Free energy and HAARP technology

[Nienna]

Did you think I would make such a comment so lightly?

It's fairly understandable that people would think this of a lot of your posts because that's how your posts come across. It's like you are writing for yourself instead of writing for those on the forum. There's a lot of noise/nonsense in a lot of your posts. Maybe something to try to work on?

 

[Inquorate]

Its really easy in theory; the devil is in the details.

Imagine a simple coil of wire, with the wire ends and the coil itself _///////__

It will be of three dimensions, _a + /////// b + _c in meters

Let's say a is 0. 08 m, b is 0. 1 m, c is 0.05 m

1. a+b= 0. 18 m
2. a+b+c= 0. 23 m
3 b+c= 0. 15 m

The coil's atoms will vibrate in resonance with the environment (we are supposing the environment is free of metal, wood or water)

Atomic vibrations travel at the speed of phonons in the nucleus, which also happens to be the speed of quantum translations, 1. 094 million meters per second.

So lambda L being the resonant frequency of the coil,
L equals speed times distance
1. 19.692 mhz
2. 25.1 mhz
3. 16.41 mhz

The cool will prefer to resonate at one of those frequencies, or a multiple thereof.

Add another coil and you can get one to reinforce the other. But by so doing, you change both self resonant frequencies and have to retune with new coils.

Tuned correctly, three coils can sustain significant energy levels from the environment.

In fact, the correctly shaped mass should be able to do the same.

It's not free energy, but it is virtually limitless.

 

[Inquorate]

Again, these videos should pique the interest..

_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FOq7-WsL5c
How to measure srf or Spatial Resonant Frequency of a Coil

_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIIhgHTEoM0
Driving LED, No Battery and No Transistor

_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eAQ2gpbWWI
3-Coil srf Demo Part1 - YouTube

_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jv-Q-_IszCg
3-Coil srf Demo Part2 - YouTube

_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAezDm2jvbA
More On Coil Spatial Resonance - YouTube

 

[trendsetter37]

Its really easy in theory; the devil is in the details.

Imagine a simple coil of wire, with the wire ends and the coil itself _///////__

It will be of three dimensions, _a + /////// b + _c in meters

Let's say a is 0. 08 m, b is 0. 1 m, c is 0.05 m

1. a+b= 0. 18 m
2. a+b+c= 0. 23 m
3 b+c= 0. 15 m

So by dimensions you are referring to the lengths of each segment? I.e. _a represents the wire length of the left part of the unwound coil, b represents the length of the physical coil or is it the length of the wire that makes the coil because those are two different values, and _c represents the length of the wire that constitutes the right side of the unwound coil. Just trying to make sure that I fully understand what you are explaining.

Are your values representative or to scale of an actual setup or just arbitrary? My initial thought being that there may be some kind of ratio between those lengths that could be of significance.

Atomic vibrations travel at the speed of phonons in the nucleus, which also happens to be the speed of quantum translations, 1. 094 million meters per second.

Hmm...up until now I've overlooked atomic vibrations possibly resonating along with or in sync with electrical oscillations. That is an interesting concept considering that atoms have to move in order to exist (Not sure if this is a fact but Tesla and walter russel touch on this point) which would also create electric oscillations. Osit.

 

[monotonic]

In an AM tuner coil, most of the electric field is actually between the layers of the coil. So the coil's electrical SRF will be different (and much lower) from the resonance of the space it's in.

EDIT: Couldn't watch those videos before. Now I'm looking.

 

[Zasino]

Its really easy in theory; the devil is in the details.
...
1. 19.692 mhz
2. 25.1 mhz
3. 16.41 mhz

I'll just pick on a devil:
mHz = milli-Hertz, 10-3 Hz
MHz = MegaHertz, 106 Hz

It's not free energy, but it is virtually limitless.

...and who's supposed to pay for it then?

.A

 

[Wyatt Shipley]

It's fairly understandable that people would think this of a lot of your posts because that's how your posts come across. It's like you are writing for yourself instead of writing for those on the forum. There's a lot of noise/nonsense in a lot of your posts. Maybe something to try to work on?

Wyatt Here: I must say that I am distressed at the above comment. It seems to me quite a jump considering that I was referring to an event that is in the transcripts. As far as noise and nonsense in my posts; I have been warned that this present organization is nothing like when I was with Cass Chat back in 1999 to 2003. I am now starting to read/see what some were talking about. As a writer, I always write to whoever is going to read what I am writing; that is, I don't need to write for the sake of writing, I believe I am adding to the discussion. So, when I wrote that exploring "Free-Energy" could be a problem My gosh, Marinov (I don't recall the correct spelling) was doing research, got injected with some substance, hallucinated and fell to his death. Ark knows about that.

"Maybe something to try to work on." Hmm? My thinking right now is that I'll take the next several months to work on it, then Maybe check back with Cassiopaea.org.
Oh well, so much for my funny stories-- It was me who spoofed that Cassiopaea might end up as a CULT; "Cult of the Wavers". (I was the first back in 2000) End of the World, The Cult Moniker; actually truth be told, My story was Hi-jack at Cassiopaea.org and fed to Vincent Most. It was I who spoofed that Vincent Most was the smartest man in the Universe. It was I who wrote, "There Goes the Neighborhood". And how about "57 Channels and Nothings On".

As I said, I write to the reader: If that is your opinion, then I'll just go somewhere else.
Best of Everything, Wyatt --

 

[goyacobol]

It's fairly understandable that people would think this of a lot of your posts because that's how your posts come across. It's like you are writing for yourself instead of writing for those on the forum. There's a lot of noise/nonsense in a lot of your posts. Maybe something to try to work on?

Wyatt Here: I must say that I am distressed at the above comment. It seems to me quite a jump considering that I was referring to an event that is in the transcripts. As far as noise and nonsense in my posts; I have been warned that this present organization is nothing like when I was with Cass Chat back in 1999 to 2003. I am now starting to read/see what some were talking about. As a writer, I always write to whoever is going to read what I am writing; that is, I don't need to write for the sake of writing, I believe I am adding to the discussion. So, when I wrote that exploring "Free-Energy" could be a problem My gosh, Marinov (I don't recall the correct spelling) was doing research, got injected with some substance, hallucinated and fell to his death. Ark knows about that.

"Maybe something to try to work on." Hmm? My thinking right now is that I'll take the next several months to work on it, then Maybe check back with Cassiopaea.org.
Oh well, so much for my funny stories-- It was me who spoofed that Cassiopaea might end up as a CULT; "Cult of the Wavers". (I was the first back in 2000) End of the World, The Cult Moniker; actually truth be told, My story was Hi-jack at Cassiopaea.org and fed to Vincent Most. It was I who spoofed that Vincent Most was the smartest man in the Universe. It was I who wrote, "There Goes the Neighborhood". And how about "57 Channels and Nothings On".

As I said, I write to the reader: If that is your opinion, then I'll just go somewhere else.
Best of Everything, Wyatt --

Wyatt,

I think Nienna is referring to your original post that started the confusion: Re: Free energy and HAARP technology

The quote below is the specific sentence that caused at least asino and myself to wonder how you meant the remark.

Alright, no sense talking to those guys, so- whadda yuh think? Oh, and Free-Energy devices are a No-No Because they will come and take you and it away, but solar panels are OK.

I don't think Nienna is talking about the stories and explanations in your attempt to clarify the above sentence but pointing out that you might want to consider the wording so as to be more specific and less vague in future posts. Like who are "those guys" and "Oh, " (why the Oh?) what inflection was meant? For me your whole tone was a little flippant.

I think you need give the forum a chance before you just give up and assume we can't be don't care about what you have to say. FWIW

 

[Inquorate]

The length of the wire itself corresponds to the election vibrations and uses speed of light for lambda.
Self resonant frequency is different to spatial resonant frequency, though both should be used. I referred to self resonance incorrectly in above post.
Now you're all starting to understand just how many variables there are
Thanks for the mhz, Mhz correction.

 

[Nienna]

It's fairly understandable that people would think this of a lot of your posts because that's how your posts come across. It's like you are writing for yourself instead of writing for those on the forum. There's a lot of noise/nonsense in a lot of your posts. Maybe something to try to work on?

Wyatt Here: I must say that I am distressed at the above comment. It seems to me quite a jump considering that I was referring to an event that is in the transcripts. As far as noise and nonsense in my posts; I have been warned that this present organization is nothing like when I was with Cass Chat back in 1999 to 2003. I am now starting to read/see what some were talking about. As a writer, I always write to whoever is going to read what I am writing; that is, I don't need to write for the sake of writing, I believe I am adding to the discussion. So, when I wrote that exploring "Free-Energy" could be a problem My gosh, Marinov (I don't recall the correct spelling) was doing research, got injected with some substance, hallucinated and fell to his death. Ark knows about that.

"Maybe something to try to work on." Hmm? My thinking right now is that I'll take the next several months to work on it, then Maybe check back with Cassiopaea.org.
Oh well, so much for my funny stories-- It was me who spoofed that Cassiopaea might end up as a CULT; "Cult of the Wavers". (I was the first back in 2000) End of the World, The Cult Moniker; actually truth be told, My story was Hi-jack at Cassiopaea.org and fed to Vincent Most. It was I who spoofed that Vincent Most was the smartest man in the Universe. It was I who wrote, "There Goes the Neighborhood". And how about "57 Channels and Nothings On".

As I said, I write to the reader: If that is your opinion, then I'll just go somewhere else.
Best of Everything, Wyatt --

Wyatt,

I think Nienna is referring to your original post that started the confusion: Re: Free energy and HAARP technology

Actually, I was referring to many of Wyatt's post throughout this forum. A lot of them added nothing to the thread they were in. Some were flippant, as you have noticed. Some are fairly good. It's pretty telling of his response to what I wrote. A lot of self-importance is showing.

If Wyatt wants to leave because of an observation instead of taking it in, looking at himself in an objective manner and trying to see just how this might be so - well, that's his prerogative.

 

[goyacobol]

It's fairly understandable that people would think this of a lot of your posts because that's how your posts come across. It's like you are writing for yourself instead of writing for those on the forum. There's a lot of noise/nonsense in a lot of your posts. Maybe something to try to work on?


Actually, I was referring to many of Wyatt's post throughout this forum. A lot of them added nothing to the thread they were in. Some were flippant, as you have noticed. Some are fairly good. It's pretty telling of his response to what I wrote. A lot of self-importance is showing.

If Wyatt wants to leave because of an observation instead of taking it in, looking at himself in an objective manner and trying to see just how this might be so - well, that's his prerogative.

Nienna,

Yes, I agree. I realized that after looking at some of his other posts and kind of wished I had just let it go or said something more to the point.

I think you are doing a tough job well.

Thank you. :)

 

[monotonic]

The length of the wire itself corresponds to the election vibrations and uses speed of light for lambda.
Self resonant frequency is different to spatial resonant frequency, though both should be used. I referred to self resonance incorrectly in above post.
Now you're all starting to understand just how many variables there are
Thanks for the mhz, Mhz correction.

Yeah, I would have known about this but I have only recently fixed my computer sound so that videos are intelligible.

However, a lot of things seem to be getting confused. First you talked about the speed of phonons, now you are talking about the speed of light. Which is important in which context?

It seems to me that the coils are behaving electrically normal like coils always do - or else most modern technology would burst into flames - and that something else, allegedly spatial resonance, is exciting the electrical resonance of the coils. In which case the resonance of the coils is rather well understood and routine and just obfuscates the actual phenomenon occurring here.

 

[Inquorate]

If the speed of QT is taken into account, one observes the aims in an excited state. Using 1. 094 million meets per second allows for a reversal of entropy in the local space. Ignoring or suppressing it does not. Please mag me your email if you wish and i will send you more info that I am reluctant to divulge publicly.

 

[combsbt]

That being said, I know that we should always try to think in terms of possibilities even if the world doesn't march to our tune. I am just a curious person and can't seem to not try to observe as much as I can when it comes to new possibilities. One of the terms used in a quantum system is Density Matrix. As I was reading the definition on Wikipedia I noticed a term that the Cs used which was "Orthongonal".

The brief formula below was an example that I don't even understand but the word "orthogonal" stood out to me:

Density matrix

Explicitly, suppose a quantum system may be found in state | \psi_1 \rangle with probability p1, or it may be found in state | \psi_2 \rangle with probability p2, or it may be found in state | \psi_3 \rangle with probability p3, and so on. The density operator for this system is[1]

\hat\rho = \sum_i p_i |\psi_i \rangle \langle \psi_i|,

where \{|\psi_i\rangle\} need not be orthogonal and \sum_i p_i=1. By choosing an orthonormal basis \{|u_m\rangle\}, one may resolve the density operator into the density matrix, whose elements are[1]

\rho_{mn} = \sum_i p_i \langle u_m | \psi_i \rangle \langle \psi_i | u_n \rangle = \langle u_m |\hat \rho | u_n \rangle.

My only skill at this "time" is using a search engine so I will give you a strange link I found while searching for "orthogonal" to something the Cs said to Ark:

Session 23 March 2013

Q: (Belibaste) So if a group of individuals acquires, stores, information that is orthogonal to truth, i.e.
lies, will this fact of acquiring information that is orthogonal to truth increase the attraction to
meteorites or cometary bodies?
A: Yes
Q: (Belibaste) How does it work?
A: Other realm just mentioned... Gravity waves.
Q: (L) Are you saying that gravity waves are a property of a different realm?
A: Mostly.
Q: (Ark) Why I am spending so much time on quantum theory instead of gravity waves?
A: Get your book finished to open the new door!
Q: (Ark) A new door for me?
A: Yes

The above quote was a fairly recent one and I am not sure how this relates to your research but I just thought it was interesting.

Best regards,

goyacobol

Goyacobol, maybe I can help explain the use of "orthogonal" here. It has a specific mathematical meaning and has been generalized to be used with inner products of functions as in the density matrix but this gets complicated. The easiest way to understand it is via the geometrical meaning from which other uses were generalized. It basically means "perpendicular". If you think of the normal (cartesian) coordinates x, y, and z that we are familiar with in 3D, these are all orthogonal to each other. That is they are completely separate directions. You can not move in the x direction at all by traveling strictly in the y or z direction (same is true for the others).

The usage in the C's session I think means something along the same lines here. "Orthogonal to the truth" would mean "away from the truth" or "in a completely different direction" than the truth. Hope that helps.

just a thought

Rife spent years of his early career grinding precision lenses for Carl Zeiss. his greatest genius may have been in designing microscopes. the ones he built far exceeded the capabilities of electron microscopes. he could see the live viruses, and tell instantly when a frequency affected them.

there are dozens of rife type machines available today, but with little more than anecdotal evidence of the best frequencies to use.

it might be better to redirect emphasis towards rife microscopes.

The Rife stuff looks interesting and I'll look into it. My first thought when you said he made lenses and achieved better resolution than electron microscopes was "no way, because of the diffraction limit". However, there is some interesting speculation on how he could have possibly overcome this problem here _http://www.rife.de/overcoming-the-fraunhofer-diffraction-limit.html but I doubt anybody has the money or time to attempt to build one. I'd have to carefully investigate possible flaws in the logic there before even considering it possible, but it is interesting nonetheless so I'll check out the thread here on the forum too.

Hmmm? 360 degrees? Well according to the guy who built Coral Castle, Gravity pushes down and knowing that was how he built it; said Pyramids were built the same.

Current theory obviously falls short of understanding gravity completely, in general relativity gravity is not a force thus there is no direction. It is simply that things follow geodesic paths corresponding to the curvature of spacetime. However, there has not yet been a (public) theory which connects GR with quantum mechanics, and QM is based on force-particle interactions. Essentially I think more than a "push vs. pull" understanding would be needed to get anywhere near anti-gravity.

Atomic vibrations travel at the speed of phonons in the nucleus, which also happens to be the speed of quantum translations, 1. 094 million meters per second.

This is one of the issues I had when I previously attempted to understand the theory here, and why I asked before what is meant by "speed of quantum translations" or "speed of quantum transition". Phonons travel at the speed of sound in the material. This is based on the lattice structure and composition and thus varies with different materials. I'm not sure where the speed of 1.094 million meters per second comes from or why it would be useful in these calculations.

It seems like the simplest experiment to try and replicate would be the one in the video you have here:

_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIIhgHTEoM0
Driving LED, No Battery and No Transistor

I still need to find information on the coils (size and number of turns). Even if it just turns out to be a clever way of harvesting ambient RF energy, it could be worth investigating.

 

[goyacobol]

Goyacobol, maybe I can help explain the use of "orthogonal" here. It has a specific mathematical meaning and has been generalized to be used with inner products of functions as in the density matrix but this gets complicated. The easiest way to understand it is via the geometrical meaning from which other uses were generalized. It basically means "perpendicular". If you think of the normal (cartesian) coordinates x, y, and z that we are familiar with in 3D, these are all orthogonal to each other. That is they are completely separate directions. You can not move in the x direction at all by traveling strictly in the y or z direction (same is true for the others).

The usage in the C's session I think means something along the same lines here. "Orthogonal to the truth" would mean "away from the truth" or "in a completely different direction" than the truth. Hope that helps.

Ask_a_debtor,

You are probably correct about the meaning in mathematics vs the geometrical usage meaning perpendicular or opposite. I just saw "orthogonal" in the density matrix formula and jumped to conclusions (not very scientific on my part). When I found the session reference it was close to the question that Ark asked about quantum theory I made a connection that was faulty I think.

Thanks