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

[Hope]

Mainstream?  Sorry "mainstream" should we instead call them guided or mislead.   I played pool to many times not to understand the simple physics of it.     Two balls hit by one ball equally will distribute the force between the struck balls.  AND the opposite is also true where two balls striking one ball will transfer their energies into the one ball.  If the two photons traveling at the speed of light hit another photon at the correct angles ..... we must account for the transferred energies.   I say BLARGH! on those can't theories.  I believe physics is quantum and is proof already of how it works.  This is an example of how momentary over the speed of light can happen, AND DOES.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Mainstream?  Sorry "mainstream" should we instead call them guided or mislead.   I played pool to many times not to understand the simple physics of it.     Two balls hit by one ball equally will distribute the force between the struck balls.  AND the opposite is also true where two balls striking one ball will transfer their energies into the one ball.  If the two photons traveling at the speed of light hit another photon at the correct angles ..... we must account for the transferred energies.   I say BLARGH! on those can't theories.  I believe physics is quantum and is proof already of how it works.  This is an example of how momentary over the speed of light can happen, AND DOES.

Interesting thought Hope.  I've actually never considered the effect of two balls striking one ball and resulting in faster than light speeds.  I'm sure you're right. 

What I'm actually proposing is that our 'force fields' gravity, electromagnetic, nuclear, 'dark', whatever, actually comprise particles that are hidden from view because the operate faster than light speed so they remain invisible.  It would need two things.  They would need to be both too small and too fast for photons to ever find them.  But if they did move at a velocity of say, twice light speed, then they would effectively be moving in a time frame in advance of our own.

One of the puzzles in particle physics is the fact that twin particles can never move entirely independently of each other.   If you moved the one to the 'north' say, then the other would adjust to that movement - INSTANTANEOUSLY.  This is regardless of their spatial positions.  The one could be 11 kilometers away (as tested) or, theoretically a million miles away.  They'd still move in synch, so to speak.  The implication is that if they can communicate their positions instantaneously then they're also communicating that at faster than light speed.  Else there'd be a required delay when the one signals a change in position to the other.  In essence this is the only proof that anything actually travels at faster than light speed.   It's a paradox - which is a euphemism for a 'scientific fact that contradicts the theory'.    

In any event - if a field comprised particles and if these indeed exceeded light speed, then think of the implications.  It would explain telepathy, remote viewing, all those rather esoteric interests that have plenty of proof as being extant - but, thus far, no scientific explanation. 

Just a thought.

Kindest regards,
Rosie

[Hope]

That conclusion you realized so quickly is amazing, Rosie your wired for this stuff for sure.  It enlightens me on a lot I have been studying.   Heat is a byproduct of a gathering of radiant energies.... how do you feel about this statement?  And when super heat is generated many forms of radiant energy can be formed,  perhaps this can explain Geet Thermal dynamic properties and abilities to decompose gases.  I even read where radioactive particals lost energy when tested through a simple reactor of this design.   Same are true of super cold fluxes which react in their own theater of effects.
edited   i goofed up usage

[Rosemary Ainslie]

That conclusion you realized so quickly is amazing, Rosie your wired for this stuff for sure.  It enlightens me on a lot I have been studying.   Heat is a byproduct of a gathering of radiant energies.... how do you feel about this statement?  And when super heat is generated many forms of radiant energy can be formed,  perhaps this can explain Geet Thermal dynamic properties and abilities to decompose gases.  I even read where radioactive particals lost energy when tested through a simple reactor of this design.   Same are true of super cold fluxes which react in their own theater of effects.

Dear Hope,  this is indeed an interesting question.  My own thinking here is that these little particles that make up the field - are magnetic monopoles - or tiny little magnets.  And they always move in the field.  I can find a required velocity in a field structure to justify the 'movement'.  But this is the proposal.  When they're in a field they're small and fast and invisible and cold.  But get them out of the field - however it's done - then they can become big and slow and visible and HOT.  What we do with electromagnetic imbalances is induce them to become hot.  Here's why I think this.

You know - for example - that when a house or anything burns to the ground - then all we're left with is the ashes?  Well.  What our physicists can prove is that no single atom or molecule in that fire was disturbed.  They are still intact - inviolate.  Their molecular structure may have varied.  Their position in space may have varied.  Some of those atoms may have dissipated into the air - or may have combined with other atoms and molecules in the air.  But the fire itself would not reconstitute the condition of the atoms themselves.  Fully accounted for.  In effect the 'bound' condition of those structures has been compromised.  Not the atoms themselves. 

So.  Let's assume this.  Let's assume that the atoms were previously 'held' in a bound condition by small disassociated fields of magnets.  Little strings.  And then picture this.  We have coke or wood under a ceramic pot - and we have iron filings loosely assembled inside that pot.  Then.  We apply friction to the wood to get it to burn.  What we're doing is we're disturbing the 'field' condition of those those little magnets that are holding the atoms together.  They lose their 'field' condition and change from small/fast/cold/invisible to sparks and flames - being a big/slow/hot/visible condition - out of the field.  They then transfer their fields through the ceramic pot.  They can't find a 'home' or atoms to 'join together' so they pass through the pot.  Then they come to the iron filings.  Now they definitely have 'loose' structures to form into some kind of aggregate.  They move in.  They align atom with atom - on a really deep/small basis and systematically 'join in' and 'join up'.  Gradually the loose aggregate becomes more bound as more and more of these little fields 'move in'.  Then.  When all the wood has burned - it has lost it's previously bound condition and remains there as 'ash'.  And all the aggregate that was previously 'unbound' is now liquud and melted and hot.  The 'binding' fields have found a new home.  And when there is no further disturbance from more 'fire' then they settle down and become small/cold/invisible/fast (scif?) - which means they re-establish their 'field' condition.  In effect the bound condition was lost to the wood - through burning - and then transferred to the aggregate which becomes bound - in relation to the number of 'fields' that were effectively transferred through that flame.

The only difference between this and classical assumption - is that this seems to be consistent with the fact.  And it would give a far finer balance to our energy equations.  Effectively a bound structure would thereby have more potential energy than an unbound structure.  Two atoms together would have more energy than each atom alone.  And all that is different is that the energy itself is a kind of material or particulate piece of matter than is applied to each atom.  It's visible in our dimensions as 'flame'.  Otherwise it is entirely invisible.  It's visible nature is plastic and shows a progress of the field to another 'abode', so to speak.  It would also then have the real merit of answering the casimir effect which is also something observed on a 'small scale'.

In any event that's how I see it.  LOL.  Not a popular view point.  But I do think it has some sort of logical merit.     Maybe?

Kindest regards,
Rosie
EDITED

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Sorry guys.  Just compelled to add something about a magnetic field.  If you consider the lines of force that extrude from a permanent cylindrical bar magnet.  Then take away the magnet and leave those lines of force.  There is absolutely nothing to determine a 'charge' in that field.  All it has is a single 'justification' or a single 'direction'.  But each part of that field would have an 'opposite' in the other half of that 'toroid' shaped field.  Perfect magnetic balance.  In effect the thing that determines a north from a south is the distribution of matter within the field itself.  This then tells us about the 'justification' of the field - and indeed - the charge of that matter responding to the field. 

So.  The proposal is this.  Perhaps the field is extant regardless of the matter that we can measure responding to that field.  Perhaps our aether energies - our aether fields - are just varying sizes of a basic magnetic field.  Smallest would be one dimensional strings - holding atoms together.  Biggest would be a universal toroid holding matter bound in its centre and anti matter?  Perhaps this is distributed in its outer boundaries.  That way all we have to determine is how it is that matter responds to the field.  ?    

Perhaps, therefore, our magnetic force is a primary force and the electromagnetic interactions that we can see and measure - may be a secondary phenomenon.  Frankly I see no exception to the way matter would relate to such a field than it is seen to relate to the 'forces'.  And it has the dubious merit of accounting for the invisibility of the forces.  But if it's right.  If the field is there?  Then we have that abundance of energy that I think we all realise is there - on a deep intuitive level.

Regards,
Rosemary
http://www.scribd.com/aetherevarising