Hi All,
I created this board and topic to discuss the
Alberto Molina-Martinez patent and his unit.
He wants to join this forum and we give him a new home over here.
Regards, Stefan.
is this it? http://givetheplanetachance.com/PATENT.pdf
Hi
Welcome Alberto Molina-Martinez.
regards
Hello Stefan,
Thank you for the invitation to the forum. Also to B. Tentzer and brnbrade.
I have seen some comments about my prior patent on the ?Continuous Electrical Generator? of year 2000. I want to say publicly that despite all my efforts of many years and hundreds of tests, probably thousands, it never performed as an over-unity device. At some point it seemed to be far over the unity, probably 14 to 16 times the power it was consuming, but it proved to be only apparent power, not real power.
I could run motors, turn on light bulbs, etc, as I say in that patent, but it only happened because it was actually behaving as an electromagnetically rotational transformer, but not a generator.
I knew early in work that there was something missing for this machine to work properly, and I spent many years on its search. Over-unity devices must have an identifiable source of energy, and this device was lacking one.
For some reason I have not trusted permanent magnets as a source of energy. I believe that it is possible to build over-unity devices with them, probably there are many out there already, but their efficiency will hardly be big enough to be used as a source of energy to redeem the world.
By 2004, while searching for a possible solution, I found my self immersed into the concept of antimatter. It was after all the most powerful source of energy known to humanity. But, could it be harnessed in a safe and economic way to be used as energy source? The answer you still find everywhere in the internet, laboratories, universities, research centers, is NO.
I?m not the kind of guy that takes a NO for an answer, for what I decided to go deep into the theme. Among all types of collisions of particles tested in physics research laboratories, I found that the collision of photons yield the most energy of all. According to CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, a collision of 2 photons can produce 183 to 209 Giga-electron-volts, far over the energy produced by the collision of any other particles or antiparticles.
The collisions of photons generate quarks and antiquarks, which in turn convert into beams of particles and antiparticles, releasing a formidable amount of energy.
The Antimatter Electrical Generator.
The deeper I went into particle physics, the more certain I was that the collision of photons was the answer I had been looking for so long. It was a source of energy in itself; the difficulty was how to harness it in a practical way.
Photons have the peculiarity that they do not collide spontaneously. You have to concentrate and direct them to force a collision, and either then, only a few of them would collide. So, the challenge was to increase their concentration to the maximum extent possible and some how make them collide.
My first design was to confront two powerful laser beams at the center of a collecting chamber. I had even written a patent for this design, when the idea came that I could use a single laser chamber if I didn?t allow photons to escape.
The result was the Self-Reflective Chamber or Photonic Reactor that I describe in my new patent, the ?Antimatter Electrical Generator?. See the complete patent in: http://www.givetheplanetachance.com/
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.givetheplanetachance.com%2FSchematicviewreduced.jpg&hash=39e082092d02c1e2c3788832989ec04a61d09640)
Summary of the Patent
?The invention refers to a system for the practical and inexpensive procurement of huge amounts of energy derived from the principles of matter-antimatter generation and annihilation.
The foundation of the system is a specially designed Self-Reflective Chamber or Photonic Reactor, which will generate photons within a totally confined space at a continuous and increasing rate, not allowing said photons to escape the chamber.
Photons will travel in all directions at the speed of light, just to be reflected back by the chamber walls.
Hundreds of trillions of photons traveling at the speed of light will be crossing paths with other photons in a high and continuously increasing density, until they will start colliding with other photons, at a rising rate. The photon density will continue to increase until the number of collisions enters in equilibrium with the production of new photons.
Each of those collisions will produce jets of subatomic particles and antiparticles, which, this time, will pass across the walls of the Self-Reflective Chamber creating a continuous flow of particles and antiparticles toward the exterior of said Self-Reflecting Chamber or Photonic Reactor.
Those charged particles and antiparticles will cross through the atoms at rest of specialized Collecting Chambers generating ion-pairs dissociations; this is electrons and positrons (the antielectrons).
Myriads of electrically charged particles and antiparticles passing simultaneously across the masses of the Collecting Chambers, creating ion-pairs dissociations, will generate, under the proper circumstances, what is known as avalanche multiplication.
The avalanches of electrons and positrons are then separated by the action of powerful Electromagnetic Rotational Fields, generating a very high electrical potential or Voltage across the terminals of the Collecting Chambers. The Power generated can be then utilized directly as electricity.
A second embodiment will, instead, separate the jets of particles and antiparticles by charge without any interference with matter by the use of powerful Monopolar Electromagnetic Rotational Fields. Particles and antiparticles thus created and separated can be used directly as propellant fuel for spacecraft or high trust combustion engines. Antimatter Fuel can then be produced in the site, on demand, in practically any amount.
In essence, the Antimatter Electrical Generator converts almost ordinary matter into pure energy.?
This technology has the potential to turn into an inexhaustible and inexpensive source of energy, bringing unimaginable prosperity to whole mankind.
My purpose in participating in this forum is to spread the understanding of these ideas, in the hope of finding receptivity for their development.
My best wishes to everyone,
Alberto Molina-Martinez
Soooo....I'm guessing that this is NOT something we can raid a Radio Shack and build in our garage this weekend?
Sounds cool though...Kinda Star Trek-ish.
Martinez,
I believe I just thought of something, lasers are the most directed photon system in the world, true?
Why not create nano lasers (prob expensive) to create these collisions, I do however think that because of the intense energy realease from the photons could damage the nano lasers, leading us to create stronger smaller material. I do believe it's a possible engineering feat. What do you think? ???
Alberto
Nice idea, but what about the photons momentum?
Photons have both energy and momentum proportional to their frequency. This momentum can be transferred when a photon collides with matter. This should heat up the matter, making the walls quite hot.
Won't you loose more energy to heating the walls which isn't reflecting 100%, than the occational collision of two photons?
Thedane
You have a valid observation. However, we might be in front of a new phenomenon capable of yielding energy far beyond our own expectations. See what I say in the patent:
?[0020] According to these formulas visible photons range in energy from 1.77 eV (at 700 nanometers wavelength) to 3.1 eV (at 400 nanometers wavelength). The photons with the most energy known, the Gamma Ray photons, range in energy from 0.0413 MeV to 0.41 MeV (Mega-electron-volts), with wavelengths between 0.03nm and 0.003nm, respectively.
[0021] How come then, a collision of two photons can yield an amount of energy in the order of 183 to 209 GeV (Giga-electron Volts) as measured with the ALEPH detector at CERN? These amounts of energy are easily millions of times the sum of two photon?s energy, as calculated before. Even for the most energetic photons, these amounts would be near 200,000 times the sum of two photon?s energy.
[0022] The apparent reason could be that the quoted formulas might only refer to the kinetic energy of the photon, not its constitutional energy, in the same way that the kinetic energy of 1 Kg. of sugar falling from an altitude of 10 meters, has nothing to do with its constitutional energy given by E=mc?. Just to remember, the lack of mass of photons does not allow us to calculate their energy with Einstein?s formula.?
The energy needed to stimulate the creation of the photons is by very far smaller than the energy yield of their collisions. And those collisions will not be by any means occasional. The environment created within the Photonic Reactor will produce ?myriads of collisions? probably by the second.
There are materials today capable of reflecting 99.9% of light, for what at the end the loss of energy due to reflection might be irrelevant. This is at least my opinion.
What I would like to do, given the opportunity, is to build the generators and test these concepts experimentally.
HopeForHumanity
If these generators prove right at some point, for sure they could be built practically at any scale. As you may have noticed in my previous comment, I passed through the concept of focusing laser beams, but I discharged the concept because the photon density required to make the system work might not be achieved, due to loss of photons.
Alberto Molina-Martinez
G'day all,
This is in many ways an optical version of a Keely Disintegrator. A fascinating concept deserving further study.
Hans von Lieven
Welcome to this forums Mr. Martinez;
for sure there is many other ways to harvest energy unknown yet to man kind, our sources of energy are at the stage were we consider them to be primitive already and very limited.
Am glad in this planet there is still hope and people with courage enough to step forward; seeking way's to help solve the largest problem civilization have encounter.
We are already experiencing an energy crisis in this planet and this is only the beginning, we don?t need to be too smart to know how this is going to affect us and work as a chain reaction, affecting sources of food, transportation and the rest.
by the time we admit it and open our eyes, it will be too late, just global warming itself will take care of the big changes yet to be, and our so called civilization will be the witness of our own actions and lack of common cense.
I hope you are very successful on your research and others join your cause to help you so this new technology can be developed, and turn to be a very solid technology capable of improve our current and primitive methods to harvest energy.
Kind regards,
Naampower
Quote from: hansvonlieven on September 01, 2007, 06:22:14 PM
G'day all,
This is in many ways an optical version of a Keely Disintegrator. A fascinating concept deserving further study.
Hans von Lieven
can you enlarge this further? :)
G'day Esa and all,
In Keely's disintegrator the idea was to introduce several wave forms, harmonically related into a harmonically related cavity.
The idea was that the interaction of these waves created upper harmonics, so fantastically high in pitch that they were capable of influencing matter on the molecular and atomic, even subatomic levels by resonance alone.
This patent tries to achieve exactly the same but uses light instead. The only other difference is the technical jargon used by Keely and Martinez to explain its workings.
Does that answer your question Esa?
Hans von Lieven
Quote from: esaruoho on September 17, 2007, 04:54:35 PM
Quote from: hansvonlieven on September 01, 2007, 06:22:14 PM
G'day all,
This is in many ways an optical version of a Keely Disintegrator. A fascinating concept deserving further study.
Hans von Lieven
can you enlarge this further? :)
Wasn't the Keely Disintegrator powered by compressed air secretly tubed in from the basement?
So some have said shruggedatlas,
Keely demonstrated his devices not only in his laboratory but on world exhibition stands before a huge public. Somehow I doubt that the organisers of these events permitted Keely to conceal a huge compressed air sphere below the floor so he could deceive the public.
Keely was never caught in a fraud and the only people accusing him were people that had a vested interest in suppressing his technology.
To this day no-one knows what happened to Keely's machines. There were over 2000 devices he built during his career !
Hans von Lieven
More material on Keely can be found on my website http://www.keelytech.com Plug, Plug :-)
Just to prove my point:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.keelytech.com%2Foverunity%2Fkeelysmotor.gif&hash=f84268262ef4ee453813ecf9aef18a95d86e433c)
This is a picture of one of Keely's motors. Whilst it is true that his earlier disintegrators were massive machines, halfway through his career Keely"s disintegrators became very small. The tiny globe in the foreground on the left is his disintegrator, which he used in virtually all his experiments in at least the last 15 years before his death. Hardly the kind of device that is powered by concealed tubing and compressed air.
The disintegrator had been examined by many engineers, scientists and newsmen. It was not fixed to anything but freely movable.
Hope this convinces a few skeptics.
Hans von Lieven.
Quote from: hansvonlieven on September 17, 2007, 05:10:50 PMIn Keely's disintegrator the idea was to introduce several wave forms, harmonically related into a harmonically related cavity. The idea was that the interaction of these waves created upper harmonics, so fantastically high in pitch that they were capable of influencing matter on the molecular and atomic, even subatomic levels by resonance alone. This patent tries to achieve exactly the same but uses light instead. The only other difference is the technical jargon used by Keely and Martinez to explain its workings. Does that answer your question Esa?
yes it does, hans. cheers. how would you say that the several waveforms were generated in the keely disintegrator? could the function of reverb , in a resonant cavity, explain the creation of higher harmonics (multiples of the sound)? Would you go as far and say that the Dale Pond mention of Keely using, in his mind, something quite akin to "Amplitude Additive Synthesis" - be related to this generation of higher harmonics by using a resonant cavity to feedback or reverberate the frequency inside it in order to constantly keep creating higher harmonics, up to a point, when the highest harmonics created, creates the specific effect that achieves the result that keely, or anyone, was looking for?
i am all for looking at the martinez patent (light) from the point of view of keely (sound). these things should be interchangeable. it would be great tho to be able to, intuitively, comprehend the martinez patent, but maybe these two forms of devices speak and support eachotehr. what do you think, hans?
oh...and:
i never subscribed to that airpressure tank thing. people who use that as an excuse to call him a scam, never bother to look at waterhammer effect, resonance, harmonics of sound, and, eventually disassociation of material inside a resonant cavity.
there are other reports where a journalist was present when keely levitated this 3 ton airpressure tank (sphere) into the basement or bottom of his laboratory - then later when he dies, people come in and start drawing schematics of how the scam was done. its not quite that simple, mates :)
G'day Esa and all,
According to contemporary physics sound and light cannot be explained in the same terms.
Allright you Ether guys, shout me down if you will, but it is a fact that two light beams crossing each other at say 90 degrees do NOT influence each other.
However sound waves crossing at 90 degrees have a profound effect on each other, since they are pressure waves in a medium and have to traverse rarefied and compressed zones which may or may not be out of phase.
This gives rise to additional harmonics known as beat frequencies, which carry their own harmonics with them. Without going into too much depth about the attendant phenomena it is fair to say that light does not behave in this manner. There are no beat frequencies generated when two incompatible light beams meet.
Sound, especially resonance is NOT as well understood as contemporary physics would like you to believe. I sometimes wonder why research in this area is discouraged and professors and physicists run for cover whenever I bring the subject up in these circles.
Hans von Lieven
list
Hans:
Define what two compatable light beams would be then? How would they influence each other.
You make a point here that I have never heard before and I did make lasers for a while in my life.
thaelin
G'day Thaelin,
Fair point.I was talking in terms of harmonic relationships. Beat frequencies between harmonically incompatible sounds, like 120 Hz and 130 Hz generate a beat frequency of 10 Hz, whereas there is no beat frequency between 120 Hz and say 240 Hz since that is an octave and they are harmonically compatible.
Light does not behave in this way, therefore strictly speaking there is no such thing as compatible and incompatible light. The laws of harmonics do not apply here.
I should perhaps have chosen a different terminology, though what I said is in essence correct.
Sorry for the confusion.
Hans von Lieven
Waves, Superpositon, Multiplication,
If I recall and transform some analogies to electrical
systems - the truth is somewhere in between.
As long as waves of (any) different frequency "meet"
in an ideal media (no compression, linear, no restriction
in amplitude) - they dont influence each other.
(ideal media is a relative term - a conductor for
electricity is "ideal" if its resistance is relativly small
compared to the termination resistance - and the frequency
is as low that now relativistic effects occur.
Some people use the term "beat" frequencies for effects that
occur in human ear/brain if two very close frequencies cannot
be "assigned" to 2 frequencies -> beat "sensation".
The human ear is no capable of ideal reception of such close
frequencies.
In "real" media - you get compression and nonlinear effects.
2 close frequencies generate a (periodic)rms pressure envelope which
causes different propagation properties in regions of high pressure
and low pressure.
'This causes harmonics (distortion), "beat" frequencies (f1-f2),(f2-f1),
(2f1-f2)..... and so on caused by multiplication of sinusodial components.
As long as you use light(photons) in vacuum / typical enviroment, the media is relatively "ideal", for sonic waves in water - it depends on the amplitude and frequency - for practical conditions "not ideal".
rgds,
Wolfgang
hello mr Martinez
your device sounds great, its logic,
is this device has been tested yet, or its have to be developed?
may be we can raise the money for developing, can you send me some materials?
ilangiat@yahoo.com
Quote from: Nomen luni on January 01, 2008, 08:44:42 AM
No offense, but how can we be sure this poster is indeed Molina Martinez?
Also, given that his patent application said his original device required a feedback of only 1% of its power to self run, and now he says it produces no OU, should we jump on the band wagon of believing his newest claims? Going from a factor 100 gain to no gain is a big measurement error.
If you've got a working device, arrange a public demonstration. If not, why are you jumping the gun again with your untested theories? Surely you should have learned your lesson last time?
I believe that some time ago he was invited and this section was created for him, but I don't really care about this thread anymore as he has not provided new information for so long...
I always understood the photon to be pure energy. This seems not to be true if we can smash two pieces of energy together and get more energy. I think whoever posted about the photon disintegrator is getting mixed-up with protons and photons. Quarks and such referred to are parts of a proton not a photon. Magnetic mono-poles? Light is comprised of photons and has a frequency and therefore has mass. Energy is in light because of lights high frequency not it's mass. Mass is energy stored in a resonating system. Resonation of light could give us a higher harmonic and some kind of yet unnamed new ray but it would be drawing on a phenomenon with very little potential for energy creation seeing as how it is almost all energy already. There could be a whole bunch of other frequency's into infinity. 1 times 10to the infinite hz. These black energy frequencys are probably flying through us all the time. But as the frequency rises there is less potential for energy and more just energy. So what happens when oscillations go all the way to omega hertz?
Now there is pure energy with no more potential energy in it to trade with the rest of the Universe. It becomes unobservable so it doesn't exist on a physical plane. Then the other extreme starting at 1x10-omega hertz and it's a big old old old wave. Loaded with potential energy just no beach to wash up on. Then back up to frequencies that whole galaxies bob up and down on. Finally back to Earth with it's 8hz resonant system going on.
@ Mr. Martinez
Welcome to OverUnity.com
@all
This thread caught my eye, and after reading, I will post my two bits here.
Anyone whom thinks electromagnetism does not form harmonics and beat frequencies, has never researched the subject personally. In my TPU (See "Steven Mark's" Thread) research, using toroidal coils, both air and ferrite cored at high frequency, I can state absolutely that two frequencies of generated magnetic wave mix and affect each other. I can equally state other things as well:
1. True harmonic frequencies are summing or mutually amplifying of each other.
2. Beats are definitely formed in the same device.
3. Truly resonant frequencies also create a "spectrum" of related frequency generation in the same device.
These things can be proven to yourself, EASILY, with nothing more than two frequency generators (5MHZ or more preferable. I use an old B&K 3025, and a digital 2MHZ new POJ), an oscilloscope capable preferably of 100Mhz resolution, and a simply wound coil.
For those wanting to I will post the necessary requirements for the coil.
Materials list:
A. 50ft of 4 wire solid strand phone cable (I use round phone cable, but flat should work equally fine)
B. 1 roll of electrical tape
C. 1 white perm marker OR white nail polish
D. 1 set wire strippers....
(that is all... this is a sensitive air core coil... :D )
1. On a form approx 6" in diameter (piece of pvc pipe, bottom of a sauce pan, literally whatever.. diameter will affect output resonant frequency, but should be within the ability of a good 5MHZ Function Generator to see effects) wind four turns of wire CW.
2. Cut the ends to leave six inch leads.
3. Carefully remove from form, and tightly bind this coil together with tape. (this is your horizontal coil for the unit)
4. Strip four inches of outer sheath, then strip 1/2" from each of the exposed wires.
5. Now, take about 30 feet of the phone cord, and strip the outer sheath from the wires.
6. Take each of the four wires, and wind loosly into a coil around your hand.
You should have one coil of each red, black, green, and yellow insulated wires.
7. Mark four even quadrants on the taped horizontal coil, with the first mark between the horizontal coils 6" output cables.
8. Tightly wind around the horizontal coil 50 turns using each color wire CW leaving 6" leads. 1 color per marked out quadrant and centered in each quadrant.
9. To simplify the winding of each colored coil, bind down the colored wire with tape, tightly wind, then secure the end of the wind with tape.
10. Strip the leads of the colored coils 1/2" At this point, the coil winding is complete.
Now, for the connections.
11. Holding the coil setup in your left hand, consider the left hand horizontal coils 4 wire cable lead as the ground. The right hand 4 wire cable lead consider as the positive.
With the horizontal coil, we have four separate individual coils wound in exact parallel. These can be connected in series to attain high enough output voltage for your O-scopes to read easily on 1 to 5v/div range. The output is low amperage, so do not be too concerned, though you may need a 10x probe at resonance. A switchable 1x and 10x probe is nice here. Switch to 10x probe if the trace starts approaching the top of the screen at 5v/div. Remember to multiply voltage x 10.
12. Take the ground yellow wire, and hook it (twist or solder) to the green positive.
13. Take the green negative and hook it to the red positive.
14. Take the red negative, and hook it to the black positive.
At this point, the horizontal coil should only have two wires unconnected. Black on the ground side, and yellow on the positive side. These are your scope connection points.
Now, concerning the four vertical coils hookups. Multiple effects can be viewed using either one or two input frequencies, and these four 1 wire coils are the input coils, or the "primary" concerning the whole coil. This is NOT directly electrically connected in any manner to the horizontal coil, just inductively. (For those saying it cannot be, since the coils are oriented 90 degrees out ....build it.... you will learn something. :D )
For the primaries connections:
ONE frequency operation:
4 in series
15. Hook all four primary coils in series. (Ending wire of one wind, to input wire of next clockwise around the coil)
16. You should have two of the leads, the start winding of the first coil, and the ending wire of the last coil unconnected. These are your frequency inputs which you hook to the function generator.
2 in series
17. Choose two opposing coils (on opposite sides of the horizontal coil).
18. Hook the output lead of the first, to the input lead of the second.
19. Hook your function generator to the remaining two unconnected leads.
20. Leave the other two coils unconnected.
2 Frequency Operation
2 coil - independent
21. Choose two opposing coils.
22. Hook the 1st Function Generator to the first coil, with the output (red) lead of the Function Generator connected to the start of the winding, and the ground (black) lead to the end winding.
23. Repeat 22 with second Function Generator on opposing second coil.
4 coil - 2 in series
24. Choose two opposing coils.
25. Hook the end wind of the first coil, to the start wind of the second opposing coil.
26. The starting wind of the first, is the red lead connection to your first function generator, and the ending wind of the second opposing coil is the ground for the F.G..
27. Repeat for the second set of opposing coils, hooking up the second function generator to this set in the same manner as stated in the previous step.
HOW TO perform the experiments.
1. Connect your O-scope to the horizontal coils leads.
2. Start with one function generator, with the leads connected to the "high" output bnc connector.
3. Progress to two signal only after performing one signal testing.
4. Turn on your O-scope, change v/div to lowest setting, and time/div to .5 microsecond. (You will notice you are already getting a voltage reading showing a trace. :) )
5. Change V/div setting until the signal only occupies two divisions.
6. Turn on your F.G. at lowest voltage, lowest frequency range, lowest frequency setting, square wave.
7. You will notice a change in the trace, but not much, or the trace will blank out.
8. Adjust voltage up on the F.G. to max, adjusting also the v/div on the O-scope keeping the signal within the two div on the scopes scale.
9. Cycle through the frequencies in every range on the F.G. noting the effects of frequency input on the output.
10. In every range, when amplification occurs, cycle back and forth through the time/div settings on the scope.
You have now seen:
Harmonic frequency generation. (the "flames" which look like a wide trace of various types. )
Beats (Square wave superimposition upon the overall sine output at MUCH lower frequency)
True Resonance, or Self amplification due to harmonic voltage summing (when the voltage requires that you change v/div to view the entire wave.)
Do the same 10 steps, with two generators......
This experiment, after both single and multiple frequencies are tested, removes excuses of all kinds, and will amaze and shock the heck out of anyone whom has not done it yet.
I will be posting this in my thread as well, as it should be a good learning tool for all doing magnetic wave interaction research of any kind.
Paul Andrulis
LOL, another guy! No offense, but this guy has not posted in a while on this tech...
Hello everyone,
I?m sorry for my prolonged absence. I apologize to all.
The true nature of photons might still be unknown. They don?t easily collide, but under the proper circumstances they do collide releasing formidable amounts of energy.
The amounts of energy measured in particles accelerators for collision of photons exceed by far that of any other particles collisions. And it exceeds by far the amount of energy of the collided photons themselves, as we know them.
Where does that energy come from? It doesn?t come for sure from the acceleration of the photons, since photons travel spontaneously at the speed of light. So, where does it come from? We just don?t know, but we know now that it is there.
What the device I designed for the collision of photons intends to do, is to increase the concentration of photons to an unthinkable limit where there is no more physical space for more photons, all traveling at the speed of light in all directions. At this hypothetical limit, photons will have no other choice but to collide with other photons crossing in their paths, until the equilibrium point is reached between the creation of new photons and their disintegration by collisions.
In many aspects, the Photonic Reactor at the center of the Antimatter Electrical Generator is like a laser system. It stimulates the creation of photons in similar ways; this is, by striking the lasing medium atoms with light or other means, but not allowing the photons to escape the chamber.
These photons, in turn, will excite more atoms, and more photons will be released, causing a population inversion. As more photons form, and more atoms get excited just to release more photons, with no stop to the process, the photon density will start to mount up at higher and higher rates.
It is very probable, but I don?t see it as a condition for the practical operation of the generator that at certain point of photon saturation the system will sustain itself, this is, the disintegration process will continue without the participation of an external source of energy, transforming into an auto-disintegrative process.
The reason why I believe this could happen is because there will be so much light inside the chamber at some point that no system could add any significant amount of light to the chamber. It would be like trying to illuminate the sun with a flash light.
Collided photons disintegrate into a variety of subatomic charged particles and antiparticles, matter and antimatter. These subatomic particles and antiparticles can not be stopped by mirrors, for which they will abandon the photonic collider through its walls.
The energy released by the collision of photons can eventually be harnessed in different ways. I?m proposing at least two: One that converts the energy of these charges particles and antiparticles directly into electricity; and another that utilizes the particles and antiparticles themselves as antimatter fuel.
The first is based on the fact that the striking of a charged particle with atoms at rest will cause ion pairs dissociations, this is, the creation of electrons and positrons, which under the proper circumstances will create avalanche multiplications. The system will separate the ion pairs by charge producing a high electrical potential or voltage on the terminals of specialized collecting masses.
The second will use the controlled reunification of matter and antimatter particles as propellant for high thrust engines as spacecraft or mega-generators.
All the descriptions in my published patent applications and in my website http://www.givetheplanetachance.com/ are still theoretical developments. If at some point I?m able to prove or disprove these theories I promise to let you know.
There is a new document in the website called ?A Solution to the Energy Crisis and Global Warming?, which reviews all aspects of the project. I hope somebody will listen from somewhere.
I promise to be more attentive to the forum.
Alberto Molina-Martinez
Hey, Your back! I remmeber reading somewhere that mathematicaly when two photons are forced to collide, the energy stored is released as virtual anti and regular particles. So i understand what is going on with that. But are you saying that these particles could release real energy. It seems all the no coe violation people keep saying the energy isn't released because there virtual.
@Hopeforhumanity
Do not get caught up in the "virtual" horsepucky. Just some advice. Generally, science and scientists are still as dogmatic as they have ever been. To many, it has become a religion in it's own right by definition.
Early on, men like Pythagorus quite literally worshiped mathematics, thinking he had derived a "holy" mathematical principle. This is information you can find with a little digging. The roots haven't changed much it seems.
Why am I saying these things? How is any of this relevant? Good questions, with a good answer.
Men today, claiming to be rational and strictly scientific men, still today tend to disregard data if it doesn't fit their own preconceived notions. They rely on these notions based solely upon faith (belief). Where and what is the difference?
Take for instance "virtual" particles, or for the sake of discussion, "virtual" anything. There is NOTHING "Virtual", imaginary, or in any manner "unreal" about ANY particle, its interactions or effects. (Virtual particles, mass, energy, etc. etc. etc. )
It is a true example of the failure of logical thought in modern science. This will be a two parter. ;D
Paul Andrulis
Part 2
(First, let me state that I emphasize words as I would when speaking.)
Ok, in the previous post I made some grand statements, raised some hackles,, and now need to provide a basis for them.
Let me use one of the common notions. A photon having "virtual" or "apparent" mass. WHY would they state it as virtual or apparent, and not actual mass? The answer is simple. It does not fit established theory, specifically the theory of relativity. It "cant" have this property, so therefore the property it shows must not be actual.
Perhaps I should emphasize this: the theory of relativity, not the law of relativity. Make a distinction between the two statements. A theory is an unproven or unprovable statement which does not necessarily work in all applications, a law has been demonstrated to apply with continuance in consistency.
It is a principle IN science that either "laws" or "theories" may well be false, and that they should be adaptable to new data.
Amazingly enough, this is not now, nor to my research into the historical precedences, has it ever been truly applied.
New ideas still get rejected unless they fall into a philosophical fad. Old untruths still get promoted. Think "earth being the center of the universe", or the "flat earth" theories, and you get a clear understanding of what it means and how it applies.
They may not actually KILL you for your scientific heresies today, they merely try their hardest to make you a laughingstock, or ruin your career. Same indifference as far as I am concerned, and is the exact same approach which is demonstrated throughout most religions.
Now, applying all of this to the "virtual" problem. The term virtual is applied when something demonstrable is in logical opposition to established theory.
Note, this virtual thing DEMONSTRATES OR SHOWS this aspect, which it cannot have or be, solely because a theory says otherwise.
This logical approach has a term.
It is called making the facts fit the theories, and not the theories fit the facts. It is also called pure hypocrisy.
That is why I no longer follow physics, when I used to be quite deep. If they are not after logical truth, I value it as worthless to me. The theories MUST fit the facts, not vice-versa.
You do not want to know how much of the branch of physics called "theoretical physics" (the theory mill of physics) is pure philosophy. That is where the cool stuff like relativity came from. That was my chosen branch.
Paul Andrulis
Yes, yes
I have been arguing the same thing to people, i was just wondering if he has run tests on it to see if the collision really does produce anything. I know, isn't it silly, all those theories contradicting eachother?
Paul Andrulis is right. Virtual photons are not called like that because they don?t exist. They do exist but have particular properties. This link could be useful.
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/inquiring/questions/virtual_photons_1.html
Photons collisions are also real, not a theory. There is abundant literature about this. You can search Google for ?photon-photon collisions?.
Best regards,
Alberto Molina M.
if i understand properly ... energy produced from collision of photons is bigger than used for collision ??
Now this is something interesting I just thought of. Arn't black holes natural photon collision centers? The photon sphere surrounding a black hole has to give off these reactions because the density of photons being acheived that this point is incredible. Enough photon collision is suppose to give off entire particle sets to naturaly form into hydrogen atoms. This looks like the jackpot in terms of explaining the amount of hyrogen in our universe. Could it be these blackholes are recycling the energy created back into matter?
@ Alberto M.
It actually makes sense to me. Let me explain why. I will have to use some math, so I apologize if I lose anyone here.
Note: ^2 = "squared" and sqrt() = square root
To say E=MC^2 for matter at rest, or E=(MC^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) with Lorentzian transformations applied for motion, or E=hf for electromagnetic energy, is somewhat cryptical. To state that the energy E referenced is actually the same form, or equivalent, then E=E.
What that means is that (MC^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) = hf. It has to be true, or E is not equivalent. In simpler terms, the property known as "energy" (E) is not "energy".
Therefore if we assume that E is truly = E, we may conclude from this that Mass itself is a function of frequency of an energy, since C and h (plank's constant) are actually constant numbers represented by symbolic form.
If mass is a function of energy frequency, then mass may well be transformed to either an increase of either frequency or energy, and vice-versa.
Now, also consider that E^2 = momentum^2 + M^2, or E= sqrt(momentum^2 + M^2)
Guess what, E = E (actually E^2 = E^2) principle yet again.......
In this we can state hf(MC^2/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)) = momentum^2 + M^2
We ten note that momentum is then a relation of a mass frequency in motion, which is true.
This then demonstrates that mass is not some quantity solely owned by "matter", and that "matter" is but another representation, form, or aspect of energy.
Otherwise, E=mc^2 would not be applicable to matter, as it's derivations are based upon ELECTROMAGNETIC formula. (Note the application of the Lorentzian transformations.)
Therefore, it should come as no shock to anyone that energy can manifest itself as any of the forms, or all of the forms, with a change in any of the functional parts of the base form.
Therefore, collision of photons, would equal a change in momentum or possibly even frequency, which might create particles, or release energy of various forms.
Paul Andrulis
@martinzurix,
In a Particle Accelerator like CERN?s, the energy produced by the collision of photons is by very far smaller that the energy needed to produce the collisions. One of the reasons for this is they have to force bunches of photons to travel in a circle against photon?s tendency to travel linearly. To force the photons to a circular trajectory they have to use extremely powerful electric and magnetic fields all along the perimeter of 27 kilometers for as long as necessary to focus and maintain the acceleration of the photons. This process demands a huge amount of energy.
Other reason is that because the concentration of photons is not too high, the number of collisions taking place is not high either. Making the balance, the process is extremely inefficient in terms of energy production. This is why physicists have concluded that the utilization of antimatter as source of energy is totally impractical.
For the Antimatter Electrical Generator the situation is totally different. The generation, concentration and collision of photons take place in a very small Photonic Chamber. There is no need to alter the direction of the photons, to accelerate them, or to focus them in any way. For this reason 99.99% or more of the energy used in Particle Accelerators is not needed here.
Plus, the concentration of photons traveling within the chamber at the speed of light in all directions will be extremely high, for what the number of collisions taking place at some point will be a lot higher than in Particle Accelerators. And the process doesn?t stop there. The collision of photons will continue indefinitely for as long as there is still lasing medium in the chamber, in a process that could last for years or even decades of energy production.
Given the Antimatter Electrical Generator works as intended, the efficiency of the system in terms of energy production will be extremely high.
@HopeForHumanity,
Nice thought. Hard to know by now what happens in there!
@pauldude,
Thanks for the math! Matter and energy, as you say, are only different forms of the same. So, theoretically, it should be within the limits of physics to transform either one into the other, and that?s exactly what the antimatter generators intend to do.
Best regards,
Alberto Molina M.
HopeForHumanit
super you thinking similar like me :)
stars is exploders to destroy unusefull matter but black holes is imploders to form back meter from energy...
Alberto Molina M.
looks very promising technology something very similar to V.Shubergers (me big fan of this gay) implosion theory..
implosion process is were particles move from from outer perimeter to center and form highter states of energy lewel
shuberger say that imploding process is natural type of energy motion... planets are centers were `anti photons` collide and form mater
stars emitting photons they collide and produce explosive anti mater-energy (reason why solar light produces heat.. there are collision of photons with matter) , black holes emitting implosive anti photons wen anti photons collide they produce stable matter and natural cold... just theory :)
sore for my bad english... i hope something is readable from my texts.. :)
@Alberto
If I understand correctly, you intend to use a lasing medium, inside of a small spherical totally reflective chamber to initialize the collision effect. May I suggest using lasing dye. (see "Dye Lasers"). Lasing dye is highly efficient, and easily replaceable.
It does not have the drawback of a partial vacuum, as in a rarified gas laser. (Along with its potential unintended X-Ray production.) It is not nearly as expensive as a solid material rods. It may be stimulated by all the regular manners except electric arc, or direct internal material combustion. (You can use RF stimulation, direct photon stimulation, heat stimulation, etc..)
I am also willing to bet that any "ultra-bright colors" fabric dye would lase quite well... ;D
Paul Andrulis
Hi everyone,
About the Continuous Electrical Generator. *It can be made to work IMHO*
Here's some patent references; patentfetcher.com is free, as pat2pdf.org
First, do a patent search (gb.espacenet.com) using the applicant field from US2004007932, namely HYUN LAB CO LTD . Did you know about this effort? It's the very same idea as the CEG.
Second, the black box inverter in the patent app., in order to be efficient, ought to use Selective Harmonic Elimination, aka Magic Sinewaves. IEEE Power Electronics journal contains other worthwhile schemes, such as this bidirectional one! US6914420. Or one can use only windings. But for the experimenter, total control over the waveform ought to appeal. Those two are very interesting: US20060087295 and US20050174098. SHE as a better PWM should yield more efficiency in the CEG's simple design, perhaps coupled to a couple other drive ideas.
Third, there's the 1984 Westinghouse patent US4595843 entitled Low Core Loss Rotating Flux Transformer does indeed tell us that when using amorphous metal near saturation, hysterisis losses are eliminated. The Sullivan patent on Toroidally wound cores US20030025416 is worth a look also, even if it's only for mechanical devices: if the toroid isn't saturated, there's almost no counter-torque! Wonder if it would be applicable to a no-moving part generator?
A recent website spawned from a recent thread on this forum on the now-classic cap anomaly might interest you also. http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc/ (Reminds me about the Mckie PODMOD, US4146395)
US20060152955 as the textbook example (lots of technicalities about FET Driving left behind) of charge recycling, another one being US20050189927.
US7085123 about how a supercapacitor correctly switched can yield much higher battery lifetime.
US20070002598 is also a great idea to keep one's mosfets cool, cutting the voltage they drive by two, makes lots of sense.
http://newelectromagnetism.com might also interest you, clearest exposition so far on the overlooked longitudinal aspect of EM modeling.
So I'm sure one can make your Continuous Electrical generator work. Maybe changing the location of the energy extraction coils to put them around the toroid, or maybe as Chung Hyun did, like your second embodiement (?? fig 3-7), with similar coils, only shifted. I'm so sure it's possible! Since there's almost no losses, just giving it a little magnetic push to keep the traveling/rotating magnetic field going while decoupling the extraction part of the device from the generating part?
Magnetic Shield for health purpose, could maybe even be an active part of another generator? :) : http://rexresearch.com/wadle/wadle.htm
* * *
As for your anti-matter generator, Mr Molina-Martinez,
First to understand what anti-matter might really look like: http://glafreniere.com Very solid, independent work, from Quebec, Canada.
He thinks J.W. Keely was a fraud, don't know myself what to think about it, so I just ignore the matter... :-\ although I'm enclined to believe in Keely's accomplishements!
Next, there's no photons!! http://unquantum.net is a MUST-SEE; Light particles don't exist, thresold-based emissions of spherical wavefronts and continuous absorbtion of radiation! The photon doesn't exist, I repeat, the light grain photon doesn't exist. Please consider this fact.
Also, in albeit the same vein, Ken Shoulders' work on EVOs might interest you.
Would love to see pictures of a prototype antimatter electrical generator, or of you CEGs! =)
All the best,
MinEth3r
Quote from: MinEth3r on June 12, 2008, 07:21:42 PM
Hi everyone,
About the Continuous Electrical Generator. *It can be made to work IMHO*
Here's some patent references; patentfetcher.com is free, as pat2pdf.org
First, do a patent search (gb.espacenet.com) using the applicant field from US2004007932, namely HYUN LAB CO LTD . Did you know about this effort? It's the very same idea as the CEG.
Second, the black box inverter in the patent app., in order to be efficient, ought to use Selective Harmonic Elimination, aka Magic Sinewaves. IEEE Power Electronics journal contains other worthwhile schemes, such as this bidirectional one! US6914420. Or one can use only windings. But for the experimenter, total control over the waveform ought to appeal. Those two are very interesting: US20060087295 and US20050174098. SHE as a better PWM should yield more efficiency in the CEG's simple design, perhaps coupled to a couple other drive ideas.
Third, there's the 1984 Westinghouse patent US4595843 entitled Low Core Loss Rotating Flux Transformer does indeed tell us that when using amorphous metal near saturation, hysterisis losses are eliminated. The Sullivan patent on Toroidally wound cores US20030025416 is worth a look also, even if it's only for mechanical devices: if the toroid isn't saturated, there's almost no counter-torque! Wonder if it would be applicable to a no-moving part generator?
A recent website spawned from a recent thread on this forum on the now-classic cap anomaly might interest you also. http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc/ (Reminds me about the Mckie PODMOD, US4146395)
US20060152955 as the textbook example (lots of technicalities about FET Driving left behind) of charge recycling, another one being US20050189927.
US7085123 about how a supercapacitor correctly switched can yield much higher battery lifetime.
US20070002598 is also a great idea to keep one's mosfets cool, cutting the voltage they drive by two, makes lots of sense.
http://newelectromagnetism.com might also interest you, clearest exposition so far on the overlooked longitudinal aspect of EM modeling.
So I'm sure one can make your Continuous Electrical generator work. Maybe changing the location of the energy extraction coils to put them around the toroid, or maybe as Chung Hyun did, like your second embodiement (?? fig 3-7), with similar coils, only shifted. I'm so sure it's possible! Since there's almost no losses, just giving it a little magnetic push to keep the traveling/rotating magnetic field going while decoupling the extraction part of the device from the generating part?
Magnetic Shield for health purpose, could maybe even be an active part of another generator? :) : http://rexresearch.com/wadle/wadle.htm
* * *
As for your anti-matter generator, Mr Molina-Martinez,
First to understand what anti-matter might really look like: http://glafreniere.com Very solid, independent work, from Quebec, Canada.
He thinks J.W. Keely was a fraud, don't know myself what to think about it, so I just ignore the matter... :-\ although I'm enclined to believe in Keely's accomplishements!
Next, there's no photons!! http://unquantum.net is a MUST-SEE; Light particles don't exist, thresold-based emissions of spherical wavefronts and continuous absorbtion of radiation! The photon doesn't exist, I repeat, the light grain photon doesn't exist. Please consider this fact.
Also, in albeit the same vein, Ken Shoulders' work on EVOs might interest you.
Would love to see pictures of a prototype antimatter electrical generator, or of you CEGs! =)
All the best,
MinEth3r
Actualy, there are photons. Don't believe the crap they talk about to cover there asses when they have contradicting theories. Photons are actualy wave packets, because light does not use a medium. This means that in order to transmit an electromagnetic wave, you must have some sort of medium to travel through, but there is no medium of matter, so photon packets are used to explain the wave-material activity of electromagnetic waves. Yes, the light we detect is a wave, but the medium that the wave travels through is generated by the light itself, that is photons.
it's like this:
|\|\|\|\|\ wave
[ ] photon
[ |\|\|\|\|\ ] [ |\|\|\|\|\ ] [ |\|\|\|\|\ ] [ |\|\|\|\|\ ]
kind of like that, but you know physics, it's mutch more complex mathematicaly.
Ah hahaha I just might get convinced, no, seriously... what an awesome reply, Let's delete that last post.
Indeed I know physics enough not to condone BS. And there's so much BS out there it's staggering.
sound is waves in medium .. photons is medium it self (waves of medium)
.............
-------------
\\--\\--\\---
-------------
.............
............
............
--..--..--..
............
............
. vacumm
- medium
\\ medium waves
The interesting subject of quantum tunneling is a good way to show what happens when energy has a particle-wave duality. Such as when a packet is able to pass through a boundary with a higher energy requirement. Waves would not be able to do this alone.
About the couple last posts:
guys, just take a look at this succint, to the point one-page summary of the crux of the matter:
http://www.unquantum.net/thephysicsparadox/insidecover.pdf
Eric's work is solid, there's really something that didn't add up about quantum science until his work came out.
Taking this and many other facts into account, we're in need of a complete overhaul of basic science books.
Wave-particle duality is a fallacy.
Quote from: pauldude000 on June 09, 2008, 10:28:29 PM
Perhaps I should emphasize this: the theory of relativity, not the law of relativity. Make a distinction between the two statements. A theory is an unproven or unprovable statement which does not necessarily work in all applications, a law has been demonstrated to apply with continuance in consistency.
There's no real difference between law and theory. Law is really a legacy term for a theory that explains fairly narrow field of physics. Theory in common spoken language is an unproven or unprovable statement (and is called hypothesis in scientific terms), but theory in physics is an established explanation for set of phenomena. They explain observed facts and make testable predictions, it has to be demonstrated to apply with continuance and consistency to be called a scientific theory. If your theory doesn't work in all applications, there's just something wrong with it and it needs to be adjusted. No current theory will ever be promoted into a law.
Sorry for nitpicking, but you sounded like those creationist nuts I like to argue with, had to jump on this :P.
There's a bit of a grey area in cosmology/astrophysics/particle physics where they use the word theory a bit too generously to my liking. A lot of that stuff is really hard to test so I wouldn't be at all surprised if they got a lot of things wrong.
How about we stop derailing the thread and get him to build his generator. This science experiment will disprove or verify. If it works, then the particle duality has been proven completely
@retroworm
I have determined from your statements that you actually enjoy attacking other for no real reason. Most people I have met with this attitude tend to gravitate to bars, and reside there half-drunk looking for fights.
If your idea is to attack and insult those whom simply do not agree with you, then by all means do not respond to my posts, as I will not answer you after this post.
I consider you of a somewhat weak mind to entertain and hold such a weak attitude.
Why weak? It is pure self-justification towards an unrational baseless attitude of hatred.
"Sorry for nitpicking, but you sounded like those creationist nuts I like to argue with, had to jump on this"
1. "Sorry for nitpicking" and "had to jump on this" demonstrates a compulsional need to attack.
2. "you sounded" demonstrates further the compulsion, as no proof was provided for the desire to attack me.
3. "those creationist" shows the base objects of your rage.
4. "nuts" your best qualification for attacking whomever. You think them insane, so they must be insane??? (baseless)
It is also your only justification for your attacks.
5. "I like to argue with" Ahhh, the true reason emerges, in that you enjoy arguing, or starting verbal fights with these people, and obviously anyone whom even in your words "sounds like" them......
What, did you think yourself in some manner superior to someone else? Intellectually? Morally?
Intellectually:
"Sarcasm is the refuge of a weak mind" Very famous quote made by a very acceptedly intellectual person. Look it up.
The intellect is the ability to think. There is no real tangible thing called "intellectual superiority", unless you compare yourself to animals, or those whom have suffered physical brain damage.
There is however terms for those whom place themselves into such a category. "Egocentric" and "Egomaniacal" both fit quite well by definition. Especially when they perceive those whom do not agree with them as "insane" ("nuts" in other words.)
Morally:
Did I or anyone else whom you have attacked, do anything whatsoever to warrant an attack beyond stating something which you disagreed with?
If not, what moral base can you claim at all? You have proven by demonstration that the ones you attack are superior in this to you.
NOW concerning "Law & Theory"......
Go to wikipedia, or any other encyclopedia, or a physics textbook for that matter, and look it up so that YOU know the difference between a law and a theory. (Though wikipedia is not a very good source, necessarily, it is good enough for this.)
If you wish to speak civilly, responsibly, and without intended antagonism towards me, I will respond.
Otherwise, you shall just be mentally shadow boxing.
Paul Andrulis
Uhf, what's with the hostility. I just spotted an incorrect statement while I was reading and decided to correct it to my best abilities. It had nothing to do with attacking you personally or showing superiority on my part. Besides, I don't see what your point is, the wikipedia article says exactly what I just said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To stay on topic though...
Quote from: Alberto Molina M. on June 08, 2008, 06:01:32 AM
Collided photons disintegrate into a variety of subatomic charged particles and antiparticles, matter and antimatter. These subatomic particles and antiparticles can not be stopped by mirrors, for which they will abandon the photonic collider through its walls.
My undestanding in particle physics might be flawed, but wouldn't the antiparticles just annihilate when they try to go through the mirror? That would degrade the mirror over time for sure, but depending on how fast, you could still probably capture the radiation and heat into electricity.
@retro
Good. Much better. Now we can hold an intelligent conversation. I really dont mind when people disagree, as I tend to weigh their statements by the statements own validity to demonstrable reality.
All quotes from your previous post.
"There's no real difference between law and theory."
A law does differ from theory. To quote from wikipedia from the topic "Scientific Law":
"A scientific law concerns the physical world. It therefore must have empirical content and consequently be capable of testing and potentially of disproof. Analytic statements that are true or false by logic alone are not scientific laws, though may feature as part of scientific theories.
The concept of a scientific law is closely related to the concept of a scientific theory. A scientific law attempts to describe an observation in nature while a scientific theory attempts to explain it."
And to quote same source from "Physical Law":
"Physical laws are:
* True, at least within their regime of validity. By definition, there have never been repeatable contradicting observations.
* Universal. They appear to apply everywhere in the universe. (Davies, 1992:82)
* Simple. They are typically expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. (Davies)
* Absolute. Nothing in the universe appears to affect them. (Davies, 1992:82)
* Stable. Unchanged since first discovered (although they may have been shown to be approximations of more accurate laws?see "Laws as approximations" below),
* Omnipotent. Everything in the universe apparently must comply with them (according to observations). (Davies, 1992:83)
* Generally conservative of quantity. (Feynman, 1965:59)
* Often expressions of existing homogeneities (symmetries) of space and time. (Feynman)
* Typically theoretically reversible in time (if non-quantum), although time itself is irreversible. (Feynman)"
As you can now see, there is a large ACTUAL difference between a theory and a law. You were mislead, by only reading the posting on "Theory".
"There's a bit of a grey area in cosmology/astrophysics/particle physics where they use the word theory a bit too generously to my liking. A lot of that stuff is really hard to test so I wouldn't be at all surprised if they got a lot of things wrong."
You need to add "Theoretical Physics" to this list. ;D
The main problem is that the concept of a "theory" is mixed up BOTH in popular useage, AND in the scientific community. You can see this by the actual definition of "theory", verses the academic applied statements about said. Reading the wikipedia article on "Theory" startled me, as they actually came very close, and actually quoted the academic position.
The problem with a "well established theory", is that it IS "well established", or thought of and taught as a law, not by emperical evidence but by tradition, preference, and longevity. When conflicting evidence raises its ugly head to these, its is readily and rapidly "explained away", as either non-applicable, error in observation, "within the limits of tolerance", "virtual or apparent", or worse.
Apparent mass in a photon is one such excellent example, and as classic as the day is long. The "mass" HAS to be apparent to these people. WHY?
1. Because the photon definitely demonstrates the quantity of mass.
2. Well established theories (more than just one) state that it cannot have mass.
Here is the basic problem in a nutshell, a photon has empirically by repeatable means through rigorous testing been shown to have mass. Miniscule, extremely small, but EXISTENT. If the mass is real, the theories are flawed and need revision. It is MUCH simpler to scoff, denounce, or relegate as somewhat "non-existent" then examine the real problem existent with the theory itself.
When ONE of the theories already gives the clue to understanding. Namely E=MC^2
Why would mass have any relationship with the constant C (speed of light in a vacuuem), OR the lorentzian transformations in the motional form of the equation? Both have everything to do with electromagnetic radiation, and NOT supposedly anything to do WITH matter! YET MASS IS A (one of) DEFINING ASPECT OF MATTER!
Einstein almost had the whole understanding. His equation demonstrated that matter is energy, which is nothing new. YET no one has seemingly bothered to equate the necessarily true implication of this statement. Matter IS energy, there is no separation between the two concepts.
Where the mental loophole exists for the continued separation between the two concepts is the completely worthless definition of "pure energy" or E.
Either "pure energy" IS "pure energy", which means that E=E, or "pure energy" is NOT "pure energy" and E is NOT = E. It truly is as simple as that. If the definitions match, and matter is energy, then Mc^2/SQRT(1-v^2/c^2) does indeed equal hf, or one or the other equations is unbalanced.
It is therefore no surprise whatsoever to find a form of energy containing aspects of matter, or vice-versa. That is, so long as you accept E=mc^2 as true.......
What science as a whole needs today is to LOSE the egotistic attitude as a whole, and accept what it does not understand, so that it may actually seek to solve the problems in the theories, and not merely explain them away.
Thought tends to be like electricity, in that it seeks the path of least resistance. It is simpler and easier to rely upon the thoughts and ability of others than to do the thinking yourself using your own ability. I call it mental laziness.
Paul Andrulis
Hello everyone,
Antimatter may be part of our daily life and we haven?t noticed!
When a charged particle crosses through matter at rest, ion pairs are created, this is: electrons and positrons. What the crossing of the charged particle is actually doing is creating a fast moving magnetic field within said matter at rest.
The similarity with the way we create electricity by making a moving magnetic field cross through a conductor, has led me to propose a new theory of electricity.
It is commonly accepted that electricity consists of the flow of electrons traveling from the negative pole to the positive pole, phenomena some how created by the crossing of a magnetic field through a conductor. But, is it true?
If a fast moving magnetic field creates ion pairs dissociation, why wouldn?t a moving magnetic field do the same on the constituent matter of a conductor?
Electricity must be the flow of both, electrons and positrons, in opposite directions along a conductor.
As equal charges repel, both, electrons and positrons, will physically occupy all the available space in their respective segment of the conductor, being the electrical potential or voltage the concentration or density of free electrons, positive or negative, occupying said available space. The more electrons repelling others are present in the volume of the conductor, the more the ?pressure? (voltage) will grow. In alternating currents the phenomenon just inverts every half cycle.
As opposite charges attract each other, at the closing of the circuit electrons and positrons will flow along the conductor to their mutual encounter, creating what we call electrical current, or amperage. The voltage and the resistance of the system will determine the amount of electrons and positrons that can flow along the conductor.
The presence of electrons and positrons in opposite terminals explains the ?short circuit? phenomena. At low ?pressure? or voltage, the matter-antimatter reactions are small enough not to cause significant damage, but at high ?pressure? or voltage, the explosions and damages can be considerable.
It has been demonstrated in Multiwire Proportional Chambers that negatively charged electrons travel at much higher speeds than positively charged electrons or positrons, probably a thousand times faster, which may be the reason why we have thought that only negative electrons travel in an electric circuit.
The Antimatter Electrical Generator is designed to utilize this concept to transform matter-antimatter charged particles? energy directly into electricity.
Alberto Molina-Martinez
@pauldude,
I also have big hopes with dye laser mediums. About the shape of the photonic reactor, I prefer a cylinder rather that a sphere for practical reasons, but a sphere would work too. Thanks for your comments.
AMM
Hello Mr. Alberto,
My opinion, if I allowed to have an opinion, is that HISTORY IS REPETITION. Everything was gonna be, all that existed longer exists, nothing is finished, nothing disappears, everything is transformation.
I'm interested in these forums and much Internet site about overunity devices and I read your messages posted here. Very, very interesting tell you. Perhaps you know that reading of Edgar Cayce about Tuaoi Stone or may not know it, but look what that says about the crystal. It is very similar to what you find yours. This is the reason they say that HISTORY IS A REPETITION.
Look this site:
http://www.huttoncommentaries.com/subs/Special/AtlanRec_Firestone/Tuaoi/TuaoiRevisited.htm
Please forgive me for not know the English language well.
Best regards and all the best,
Victor
Perhaps Tuaoi Stone used neutrino, not photons.
Here' s a nice 30 amp Pulse Width Modulator i came across
http://www.extremehho.com (http://www.extremehho.com)
Paul,
It must have been a difficult choice to continue with your chosen field or suffer " the slings and arrows" of a brainwashed gallery. But you are right! If we followed custom, we would still worship medicne men.
Where would Genetic medecine be? Burn at the stake?
Keep it going and challange tradition. Tradition is a two legged animal. Although it has 2 perfectly good legs it is unable to take steps forward!
Raullt12
hmmm... very interesting.. makes me want to take two CRT's and point them both at a crystal