that he's at least questing albeit within a classical framework.  I sincerely believe that this compulsive reach that we all have in all these forums is to answer a deep intellectual, emotional, psychological need for a coherent explanation to those many contradictions in physics.  And I sincerely believe that these needs are answered very simply indeed, in aether energies. 

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

I agree wholeheartedly.  The "dark matter" is undoubtedly the aether, the vril, or any number of other names attributed to the same concept... that we have charged magnetic quantum particles smaller than quarks making up everything, resonating at frequencies way above what we understand as the EM spectrum.  In order to reconcile our results, I think we need to rewrite most but not all of modern physics, using the original 1864 work of Maxwell, not the truncated version taught as "Maxwell's equations."

That means rewrite relativity as well.  It is the only way we can account for our respective COP measurements in our circuits, and the only way we can explain other observable evidence that classical physics fails to account for.  I feel the best way to do that is in a collaborative, distributed environment, which bypasses the costs associated with everyone being under one roof.

I do enjoy your posts... if you do feel the need to stop posting, please include me in your mailing list for further updates.  If you do not have one, I hereby offer to host said list on my private list server,
gratis, in perpetuity. 

Cheers,
Twinbeard

[Rosemary Ainslie]

I agree wholeheartedly.  The "dark matter" is undoubtedly the aether, the vril, or any number of other names attributed to the same concept... that we have charged magnetic quantum particles smaller than quarks making up everything, resonating at frequencies way above what we understand as the EM spectrum.  In order to reconcile our results, I think we need to rewrite most but not all of modern physics, using the original 1864 work of Maxwell, not the truncated version taught as "Maxwell's equations."

That means rewrite relativity as well.  It is the only way we can account for our respective COP measurements in our circuits, and the only way we can explain other observable evidence that classical physics fails to account for.  I feel the best way to do that is in a collaborative, distributed environment, which bypasses the costs associated with everyone being under one roof.

I do enjoy your posts... if you do feel the need to stop posting, please include me in your mailing list for further updates.  If you do not have one, I hereby offer to host said list on my private list server,
gratis, in perpetuity. 

Cheers,
Twinbeard

  Thanks Twinbeard.  Always nice to find support.  But I'm not likely to 'leave' our forum unless I'm expelled.    God forbid.  I'm way too fond of the members here.  LOL

Kindest as ever,
Rosie