I need help with a KEELY project

[Grumpy]

Besides, Keely was the first to state that enormous energies were locked up in the "interstitial spaces of corpuscles" (Keely's term for subatomic particles) This statement more than anything else discredited him with the scientific world of the day. All you have to do is look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki to see how right he was.

"Interstitial spaces of corpuscles" has nothing to do with "subatomic particles".  Keely was refering to the vortices of the "ether", which are the ambiant potential - call it the "electrostatic scalar potential" if it makes you happy.  It's the "time" parameter of  Einsteins 4-vector. Also known as the "torsion field".  See the work of Wilbert B. Smith, F.F. Mende, and Stephan Marinov.

@Grumpy
Don't be such an ass. Confrontation  yields nothing.

It's not intentional, just my nature.   All I'm trying to do is open Hans' mind a little - let him see the dark side of the moon.

[Pirate88179]

There is no "dark" side of the moon.  It should actually be called the far side, but I guess everyone on here probably already knows that.

Grumpy, are the works of the men you mentioned still available in print somewhere?  Even the library at our local university leaves a lot to be desired.

Bill

[hansvonlieven]

Well Pirate,

This is the dilemma. We are talking of energy here, heaps of it, though we are not talking about fission as much as we are talking about fusion. So at least there should not be any radioactivity.

Helena Blavatski said that Keely's technology should not be available to mankind for at least 10,000 years.

What came out of the Manhattan project never made it into peaceful technology on a larger scale because of the inherent danger of the materials involved and the very real fear that someone irresponsible might get their hands on it. For that reason massive safeguards were put into place from raw materials to the metals required to make enrichment feasible. It is a moot point that Keely's technology might pose the same dangers without the difficulty of basic material procurement. The best thing is to ignore it and do nothing one might argue.

If you believe that then we should go back to the cave and live like savages. For better or worse, the technology to destroy this planet has been around for a while. The question is, do you want a technology like Keely's be developed by Iran or perhaps Robert Mugabe? Wouldn't that be fun?

We have no choice, we must go forward and stay on top or there is no hope for anyone.

Hans von Lieven

[hansvonlieven]

OK Grumpy be pedantic,

Corpuscles was the term used by Keely for subatomic particles, You are right I didn't make that clear, though any halfway intelligent person would have caught what was meant. Unless of course someone wanted to argue just for the sake of it.

Hans von Lieven

[Pirate88179]

Hans:

Well, I have to admit, you got me with your point about Iran.  You are correct.  As good or bad as the atomic bomb may be, I am glad it was ours first here in the USA.  And so, as you said, one can't turn back the clock or hide with their head in the sand.  Technology marches forward with or without us.  I failed to consider that in my question to you.  Thanks for helping me to understand this.

Bill