Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Solid States Devices => Tesla Technologgy => Topic started by: dz93 on January 26, 2015, 04:58:15 PM

Title: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: dz93 on January 26, 2015, 04:58:15 PM
Well scalar waves seem to be a big thing for conspiracy theorists and lunatics alike but I've seen some convincing stuff about scalar waves being able to be used for communication. My question is can scalar waves or longitudinal waves actually be used to wirelessly transmit power or even for simple communication from a transmitter to a receiver? And while I'm at it what about the rest of the hype about scalar waves? Supposedly they're able to heal you in some way and you can also make crazy weapons with scalar waves. I'm just wondering what you guys think about scalar waves.

If you guys think they're real then I want to start work to see if I can make a neat communication project with it. It'd be cool to be able to make a walkie talkie of some sorts that use scalar waves to communicate but that's even if they're real or work the way everyone on the internet says they work. My professors tell me they don't exist so that's strike one for it so now I just need your take before I toss this idea into the graveyard along with all the other conspiracy ideas.

Thanks guys
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: forest on January 26, 2015, 05:41:33 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPnYLD2awFc
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: dz93 on January 26, 2015, 05:53:46 PM
I know scalar waves exist for sound. I would like to know about whether they work to transmit communications, data, electricity or anything else wirelessly.

My interest is not in making a tin can phone with a wire between. Has anyone on this forum actually made a scalar wave transmitter and reciever? Are there any detailed schematics that I can use to make my own? And before anyone gets mad because I'm asking questions that could probably be found on Google I have already searched for this stuff. All I can find a videos of people talking about how wonderful this could be or videos of supposedly already working devices. I have not found anything that would be of any help to someone new to make a scalar wave or longitudinal wave transmitter and receiver. There's no info or details to help me learn to make my own. That's why it's hard for me to believe that this isn't some new age hype that's designed to con money out of people who think the holy grail of free energy has been found... again.

I was hoping maybe I could find someone on here who is a little bit better educated in the subject than the rest of the people on the internet. Dr. Mely is the only person who seems to be dedicated to this technology but his website is only good for documentation of the existence of these waves and maybe a patent or two from Tesla and then whatever devices he sells. None of this tells me how I could build my own to see for myself whether this works or not.

And even then are there any equipment that exists to validate the existence of such waves?
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: dz93 on January 26, 2015, 06:02:37 PM
Here is an example

http://ajitvadakayil.blogspot.com/2011/07/time-reversal-of-body-cells-by-scalar.html?m=1

This is disturbingly similar to everything else I find about scalar waves. That's why I'm here. Hoping for true science.

Also most website claim scalar waves to be electromagnetic but my understanding is that they are magneto dielectric and not electromagnetic. This is what Eric dollard and Dr mely called it right? Please correct me if I am misunderstanding. I don't know where else to go to get information on this so any help here would be greatly appreciated.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on January 26, 2015, 08:24:01 PM
Hi dz93. I don't know if scalar waves really exist or not, but you can have a look at this video
by theoldscientist. If you place a portable radio receiver in a metal box, the metal box acts as a faraday cage and should
stop the radio receiver from receiving any radio signals (blocks electromagnetic radio transmissions). Theoldscientist
did an experiment where he placed a radio receiver in a metal cookie tin and found that it could still receive
his signals from his transmitter coil. I don't know if that is really necessarily indicative of scalar waves, but
the cookie tin should have blocked ordinary electromagnetic radio waves from being picked up by the receiver.
I haven't tried this experiment to confirm that a cookie tin really does fully block EM waves from getting picked up by a receiver,
but can still pick up waves from a tesla coil. but you could set up a similar test where you test with regular EM transmissions, and then
test again along the lines of what theoldscientist showed in his video, if you are interested.

Superluminal Scalar Waves for Communications - TheOldScientist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjz-5Lqtxow

All the best...
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: dz93 on January 26, 2015, 08:52:37 PM
Thank you for your reply. I have watched theoldscientist's videos and I've already saw the one you listed. My issue is how do I build one? Are there any documentation or info out there on building one? Or something that could lead me in the right direction. I don't need a step by step how to guide or anything but just better information than what's available.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 26, 2015, 09:03:30 PM
If you want to research this further check J.L Naudin's site. He always has something. For scalar waves he did experiment with caudauceus coil and got results similar to TheOldScientist.

Another line of inquiry is checking work of Dr. Konstantin Meyl. He wrote several books and he is selling a kit that is producing EM scalar wavers. Right from Tesla's patents. Dr. Meyl is professor of physics at some university in Germany and he claims that many of his students successfully repeated the experiment.

Dr. Meyl sells a kit, on his site. Depending on the configuration, kits sell from around €1,400 to €2,400.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: MarkE on January 26, 2015, 09:48:59 PM
Hi dz93. I don't know if scalar waves really exist or not, but you can have a look at this video
by theoldscientist. If you place a portable radio receiver in a metal box, the metal box acts as a faraday cage and should
stop the radio receiver from receiving any radio signals (blocks electromagnetic radio transmissions). Theoldscientist
did an experiment where he placed a radio receiver in a metal cookie tin and found that it could still receive
his signals from his tesla transmitter coil.
Only a superconductor completely excludes magnetic fields.  All conventional conductors generate image currents that in turn generate offseting flux.  That flux is never 100% of the incident flux, so cancellation with conventional conductors is never 100%.  A powerful enough signal at a low enough frequency penetrates any non-superconducting Faraday cage.  VLF submarine communication relies on that fact to penetrate miles of highly conductive seawater.
Quote
I don't know if that is really necessarily indicative of scalar waves, but
the cookie tin should have blocked ordinary electromagnetic radio waves from being picked up by the receiver.
I haven't tried this experiment to confirm that a cookie tin really does fully block EM waves from getting picked up by a receiver,
but can still pick up waves from a tesla coil. but you could set up a similar test where you test with regular EM transmissions, and then
test again along the lines of what theoldscientist showed in his video, if you are interested.

Superluminal Scalar Waves for Communications - TheOldScientist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjz-5Lqtxow

All the best...
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: dz93 on January 26, 2015, 10:32:03 PM
So then how can we even be sure such a setup like theoldscientists' is actually producing scalar waves? Assuming they even exist. I've seen what some people claim to be a scalar wave detector but how do we know they're not actually just detecting something else and they're only assuming its scalar waves?

You'd think there would be better ways to test these things. And I don't mean an actual scalar wave detector but there has to be some sort of way to prove that they're not producing normal EM waves. If you can prove that its not a normal EM wave then you could easily show you might be on to something.

I know Eric Dollard, in his video on longitudinal electricity, had repeatedly mentioned conventional science says what he's doing is impossible and that a device built in such a way as his could never work but even so it still doesn't mean he produced scalar waves.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: dz93 on January 26, 2015, 10:46:36 PM
Maybe if I mention my intentions then I could get more help on this subject. I'd like to, some day, build a device that would allow for wireless communication ivwe a long distance without harmful EM waves.

Why do I say harmful? I have read a lot about EMF being harmful to biological life. I know not all EMF's are harmful but apparently the ones broadcasted in the microwave frequency are claimed to be harmful. Now I don't know how much truth there is to that but if it is then we do need to find a way around that eventually. This was one leading motivator in figuring out if scalar waves even exist. If they don't then we'd have to figure out a safer way to transmit EMF.

Now this is all based on the assumption that EMF in the microwave range are harmful. Could I get anyone's take one this?

I know I've asked a lot of questions in the last post and this one but I'd greatly appreciate it if you could help me find answers to these questions. I'd hate to be misled because some website has a more convincing argument about something than another. Its hard to find the truth on the internet and my college isn't teaching me what I want nor need to learn. They just teach you what they assume the average Joe needs to know. I'm not the average Joe nor do I want to be. I'd like to be something more which is why I'm dedicated to learning as much as I can and hopefully most of what I learn will be the truth.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 26, 2015, 10:49:01 PM
Scalar fields do exist in coils of wire that are running AC. They are called Electro Motive Force or EMF for short. EMF is scalar field and it is a direct consequence of the Faraday's Law. Unfortunately, it falls of very quickly with distance. If I remember correctly it falls with a factor 1/d ( d = distance ).

Now, weather varying these EMF scalar fields will produce scalar waves, I can't tell. It sounds logical, but it might be different.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: TinselKoala on January 26, 2015, 11:00:40 PM
There are _zero_ confirmed instances of faster-than-light communication of information using electromagnetism, light or any other system. The experiment by Oldscientist is flawed due to incorrect assumptions about what a Faraday cage can do and how good ones are actually constructed (double-walled, fully isolated, or perhaps solidly grounded, sometimes even biased with external or internal power to the walls).

But if you want to experiment you can make a "scalar wave transmitter" using a Caduceus coil antenna:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-MA8rzZSqk
(Be sure to read the "Description" for details)

The schematic and construction details can be found on Jean-Louis Naudin's website archive.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: MarkE on January 26, 2015, 11:40:45 PM
Maybe if I mention my intentions then I could get more help on this subject. I'd like to, some day, build a device that would allow for wireless communication ivwe a long distance without harmful EM waves.

Why do I say harmful? I have read a lot about EMF being harmful to biological life. I know not all EMF's are harmful but apparently the ones broadcasted in the microwave frequency are claimed to be harmful. Now I don't know how much truth there is to that but if it is then we do need to find a way around that eventually. This was one leading motivator in figuring out if scalar waves even exist. If they don't then we'd have to figure out a safer way to transmit EMF.

Now this is all based on the assumption that EMF in the microwave range are harmful. Could I get anyone's take one this?

I know I've asked a lot of questions in the last post and this one but I'd greatly appreciate it if you could help me find answers to these questions. I'd hate to be misled because some website has a more convincing argument about something than another. Its hard to find the truth on the internet and my college isn't teaching me what I want nor need to learn. They just teach you what they assume the average Joe needs to know. I'm not the average Joe nor do I want to be. I'd like to be something more which is why I'm dedicated to learning as much as I can and hopefully most of what I learn will be the truth.
If you don't need a lot of bandwidth then you can broadcast using a low frequency carrier.  The lower the frequency the carrier, the larger the extents of the near field.  Most radio transmission theory is taught concentrating on the far field. 
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on January 27, 2015, 12:32:49 AM
Thank you for your reply. I have watched theoldscientist's videos and I've already saw the one you listed. My issue is how do I build one? Are there any documentation or info out there on building one? Or something that could lead me in the right direction. I don't need a step by step how to guide or anything but just better information than what's available.

Hi dz93. TheOldScientist didn't provide a whole lot of info in his video of how exactly he was
transmitting the signal. It appears he was using some sort of tesla coil or maybe another coil arrangement to transmit into,
but he doesn't seem to have provided specific details on what he had his function generator connected to in his video, but he also
said he was using FM modulation of a square wave, I believe. It gives you some idea of what he was doing however.

You haven't indicated whether you have any experience of using electronics test equipment, and if you have
any electronics circuit building experience, but you should have some ideas from this video to try some of your own
experiments if you do have some electronics experience.  It may have been the near field magnetic component that was penetrating
the two cookie tins to the radio receiver in his test. I think a better test would have been to compare the difference between
TheOldScientist's setup shown in his video, to transmitting a sine wave carrier at the exact same frequency, possibly using AM modulation,
for example, or just using CW if the receiver has a BFO, over a straight wire, to show if there really is a difference in penetrating the
cookie tins between the two different setups. It does seem that TheOldScientist's test may have been based closely
on Naudin's experiment:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/sclxmtr.htm

By the way, there is likely not very much more info around anywhere about experimenting with supposed scalar waves
beyond what you have already found. Meyl published a big thick book on his theories about scalar waves, but I think
it is very heavy into mathematical analysis. If you are good at heavy math, you might get something from that book. ;)
Other than that, you may just have to try to devise your own experiments based on what little info/ideas are available out there.
There may be a few other books out there that get into scalar wave theories, but I don't know of any off hand that
are necessarily good. "Scalar Potentials Fields and Waves" by Thomas Valone might be of some use if you can find a copy,
but I haven't read it, so I don't know if it is any good. 

All the best...
 
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: dz93 on January 27, 2015, 01:47:42 AM
I have some experience in electronics but am quickly learning. I learn best when I can actually experiment with things rather than read about them and with not much money to spend its hard to experiment with much.

Im attending college where I'll be learning electrical and mechanical engineering but I'm not far in college yet. Once I get into all the more in depth classes I'll be able to do this stuff more fluidly without have to rely on more details but I'm very impatient and eager to learn about new things. Which is exactly why I came here to ask a few questions so I could get an idea of what I'm getting into. Not to mention it wouldn't be too hard to replicate what theoldscientist did but I'm mainly concerned about if things are being done right. I just wanted to see how accurate all the hype about scalar waves are. Its still a very interesting concept and in time I hope meyl will stumble upon something very useful.

Thanks again for answering my questions.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: dieter on January 27, 2015, 04:46:07 AM
As far as I know, Richard Feynman refers frequently to the "A-Field" which seems to be an other word for Scalar / longitudinal  waves. The reason why your Prof denies its existence is because at some point it was decided that they don't exist in order to simplify Electro engineering, at the time of Heaviside and Steinmetz.


http://functionspace.org/topic/3370/Longitudinal-Electromagnetic-Waves (http://functionspace.org/topic/3370/Longitudinal-Electromagnetic-Waves)

http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node51.html (http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node51.html)


http://hitoshi.berkeley.edu/230A/HW4sol.pdf (http://hitoshi.berkeley.edu/230A/HW4sol.pdf)


There is a detailed document by a russian guy about tesla's scalar wave research, but it is rather suspicious, since it seems as if the man observed Tesla 24/7...




www.teslasociety.ch/info/doc/Teslacar.pdf (http://www.teslasociety.ch/info/doc/Teslacar.pdf)


http://secretsofcoldelectricity.com/pdf-downloads/
(scroll to secrets of cold war technology pdf)


Anyway, according to such sources it is an electrostatic phenomenon, but a very powerfull one.


According to other sources you can pulse a toroid coil and the scalar wave will be emitted from the center of the toroid.


For a walkie talkie they would however be rather useless, unless it is equipped with a sniper scope and you'd aim at the receiver precisely. At least, that's how I understand "longitudinal".


But it may be possible to use reflectors, like the ionosphere.


BR
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: pomodoro on January 27, 2015, 05:00:09 AM
Unfortunately real scientists have never been able to detect these waves. Only the odd crazy ones like Bearden. My advice is not to waste your time as you are going against one  hundred years of research multiplied by thousands of researchers. Utilize your passion in another less researched but similar field.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: dieter on January 27, 2015, 05:20:04 AM
Pomodoro, guess you're wrong. Like light that can be longitudinal, but isn't in nature, so can "electrical" waves. And by following your guidence, the "real" scientists simply never tried it, even if they woulda have been able.


But ok, longitudinal waves may very well be useless. Except maybe to save and focus Energy in point to point transmission.


BR

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: pomodoro on January 27, 2015, 07:39:21 AM
So, there are reputable research papers proving light is scalar ?
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: conradelektro on January 27, 2015, 08:57:37 AM
@dz93: I did some experiments along the ideas of Prof. Dr.-Ing. Konstantin Meyl (see the attached diagrams and photo).

http://www.meyl.eu/go/index.php?dir=30_Books&page=1&sublevel=0 (http://www.meyl.eu/go/index.php?dir=30_Books&page=1&sublevel=0)

I bought the first two books Documentation (1) on Scalar Wave Technology (http://www.meyl.eu/go/index.php?dir=30_Books&page=19&sublevel=1) and Documentation (2) on Scalar Wave Medicine) (http://www.meyl.eu/go/index.php?dir=30_Books&page=20&sublevel=1) .

Well, the books are not very good and leave almost everything open (from an electronics point of view, but lots of esoterica). I could not detect anything useful, but it could be my fault.

The most paradox fact: One needs a connection between receiver and transmitter, a wire which can not be left out, if one wants to transmit anything. A connection through ground (earth) failed.

In a widely publicized video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD8OkbumcY0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD8OkbumcY0) Meyl drives a little toy boat in a small basin, but a wire leads from the transmitter to the basin and the water in the basin contains a lot of salt to make it conductive (so that there is an electrical connection between transmitter and receiver). Therefore, Meyl does not transmit saclar waves through air, his set ups transmit electricity through a wire.

My personal conclusion: very inconclusive, no proof, lots of talk, no facts.

In my tests the output at the receiver was at least 5 times less than the input at the transmitter (and there has to be a wire between transmitter and receiver). But, as I said, one can always claim that I did something wrong.

You seem to be enthusiastic: buy the two books, make your own tests. You will not be content before you have done this. If you are not really poor, no harm is done, you just lost some money and time. I had to go through this, my own fault. I am allowed to be silly and I can afford it. Are you allowed to be silly, can you afford it?

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: synchro1 on January 27, 2015, 10:24:43 AM
This video by Jerry Bayles shows Chiral disk magnets agitating satillite magnets with a "Scaler Wave" at Shumman resonant frequency.:

Magnetic standing wave around two variable speed disk magnets resonates with two small 'balance' magnets at the Schumann frequency (7.834 Hz) on the right side.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcVg_K3U-uk

Chiral Disks are in opposition. This magnet rotation should work inside a Faraday cage like TinselKoala's Caduceus broadcasting coil. Does "Lenz's law" apply to this effect?

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on January 28, 2015, 01:34:25 AM
As we can see by the definitions a Scalar is a constant unchanging value with no direction, and a wave is a movement of
something which means there is variation, the two are totally incompatible.

A wave by definition has constantly changing values and movement, a Scalar is an unchanging value. All waves have constant
variation.

In my opinion A longitudinal wave could be considered as an AC or pulsed current wave, the current doesn't move side to side it
moves directly from point to point. But it is driven by a fluctuation in the potential applied. Nothing scalar about either the current
or the potential unless considering an unchanging value such as the value of a DC potential or the value of DC current or the
values from a single point in time. 

That's my take on it. Scalar is a catch word used to whip up hype and bamboozle people. People using the word for hype or
attention should be taken with a grain of salt.

Definition of a Scalar.

Quote
scalar
(ˈskeɪlə)
n
1. (Mathematics) a quantity, such as time or temperature, that has magnitude but not direction. Compare vector1, tensor2, pseudoscalar, pseudovector
2. (Mathematics) maths an element of a field associated with a vector space
adj
3. (Mathematics) having magnitude but not direction
[C17 (meaning: resembling a ladder): from Latin scālāris, from scāla ladder]
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/scalar

.....

Definition of a Wave.

Quote
1.
a. A ridge or swell moving through or along the surface of a large body of water.
b. A small ridge or swell moving across the interface of two fluids and dependent on surface tension.
2. often waves The sea: vanished beneath the waves.
3. Something that suggests the form and motion of a wave in the sea, especially:
a. A moving curve or succession of curves in or on a surface; an undulation: waves of wheat in the wind.
b. A curve or succession of curves, as in the hair.
c. A curved shape, outline, or pattern.
4. A movement up and down or back and forth: a wave of the hand.
5.
a. A surge or rush, as of sensation: a wave of nausea; a wave of indignation.
b. A sudden great rise, as in activity or intensity: a wave of panic selling on the stock market.
c. A rising trend that involves large numbers of individuals: a wave of conservatism.
d. One of a succession of mass movements: the first wave of settlers.
e. A maneuver in which fans at a sports event simulate an ocean wave by rising quickly in sequence with arms upraised and then quickly sitting down again in a continuous rolling motion.
6. A widespread, persistent meteorological condition, especially of temperature: a heat wave.
7. Physics
a. A disturbance that travels through a medium. Energy is transferred by a wave from one region of the medium to another without causing any permanent displacement of the medium.
b. A graphic representation of the variation of such a disturbance with time.
c. A single cycle of a periodic wave.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Wave

..
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: dieter on January 28, 2015, 02:46:32 AM
Probably Scalar means that it affects things immediately, like the two sides of a balance: scale.


Longitudinal on the other hand may be more descriptive. Unlike traversal waves, longitudinal ones are a plain vector from one point in one direction (like an ideal laser), or maybe only the direction / vector.


I do however agree that both terms are often used pseudoscientificly and for a wide range of things, real or made up phenomena.


It is certainly a rather  fantastic trip to try to do the experiments described in the tesla chapter of that "secrets of cold war technology" book, and Meyl is also rather "fancy", regardless of his Professor title.


Then again, there may indeed have been certain experiments by tesla in which he discovered some interesting things.


It is known that he was highly intetested in controlling the pulse width of high power, high voltage high frequency arc dis-charges, and despite the system trolls denials, it is exactly such a condition that leads to excessive electron avalanches with "stochiastic electron multiplication"  in the ratio of 1:12'000'000 per centimeter. Funny enough these electrons are pulled right out of the air, leaving a bunch of ions behind.


At least Lindemann and that guy of the mentioned book (I never remember his name) seem to think there is a relation between avalanche / breakdowns , longitudinal waves (tho tesla was quoted to have described them being of electrostatic nature, like the charge of a cap) and the ever disputed Aether.


BR




BTW. Farmhand, a question for you: When a wave needs a medium to propagate, like air or water, and since there are wavelengths in light, what is the medium for light in the cosmos?



Yet anotherone of those questions that none can answer without to question the standard model...
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on January 28, 2015, 04:02:38 AM
Although the following definition is probably at least somewhat simplified, it gives an idea why the term 'scalar wave' may have been used:
"What is a "scalar wave" exactly? Scalar wave (hereafter SW) is just another name for a “longitudinal” wave.
The term “scalar” is sometimes used instead because the hypothetical source of these waves is thought to be a
“scalar field” of some kind similar to the Higgs Field for example."
https://jmag0904.wordpress.com/2013/05/25/what-are-scalar-waves/

Bearden:
"A scalar potential is any static (stationary) ordering in the virtual particle flux of vacuum."

So, a scalar wave may be something like a propagating ordered disturbance/structure in a scalar field or scalar fields, which may have unique properties.
The term 'scalar' may have been used to clearly differentiate it from vector potentials and transverse waves. Maybe not the best choice
for the name, but it is really only a name. Just as 'ball lightning' is not really an actual 'ball'. ;)

Wlibert Smith, who came up with the Smith coil (yes, I know he was way out there in various ways) used the terms 'tensor beam' and 'tensor energy'.
Definition of a tensor: "A mathematical object analogous to but more general than a vector, represented by an array of components that are functions of the coordinates of a space."

All the best...

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 28, 2015, 10:21:36 AM
Scalar means: having no direction.

Examples are temperature, density and even height of landscape.

Lets say temperature and a hot incandescent bulb. Air around the bulb will be as hot as bulb, but temperature will start falling off with a distance from a bulb, till it reaches ambient temperature. That is scalar field. Now, the rate with which temperature falls, as we depart away from the bulb, has a direction. That direction is vector. So rate of change is vector field, but source is scalar field.

The rate of change itself will be cause of energy flow. In case of temperature, heat will flow from higher temperature air to lower temperature air. Or if your scalar field is a height of landscape, than rate of change is a slope of a terrain. So, ball will roll down in a direction of a slope and slope is vector. So rate of change in scalar field shows the direction in which energy flows. That is the vector part. Vector part causes flow of energy: rolling of a ball, movement of the air, movement of the charges etc.

I am not sure, but electric potential works the same as the above example. We have electric potential, that is scalar, but the gradient (rate of change) in that scalar is vector electric field.

Main thing is that scalars, fields and vectors are all mathematical constructs. Just a shadows of a real things. You can stick these mathematical shadows on anything you like. You can re-arrange them to suit your fancy. They are not a real physical things. The fact that they are not a real thing is their limitation. There could be a part that is missed out and it is still in a hiding. Another issues is that sometimes things are constructed which don't have an real physical presence, just to make maths easier. I am not sure, but displacement current can be such a case.

Now in the above examples, there is a source: a light bulb, an electric charge, or gravitational body like Earth. But there are cases where there is no source, like in density of material. Maybe Electro Magnetic Force EMF is an example of scalar field without source. Somebody can cast more light here.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: fritz on January 28, 2015, 12:37:34 PM
Dear All,

I tried to compile everything I know / have heard about scalar waves into the following summary:
(Feel free to correct me)
Logitudinal/Scalar waves (sw) are somewhat near-field standing waves with resonant transmitters/receivers.
Near field means that the wavelength is in the same magnitude/order as the distance between both.
Contrary to hertz-waves which radiates in empty space depending on the characteristic of the antenna (which happens having a transmitter only) -
these waves only propagate if you have a resonant/tuned receiver. In contrary these antennas are tightly coupled - which means changing the impedance / load
of the receiver directly influences the energy drawn from the transmitter. In principle there is no transmitter or receiver - both can interact in both directions because
of the tight coupling. (tight coupled oscillation).
If there is some point that this even works with one component shielded (electrical or magnetic but not both) - than its because of the fact that in such scenario - standing wave - one component might be zero at the point of termination. The energy in this point is 100% electric or magnetic - and canceling out the other term has no effect because its zero at this point.
If you add the earth crust as third interactor (transmitter-receiver) - you end up with Teslas wireless worldwide power system. A (servo-tuned)  transmitter @schuman frequency can deliver power to another transmitter/receiver(interactor) tuned to the same frequency anywhere on earth. Once receiver is activated - a standing wave between transmitter-earth and receiver -earth is established - and dedicated power transfer is possible. So its about 3 coupled oscillators exchanging energy.
This might work pretty well in a scaled down experiment using 3 spheres - but I am not sure how healthy such system would be for the inhabitants of the big sphere/earth. It would change the earth electrical environment, weather, and whatever. This is the reason why "shutting down" Tesla on this project makes lots of sense.
Using this scheme for wireless charging is highly interesting because of efficiency...., or powering vehicles/equipment wireless at small distance....
Pls. feel free to correct me - thats just my "working copy" of what could be scalar waves.

rgds.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: fritz on January 28, 2015, 01:10:10 PM
... getting curious about the trawöger pyramid - I got interested into dowsing phenomenon.
This is where I stumbled on this guy:
http://www.pimath.de/magnetfeld_der_erde/gitter.html
(sorry german)
Derived from the grid structures observed by dowsing - this guy assumes that the magnetic field of the earth has very tiny but existing ac component -
in the Mhz range. There would be pretty no way to observe such components as hertzian waves - because of the damping.
Otherwise it should be possible to get near-field interaction with this ground ac currents - using conductive rods and an electrosensitive human operating them.
So the dowser would act as resonant receiver - establishing a scalar wave between the grid current  and the rods.
There are some folks which developed/sell hartmann grid detectors:
http://www.viviss.si/download/viviss/ZBORNIK%20MGB/Jurgec_paper_79_87.pdf
Because the FM wavelength is about 3m - its not impossible to get some scalar compound with an FM transmitter - .
In the described setup - the power of the fm receiver should vary in presence of such hartmann line - This could be explained by a scalar fm component interacting with the gridline.
Based on theses studies - I expect Mr. Trawögers pyramid as such servo-tuned resonant receiver - with the pyramid just operates as shielding - and the reactor somehow manages to establish a scalar wave with the grid system.
Well - this is somehow offtopic - but putting the pieces together - it would make sense.
rgds.


Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on January 28, 2015, 03:31:27 PM
Probably Scalar means that it affects things immediately, like the two sides of a balance: scale.


Longitudinal on the other hand may be more descriptive. Unlike traversal waves, longitudinal ones are a plain vector from one point in one direction (like an ideal laser), or maybe only the direction / vector.


I do however agree that both terms are often used pseudoscientificly and for a wide range of things, real or made up phenomena.


It is certainly a rather  fantastic trip to try to do the experiments described in the tesla chapter of that "secrets of cold war technology" book, and Meyl is also rather "fancy", regardless of his Professor title.


Then again, there may indeed have been certain experiments by tesla in which he discovered some interesting things.


It is known that he was highly intetested in controlling the pulse width of high power, high voltage high frequency arc dis-charges, and despite the system trolls denials, it is exactly such a condition that leads to excessive electron avalanches with "stochiastic electron multiplication"  in the ratio of 1:12'000'000 per centimeter. Funny enough these electrons are pulled right out of the air, leaving a bunch of ions behind.


At least Lindemann and that guy of the mentioned book (I never remember his name) seem to think there is a relation between avalanche / breakdowns , longitudinal waves (tho tesla was quoted to have described them being of electrostatic nature, like the charge of a cap) and the ever disputed Aether.


BR




BTW. Farmhand, a question for you: When a wave needs a medium to propagate, like air or water, and since there are wavelengths in light, what is the medium for light in the cosmos?



Yet anotherone of those questions that none can answer without to question the standard model...

I say is the Aether, but that's too easy to repeat. A question foryou dieter. Do you consider space outside of atmosphere to
contain nothing ? Or is there something everywhere ?

I can only say for myself that light waves do propagate through space which is a medium or they don't because it isn't. Either
way light is present here on earth as a result of the suns radiations. I never stated that light waves travel through a vacuum or
that space is a vacuum.

We can have a light wave, an electromagnetic wave a human wave ect. all have movement, what causes the wave is not what
we call the wave we call the wave what is moving eg, a water wave or a sound wave or a light wave ect.

We can't have a wave of scalar or a scalar wave, we could have a wave cause by a scalar value of something maybe.

We can have a water wave or a wave of water. See my point.

It's kinda like the "generator statement errors" a diesel generator does not generate diesel. haha. It should be called a diesel
powered electricity/electrical generator. A wind turbine can be a wind powered electricity generator ect. .

A scalar field is not a scalar wave the entire scalar field is static. A scalar field makes sense a scalar wave does not.

I have seen no credible claims by Tesla of any OU energy or extra energy except those setups where he collects environmental energy.

I see no claims of OU performance from his Magnifying transmitter by him, in fact he clearly stated in court that his Magnifying
transmitter system was under unity. And explained it with figures.

..

..
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: dieter on January 28, 2015, 05:04:05 PM
Yes, Aether. Nothing does not exist.


What it exactly is, that's an other question, but it is everywhere and also there where they say is "empty space".


BR

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on January 28, 2015, 05:19:08 PM
Farmhand, see my comment above. It appears the term 'scalar wave' was coined because
a scalar wave is supposed to be some sort of phenomenon associated with 'scalar fields' It may be something like
an ordered disturbance or ordered structure/formation in a scalar field or scalar fields which either
can move through a scalar field in some way (for example longitudinally), or maybe which can act at a distance in a scalar field
without actually propagating like a transverse wave propagates. I am not sure who coined the term 'scalar wave'.
It would be good if we could find a definition from the person who actually coined that term. :)
As I mentioned above, Wilbert Smith used the terms 'tensor beam' and 'tensor energy'. Other terms
may have been used by others as well...  Wilbert Smith said his Smith coil produced 'doughnut shaped waves' which
could remain stationary or which could move as well. I don't know how Wilbert Smith determined the wave shape,
but he was into some very controversial stuff overall, so most people probably won't take his stuff too seriously, but he did have
a strong technical background.

It is also possible that there are quite different effects which people may be mixing up and including under the single term 'scalar wave'.
It seems it is all just hypothetical at this point anyway.

Does anyone know who actually coined the term 'scalar wave'? Did this person create a formal definition?
Was it Bearden who coined the term?


P.S. I believe that magnetic fields and electric fields are considered vector fields, and since a scalar wave
is a hypothetical phenomenon that is supposed to be associated with scalar fields, it is apparently not related
to electric and magnetic fields. The Higgs field is an example of a scalar field.
Scalar Field:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalar_field
Higgs Field:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson

Many people may be mixing up the concept of a longitudinal wave in an electric field, for example, if such is possible, with a
scalar wave. A scalar wave is not an accepted mainstream scientific concept at any rate, as has already been pointed out.
What Telsa and Wilbert Smith experimented with may be quite different than 'scalar waves'. It could be that many people
are mixing apples and oranges. Without a formal definition of scalar waves, it is pretty hard to discuss it, at any rate. ;)

All the best..

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 28, 2015, 06:36:11 PM
I've explained what 'scalar' means in the [Reply #24 on: Today at 10:21:36 AM] right in this thread. There are examples as well.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on January 28, 2015, 06:43:11 PM
I've explained what 'scalar' means in the [Reply #24 on: Today at 10:21:36 AM] right in this thread. There are examples as well.

Hi DROBNJAK. Yes, I read your comment. It contained some good info.
The discussion here is in regards to 'scalar waves' however. Without a
formal definition of what a scalar wave is supposed to be, preferably by the person who
originally coined the term, it seems there is not too much further to discuss. People seem to be actually mixing
up different concepts when they use the term 'scalar wave' as well. As I mentioned, a longitudinal wave
in a magnetic field or electric field, if such is possible,  would apparently not qualify as a 'scalar wave'.
We can't be sure though without a formal definition of 'scalar wave'. :D

P.S.
Bearden's ideas are considered by many to be fringe science, but at any rate here is a comment on
the concept of a 'scalar wave':
"Well, Bearden says that when Heaviside threw out the scalar part of the quaternionic EM equation, he unknowingly threw out the possibility of unifying gravitation with electromagnetism-- which has been a holy grail for scientists since Einstein himself wrestled with the problem. That's because the scalar part of the quaternion, according to Bearden, was the part that captured or modeled the "stress on the aether"-- which leads to curving/warping spacetime a la Einstein. Tom Bearden says we can unify gravity with EM, and convert back and forth between them, if we understand how vectors and scalars relate to one another and what the ramifications are. "
http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/scalar.htm


P.P.S. ;)
"From : " SCALAR TRANSLATORS " by Joseph John Misiolek - 05/02/91
        When coverting EM energy to SCALAR, what you are  actually doing
       is attempting  to  create  a  subtructure in which the energy is
       folded in on itself in such a  way that it manifests no external
       net effects  in the manner in which our current  test  equipment
       (single stage  interaction)  is  designed to detect, but rather,
       maintains all  of  its energy  within  the  substructure  itself
       (hyperspace), in other words, SCALAR WAVES.
 
       These types   of   waves  are  quite  capable   of   penetrating
       conventional forms   of   em  shielding  (Faraday  Cages)  while
       remaining quite invisible to standard  (single  stage) detection
       methods.
"
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/scalwfaq.htm


All the best...

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 28, 2015, 07:23:05 PM
The discussion here is in regards to 'scalar waves' however. Without a
formal definition of what a scalar wave is supposed to be, preferably by the person who
originally coined the term, it seems there is not too much further to discuss. People seem to be actually mixing
up different concepts when they use the term 'scalar wave' as well. As I mentioned, a longitudinal wave
in a magnetic field or electric field, if such is possible,  would apparently not qualify as a 'scalar wave'.
We can't be sure though without a formal definition of 'scalar wave'. :D

Just imagine any one of the scalar values from examples I gave, to be acting as wave. For example density. If density starts changing in a periodic way, you get a sound or a longitudinal wave. Because fields are derivatives of the scalar, that means that wave in the scalar will produce waves in its derivative, the fields. But reverse would be true, as well. An oscillation in a derivative, will cause oscillation in a scalar.

Now, sound is a common example. But I wander wold that apply to temperature, which is scalar as well. A temperature of a light bulb oscillates with an AC frequency of 50Hz. Would that cause oscillation of a temperature at some distance from the light bulb? Just an idea for a very simple scalar field experiment.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on January 28, 2015, 08:11:19 PM
Just imagine any one of the scalar values from examples I gave, to be acting as wave. For example density. If density starts changing in a periodic way, you get a sound or a longitudinal wave. Because fields are derivatives of the scalar, that means that wave in the scalar will produce waves in its derivative, the fields. But reverse would be true, as well. An oscillation in a derivative, will cause oscillation in a scalar.

Now, sound is a common example. But I wander wold that apply to temperature, which is scalar as well. A temperature of a light bulb oscillates with an AC frequency of 50Hz. Would that cause oscillation of a temperature at some distance from the light bulb? Just an idea for a very simple scalar field experiment.

Hi DROBNJAK. Thanks.  The experiment with temperature might prove interesting.
I understand the concept of longitudinal waves in regards to say sound, but it is more difficult for me to understand in
regards to electric and magnetic energy. Dr. Konstantin Meyl seems to have no problem with referring to
'longitudinal scalar waves'. Meyl has focused on the properties of what he calls longitudinal magnetic waves, but he
also refers to them in general as scalar waves. If magnetic and electric fields are not scalar fields, I am not sure why
he refers to magnetic longitudinal waves as scalar however.

If you are interested, you can read an overview of Meyl's idea of scalar waves in this PDF: 
http://www.petprotector.org/PDF/Scalar-Waves.pdf
Here's an excerpt:
"Vortex model
The Tesla experiment and my historical rebuild however show more. Such
longitudinal waves obviously exist even without plasma in the air and even in
vacuum. The question thus is asked, what the divergence E describes in this case?
How is the impulse passed on, so that a longitudinal standing wave can form? How
should a shock wave come about, if there are no particles which can push each
other?
I have solved this question, by extending Maxwell’s field theory for vortices of the
electric field. These so-called potential vortices are able to form structure and they
propagate in space for reason of their particle nature as a longitudinal shock wave.
The model concept bases on the ring vortex model of Hermann von Helmholtz,
which Lord Kelvin did make popular. In my books the mathematical and physical
derivation is described.""

Meyl outlines his mathematical derivation in this PDF, but the math is beyond my level of understanding.
If you have a good understanding of the math involved, maybe you can understand Meyl's mathematical derivation,
and see if it makes any sense to you.
All the best...

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 28, 2015, 10:53:21 PM
Yeah, I read Meyl's book, all 400 pages of it. As you say, its math heavy. There is no way around math, it gives you an insight.

Anyway, I was struggling with math as well, when, about two weeks ago, I stumbled on these animated videos. They didn't boggle me down with dozens of instructions, but explained all the vector algebra with nice, intuitive animations. I instantly understood the working principles and worked from there. Here they are:

Grad - Grad, Div and Curl (1/3) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynzRyIL2atU)

What Is a Field? - Instant Egghead #42 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BK166SL-ig)

Gradient of a Scalar Field - Dragonfly Education (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ231k3zsAA)

What is a vector field?? Chris Tisdell UNSW (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peSbhgglvZo)

Gradient of a scalar field (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OB8b8aDGLgE)

And the unmissable classics:

AT&T Archives: Similiarities of Wave Behavior (Bonus Edition) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DovunOxlY1k)

Tektronix - Transmission Lines (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9m2w4DgeVk)
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on January 28, 2015, 11:12:57 PM
Hi DROBNJAK. Thanks for the video links. I will check them out when I get the chance.
That should definitely help in going through Meyl's writings.
All the best..
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on January 29, 2015, 02:51:28 AM
Meyl is buddies with Dr Keshe, neither is to be trusted, Meyl points to voltage on the receiver as a indication of OU and I have not
seen any actual transmitter input and receiver output power/energy figures.

I myself with my pair of 12 volt Tesla transformers transmitted electricity via a single wire laying on the ground from inside one
metal clad shed to inside another metal clad shed not faraday cages but not far from it.

I got an output voltage of 24 volts with a small load (more than Meyl's 3 mm LED's) with only 12 volts input. Voltage magnification
is not OU. My setup could have been greatly improved with a few modifications and got much better efficiency but it would still
have been under unity and no need for "scalar waves" as the connecting wire is how the energy is transmitted. The receiver coil
could have been in a faraday cage and it would still work because the wire goes from transmitter to receiver. In Tesla's World
system the Earth would be the conductor replacing the wire in mine and Meyls experiments and the earth itself would be included
in the resonating circuit as with my experiment the setup was tuned to include the wire but rather than having two current nodes one at each transformer ground plate as in Tesla's arrangement mine and Meyl's setups has one current node somewhere on the
connecting wire. For a grounded system to work it would need to operate at some harmonic of the Earths resonant frequency
and enough energy would need to be input to cause a resonant rise on the receiver when tuned.

One of my experiments.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1nfWnjufZo

Meyls experiments and claims are unimpressive to me.

Can I claim to have produced scalar waves because I can shield the receiver terminal and still receive energy from the transmitter ?
No of course not.

It's not a radio the, terminal is not a radio antenna it's an elevated capacitance, shielding it by line of sight from the transmitter terminal is a ruse.

Meyl has confused himself with the numbers so much he cannot see what is actually happening right in front of him. Or he is a scammer like Keshe. His kits are way overpriced.
..

And before anyone harps on me about the quality of my demonstration I would remind them that I am not trying to sell anything.
It was a simple quick demonstration to show I can do what Meyl can do. If his demo is watched closely I can see he demo is flawed. And he gives no power in out or energy in to out to be able to claim anything much at all.

..
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on January 29, 2015, 03:26:14 AM
Hi Farmhand. Nice experiment. It is a given that voltage magnification is not necessarily indicative of a power gain, let alone OU.
I haven't seen any video of Meyl's where he demonstrates measuring OU, so I can't really comment on that, but anyone can
potentially make measurement errors, even professors. I would have to know all the details about how they did
their measurements before I could draw any conclusion one way or the other about whether they really measured OU
or not. That is separate from Meyl's concept of scalar waves however. As I mentioned previously, I personally don't
know if there is such a thing as scalar waves or not, and I think a person would have to be quite good at advanced math
to be able to evaluate Meyl's mathematical analysis. I personally am not able to comment on his math.
All the best...

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 29, 2015, 11:55:09 AM
I wouldn't go that far to discount Dr. Meyl's results.

He has a Doctor degree, so he won't be talking BS easily. In addition to that he is a professor at a very reputable university in Germany. He devoted his professional life to EE. He would be well aware of all the pros and cons, as well as engineering details.  Not to mention that he has access to high quality instrumentation. I've seen a picture of the lab at his uni and they are loaded with Swiss made LeCroy oscilloscopes. LeCroy is just about one of the premium brands in scope market. He states that his students had repeated his experiments, even at distances far in excess of one wavelength.

Him using a voltage as indicator, might be just a logistic constraint, because he traveled from Germany to US to give that lecture and most likely didn't have a room in his luggage to carry oscilloscope.

But yes, measuring the input & output power is the biggest problem we face as experimenters. I thought of using DC motors attached to weights to measure the power output. But I need some advice here, because impedance mismatching can ruin the scheme.

Regarding the Faraday's cages, they leak easily. Metal shed is not good enough, despite valiant effort. A tiniest of gaps, in the Faraday's cage, is good enough to ruin the experiment. Here is a good experiment, about influence of gaps on Faraday's cages:

EMP Trash Can Faraday Cage Testing in Lab (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3S2KDuVxaU)
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on January 29, 2015, 04:13:39 PM
Hi Dobnjak. You are right that different load impedances can affect efficiency.
If you use a carbon resistor as a load, you can then do power measurements using
different resistance values and find which resistor value gives the best efficiency.
If you have a specific circuit setup and schematics that you are testing with, I could offer
some suggestions on how to measure input and output power. Are you using Meyl's exact
demo circuit setup?

Sometimes someone being a professor doesn't necessarily mean they have good practical
experience doing measurements, such as say power measurements. Even very experienced scientists
and engineers still make use of a peer review process to help minimize the chance that they have overlooked
things, or made outright errors. We would hope that Dr. Meyl and his students made proper measurements,
but still I personally would have to see all the details of the circuit setup they used and how they made their measurements
before I could comment on whether I think they might have really measured OU or not. Someone being really smart doesn't 
necessarily mean that someone is always error free. Anyone can overlook things or make mistakes. :)

That video on faraday cages was really interesting. He was using quite a high frequency of 500 MHz, which is fairly short wavelength.
It would have been interesting to see if he repeated the same test over a range of frequencies to see the difference.

All the best...

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 29, 2015, 04:35:25 PM
@Void: ... If you have a specific circuit setup and schematics that you are testing with, I could offer some suggestions on how to measure input and output power. ...

Thanks.

I am only learning theory now, so I can minimize a number of uninformed assumptions I make. Plus, I do like learning physics.

Not much time for experiments, right now, unfortunately.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: fritz on January 29, 2015, 05:42:51 PM
Even if Dr. Meyl is a "doctor", he has some BS track record......
I can verify his view of "scalar wave" by certain degree - but if it comes to OU and the explanation for the magnifying transmitter - I wouldnt trust him.
There are lots of things which can happen in near field oscillating environments.
The brightness of an led or even the idea that this could be an indication for something in this case is nonsense.
Because every voltage amplitude in such system relies on the local termination and impedance.
Even if I believe that this is a nice and efficient method of transfering energy - I doubt the stated "energy" amplification.
Working for a company designing highly sensitive metal detectors - I also know that you can model "near field" effects with maxwell equations.
Its lots of effort but it can be done.
A phase velocity "faster than light" is also something quite normal if we talk about waveguides - but has no practical implication.
He is a professor for power electronics, drive and control stages - not for rf and relativistic electrodynamics.

 
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 29, 2015, 05:58:42 PM
Dr. Meyl's extension of Maxwell's theory and maths is way above my head.

But what is interesting here, is that he meticulously read Tesla's lab notes and repeated Tesla's results.

Tesla claimed that when two of his magnifying coils were in resonance, at certain frequencies, the receiving coil started collecting energy from environment. Now that part is what I would like to verify. There is no OU, but some kind of environmental energy was harvested.

It seems that Dr. Meyl did some good work there.  Tesla claimed that he was collecting more during the day than during the night. So Dr. Meyl concluded that Tesla was collecting neutrinos coming out of the Sun.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on January 29, 2015, 06:03:54 PM
But what is interesting here, is that he meticulously read Tesla's lab notes and repeated Tesla's results.
Tesla claimed that when two of his magnifying coils were in resonance, at certain frequencies, the receiving coil started collecting energy from environment. Now that part is what I would like to verify. There is no OU, but some kind of environmental energy was harvested.
It seems that Dr. Meyl did some good work there.  Tesla claimed that he was collecting more during the day than during the night. So Dr. Meyl concluded that Tesla was collecting neutrinos coming out of the Sun.

Interesting. Is that in Meyl's book? If so, do you have a page number?
I wonder if Meyl provided a reference in his book to specifically where Tesla stated this?
All the best...

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: TinselKoala on January 29, 2015, 06:52:39 PM
DROBNJAK's comments about Faraday cages are right on the money, and the problems get worse with higher frequencies. For really complete isolation you need a double-layer, completely sealed enclosure, with the two walls electrically isolated, and in some cases you even need to actively bias the "capacitor" formed by the walls, grounding one or the other of them to a really solid Earth ground (like a buried heavy conductor that surrounds the footprint of the cage) and put some voltage on the non-grounded wall. Any electrical feedthroughs into/out of the cage can leak, transfer RF, etc. Good ones are even lined inside with anechoic, conductive foam walls (like the kind used to package static-sensitive CMOS, etc). It's not a trivial exercise to set up a good HF Faraday cage.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 29, 2015, 08:21:46 PM
Interesting. Is that in Meyl's book? If so, do you have a page number?

@Void: its your lucky day today, I found it in the first try ;-)

Book: Scalar waves by Konstantin Meyl
Chapter 9.8 Measuring and switching technique of Nikola Tesla, pg.205
Chapter: 9.9 Energy technical usage, pg. 207

The description about collecting neutrinos starts at a bottom half. For the benefit of those who don't have a book, I'll do a short excerpt:

from pg.205

" ... The degree of effectiveness of today's distribution technology of current due to the having losses lies clearly beneath 100 per cent. Without the losses of the wiring it lies close to 100 per cent for the discussed one wire energy transmission. There the vortex rings are guided nicely one after another along the line like beads drawn over a string. This result eve is to be expected, as far as no vortex "jumps off" the wire or "falls apart". For the wireless version Tesla however to his own surprise had to find out that more energy could be received, than his transmitter produced. The measured degree of effectiveness lay above 100 per cent! He therefore called his transmitter a "Magnifying Transmitter" (fig. 9.10). The further transmitter and receiver were away of each other, the further the received energy increased. Tesla inferred from this, that there had to exist free energy and that he had caught that too."

form pg.207:

" ... If the neutrinos for instance are just positively charged when leaving the transmitter electrode, than an electromagnetic force of attraction takes place, if the receiver electrode at the same time is negatively charged. The required operation with the same frequency and opposite phase guarantees that also the next moment, if both, the neutrino and the receiver, have changed their polarity, the electromagnetic attraction is preserved.

It is obvious, that strange neutrinos which fly past and by chance oscillate synchronously are as well attracted. In that way the power collected in the receiver capacitor will increase further and degrees of effectiveness of over 100% are obtainable. Tesla discharges the receiver capacitor timed with the frequency of resonance (fig. 9.9) and point to the difficulty of an exact keeping of the condition of synchronization. ... "
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: TinselKoala on January 29, 2015, 08:39:06 PM
But neutrinos have NO charge (which is why they are called Neutrinos (little neutral ones)), and they are very difficult even to detect, much less "collect". If Meyl can demonstrate otherwise, maybe he should apply to CERN for a job. Just to tide him over until the Nobel committee awards him his prize, of course.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 29, 2015, 09:05:49 PM
But neutrinos have NO charge ...

Well, he obviously knows that. He is not a simpleton. You have to give him a benefit of doubt and read the whole book.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on January 29, 2015, 09:32:23 PM
TK, thanks for the info on Faraday cages. Good to know.

Drobniak, thanks for those page references. That really is interesting.
I intend to read through Meyl's book, but it will likely take me quite a while. :D


Regarding Neutrinos, although neutrinos are neutral, they can apparently cause an energetic reaction when interacting with matter:
"When a muon neutrino interacts with a nucleus, it can produce an energetic muon which travels only a short distance, emitting a sharply outlined
cone of Cerenkov radiation which can be detected by photomultiplier tubes. An electron neutrino interaction can produce an energetic electron,
but the Cerenkov cone from this interaction differs significantly from that of the muon. The electron generates a shower of electrons and positrons,
each with its own Cerenkov cone."
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/neutrino2.html

I am not a physicist, and they were referring specifically to reactions in a detector, but it sounds from the above like neutrinos can possibly give an energy boost,
at least under certain conditions, when interacting/colliding with other matter. I will leave that for the physicists to consider and analyze. It sounds like it might
at least be possible however.  :)

All the best...


Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: TinselKoala on January 29, 2015, 10:23:04 PM
Indeed, and that is how neutrinos are _actually_ detected by real scientists.
Quote
Work began in 1990 and was completed in 1999. The detector consists of 1,000 tonnes of ultra pure heavy water enclosed in a transparent plastic vessel measuring 12 metres across. The vessel is itself enclosed in 7,000 tonnes of ultra pure normal water, lodged in an immense cavity measuring 22 metres wide and 34 metres high (the equivalent of a 10-storey building). It is the largest underground opening ever excavated at two kilometres depth.
The acrylic vessel is surrounded by a 17-metre geodesic dome equipped with 9,600 detectors that sense the presence of neutrinos. The frequency of neutrino detection is one per hour.
Out of an unimaginably high number that are passing through the detector.

http://astro-canada.ca/_en/a2115.php


Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on January 29, 2015, 11:12:48 PM
@Void: its your lucky day today, I found it in the first try ;-)

Book: Scalar waves by Konstantin Meyl
Chapter 9.8 Measuring and switching technique of Nikola Tesla, pg.205
Chapter: 9.9 Energy technical usage, pg. 207

The description about collecting neutrinos starts at a bottom half. For the benefit of those who don't have a book, I'll do a short excerpt:

from pg.205

" ... The degree of effectiveness of today's distribution technology of current due to the having losses lies clearly beneath 100 per cent. Without the losses of the wiring it lies close to 100 per cent for the discussed one wire energy transmission. There the vortex rings are guided nicely one after another along the line like beads drawn over a string. This result eve is to be expected, as far as no vortex "jumps off" the wire or "falls apart". For the wireless version Tesla however to his own surprise had to find out that more energy could be received, than his transmitter produced. The measured degree of effectiveness lay above 100 per cent! He therefore called his transmitter a "Magnifying Transmitter" (fig. 9.10). The further transmitter and receiver were away of each other, the further the received energy increased. Tesla inferred from this, that there had to exist free energy and that he had caught that too."

form pg.207:

" ... If the neutrinos for instance are just positively charged when leaving the transmitter electrode, than an electromagnetic force of attraction takes place, if the receiver electrode at the same time is negatively charged. The required operation with the same frequency and opposite phase guarantees that also the next moment, if both, the neutrino and the receiver, have changed their polarity, the electromagnetic attraction is preserved.

It is obvious, that strange neutrinos which fly past and by chance oscillate synchronously are as well attracted. In that way the power collected in the receiver capacitor will increase further and degrees of effectiveness of over 100% are obtainable. Tesla discharges the receiver capacitor timed with the frequency of resonance (fig. 9.9) and point to the difficulty of an exact keeping of the condition of synchronization. ... "

There is no quote from Tesla there, the increasing power at increasing distance from the transmitter is easily explained by Tesla
as well in the book Nikola Tesla and his work on alternating currents. And it goes like this - because there is a
current node = 0 volts at the ground plate at the base of the transmitter and the receiver is at the 1/4 Wavelength then the
voltage and power at the transmitter base is very low almost zero however the further from the transmitter you go and the
closer you get to the 1/4 wavelength and the receiver the higher the voltage and as a result the higher will be the current it can
cause and the higher the power that can be received.

The radiant energy receiver is what collected free energy and Tesla mentioned that it collected more energy during the night than
the day, I think from memory.

So anyway I shielded my receiver terminal much more effectively than Meyl and still powered a larger load with a residual
resonant rise.

I showed with a lighting setup I was experimenting with how the current into the ground is much increased by tuning to near
resonance a grounded system with an elevated capacitance.

Truth is that if Meyl had in fact measured valid OU or demonstrated "Scalar Waves" he would be very famous, a household name.

The math is all good if it leads to something, but Meyl has no special experimental results to go with his math.

..

I think you'll find Tesla called his system a Magnifying Transmitter because it magnified the voltage and current and power but he
never claimed any magnification of energy and I challenge you or anyone to show words from Tesla where he claims a
magnification of energy from his Magnifying Transmitter.

Read the book - "Nikola Tesla On his work with alternating currents". It contains Tesla's own words.

It's all there.

I don't get why people read the work of people who disrespect Tesla's legacy, rather than read Tesla's own words on the matter.

..
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on January 30, 2015, 12:01:15 AM
Hi Farmhand. Nice experiment. It is a given that voltage magnification is not necessarily indicative of a power gain, let alone OU.
I haven't seen any video of Meyl's where he demonstrates measuring OU, so I can't really comment on that, but anyone can
potentially make measurement errors, even professors. I would have to know all the details about how they did
their measurements before I could draw any conclusion one way or the other about whether they really measured OU
or not. That is separate from Meyl's concept of scalar waves however. As I mentioned previously, I personally don't
know if there is such a thing as scalar waves or not, and I think a person would have to be quite good at advanced math
to be able to evaluate Meyl's mathematical analysis. I personally am not able to comment on his math.
All the best...

Thanks Void, but I think it only a demonstration and a rough one at that, but it shows Meyls hand waving "shielding the receiver terminal ruse" for what it is, showmanship !

I have a plethora of experiments and demonstrations with that pair of transformers and also some more with a smaller set.

I made my own circuit controllers ( DC choppers ) and constructed the coils so that many parts of the tuned circuits could be
tuned. I operated the transmitters and receivers close to or at resonance with sine waves shown at the terminals and the
receiver output coil.

I can achieve voltage - current and power magnification in the oscillating circuit due to resonance just as Tesla describes but on
a small scale.

I've run small motors, filament bulbs and such from the receiver and got output voltages up to several hundred volts on a
capacitor connected via a FWBR to the output coil with 12 volts input. All is expected and normal. I can use one small Tesla
transformer connected to a ground stake as a crystal radio with no external antenna except the ground stake and receive an
AM radio transmission from about 25 Klms away while inside the steel shed. I can excite two tuned receivers to power loads
from one Transmitter. All good fun and interesting.

Many of the demonstrated things Meyl points to as evidence of something special are easily explained as regular effects.

He needs demonstrated evidence to back up his math, math won't transmit energy it can only explain how or why if correct.

..
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on January 30, 2015, 04:12:35 AM
Hi Farmhand. Good job on your tesla coil wireless power experiments. I've experimented with that
a bit as well, but not as much as you have. You have got some good results there. I have a little different
perspective than you in regards to people like Dr. Meyl, where they propose new ideas and new ways of looking at things.
It is easy for anyone to just dismiss such things out of hand and say they are definitely just mistaken or kooks or whatever,
but in the case where such a person does have a very solid and advanced educational background in a field related to
what they are talking about, it is not so easy to just quickly dismiss such a person as a complete kook, although many
people still do. Yes, Meyl could good be off the mark about certain things, but on the other hand, he could
be right about many things, or at least right about some of the things he is talking about.

As an example, I believe Meyl has talked about faster than light propagation of the 'scalar longitudinal waves', if I
remember correctly. It's been a while since I have gone through his stuff. Meyl's views about longitudinal waves
appear to be a new way of looking at and understanding 'near field' effects, if not more.  Meyl isn't the only academic/scientist who is
suggesting these sorts of things. Here is a link to and excerpt from a PDF file of a research paper from Orebro University
in Sweden. They have run experiments to analyze the speed of propagation of electric and magnetic fields around an antenna, at different
distances, as well as gravitational waves, and then analyzed the results. They came to the conclusion that within the near field
distance range they do propagate at superluminal speeds, but at distances greater than one wavelength they are propagating at
the speed of light. So Meyl may actually be on the right track about such things after all. ;) It is easy to dismiss things out of hand, but
sometimes you might just be dismissing something of real value if a person is too quick to dismiss things... A single research paper
by itself is not proof of anything, but it does potentially add some support to some of the things Meyl has been saying. :)

"Near-field Analysis of Superluminally Propagating Electromagnetic and Gravitational Fields
William D. Walker
Örebro University, Department of Technology, Sweden

Abstract
A near-field analysis based on Maxwell’s equations is presented which indicates that the fields
generated by both an electric and a magnetic dipole or quadrapole, and also the gravitational waves
generated by a quadrapole mass source propagate superluminally in the nearfield of the source and
reduce to the speed of light as the waves propagate into the farfield. Both the phase speed and the
group speed are shown to be superluminal in the nearfield of these systems. Although the information
speed is shown to differ from group speed in the nearfield of these systems, provided the noise of the
signal is small and the modulation method is known, the information can be extracted in a time period
much smaller than the wave propagation time, thereby making the information speed only slightly less
than the superluminal group speed. It is shown that relativity theory indicates that these superluminal
signals can be reflected off of a moving frame causing the information to arrive before the signal was
transmitted (i.e. backward in time). It is unknown if these signals can be used to change the past."
http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0304/0304090.pdf

Sounds like crazy stuff, but this research came from people who presumably are highly qualified in their field of research.

All the best...
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 30, 2015, 11:33:49 AM
I have a little different perspective than you in regards to people like Dr. Meyl, where they propose new ideas and new ways of looking at things. It is easy for anyone to just dismiss such things out of hand and say they are definitely just mistaken or kooks or whatever,
but in the case where such a person does have a very solid and advanced educational background in a field related to
what they are talking about, it is not so easy to just quickly dismiss such a person as a complete kook, although many
people still do.

Yes, Meyl could good be off the mark about certain things, but on the other hand, he could
be right about many things, or at least right about some of the things he is talking about.

We are on the same page here. People like Dr. Meyl spend whole life doing one thing. They are even paid while to do it. So they are the hardest ones to dismiss.

Thanks for that link, I am going to check that out.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: dieter on January 30, 2015, 01:18:11 PM
"...causing the information to arrive before the signal was transmitted..."


OMG.  :o


Indeed, I like the sound of it. Now pls excuse me, I've got to check the Lotto numbers...  :)


BR




BTW. I think this is a good example for two things:  first of all, titles and degrees don't mean anything, even worse, univercities are the places to conserve l the current political and social model, that is the capitalistic semi-subtile enslavement of mankind. Second, the speed of light has nothing to do with time, time is an abstract invention of men, Einstein was wrong about "space time" and the fact that honoured, established scientists are seriously trying to discover a "time particle" shows that their titles and degrees don't mean anything.


But I could be wrong :) , that's how much open-minded I am.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: pomodoro on January 30, 2015, 04:16:19 PM
"...causing the information to arrive before the signal was transmitted..."


OMG.  :o


Indeed, I like the sound of it. Now pls excuse me, I've got to check the Lotto numbers...  :)


BR




BTW. I think this is a good example for two things:  first of all, titles and degrees don't mean anything, even worse, univercities are the places to conserve l the current political and social model, that is the capitalistic semi-subtile enslavement of mankind. Second, the speed of light has nothing to do with time, time is an abstract invention of men, Einstein was wrong about "space time" and the fact that honoured, established scientists are seriously trying to discover a "time particle" shows that their titles and degrees don't mean anything.


But I could be wrong :) , that's how much open-minded I am.

Sorry Dieter, but so far every attempt to prove Einstein was wrong has failed. Do you even understand the derivation of his special law of relativity?
Do you understand how Meyers garbage can be explained by standing waves?
Do you have any idea of what you are doing and saying?
Your lack of respect for proper education and dedication shows real ignorance. Achieve a thousandth of what Einstein did and maybe you will then make some sense. Come on, show us how these men with degrees are worthless, where is your proof?
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 30, 2015, 05:59:59 PM
Do you understand how Meyers garbage can be explained by standing waves?

If you can briefly explain how Meyl's ideas can be explained by standing waves, please do.

I am keen to increase my own understanding and I guess many others visiting here are.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: dieter on January 30, 2015, 11:59:45 PM
Tho shall not confuse Meyl and Meyer... and Landski  ;D


Pomodoro, why do you suck up to the establishment so much, and if so, what are you doing in a forum named overunity? If you try to achieve overunity, which I hope, then you disagree with the fundamental "laws" of these stuffed, honored ones anyway.


There is no need to make me look like a stupid schoolboy, man. In fact it's insulting. Yes, I am a selfteached explorer. Just like edison, who brought us audio and lightbulbs.


Anyway, you ask what I have achieved? I actually violated the 2nd law of thermodynamics and built a device that is by the dfinition of Lord Kelvin a Perpetuum Mobile. In fact, it's running in this very moment beside me, as we speak, sotosay. You may not believe me, and I don't care.


BTW. Kelvin was the guy who also said that heavier than air flight is completly impossible. But of course, his 2nd law of TD is sacred...


I am not the only one who thinks Einstein was wrong about Spacetime. That's all I have to say to yoz.


BR

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: pomodoro on January 31, 2015, 07:29:36 AM
Dieter, I'm on the forum to discover new / hidden energy sources, not to go against the 'system'. I dont 'suck up to these guys' but I respect the work and dedication they give to science. Edison had great respect for them too, he employed many greats of the time, including Langmuir, Coolidge, Whitney to name but a few.  Einstein was regarded as a crackpot, so was Barry Marshall more recently. Guess what, because they proved that their discoveries were for real, they were accepted by the establishment and rewarded.  Real crackpots end up talking to themselves in the end, because they can't prove anything to anyone else.

Drobnjack, I was into Meyls thoeries about 12 years ago, when he was a hot topic on the web. I don't recall the standing wave  explaination from the radio engineers  exactly, but it had to do with a few of the experiments, especially the one where a signal can be detected in a metal box. One of the big objections to his experiments, is the fact that he connects the receiver to the transmitter with a wire. This is supposed to be the earth. In reality it becomes a transmission line to the receiver. Standing waves easily develop in this wire. No wonder the power to the receiver doesn't obey the inverse square law, it is directly connected!! Tesla transmitted power via ionization of the high altitude air, this guy uses low voltage , ionizes nothing and uses a direct wire to the receiver.

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on January 31, 2015, 12:03:39 PM
Drobnjack, I was into Meyls thoeries about 12 years ago, when he was a hot topic on the web. I don't recall the standing wave  explaination from the radio engineers  exactly, but it had to do with a few of the experiments, especially the one where a signal can be detected in a metal box. One of the big objections to his experiments, is the fact that he connects the receiver to the transmitter with a wire. This is supposed to be the earth. In reality it becomes a transmission line to the receiver. Standing waves easily develop in this wire. No wonder the power to the receiver doesn't obey the inverse square law, it is directly connected!! Tesla transmitted power via ionization of the high altitude air, this guy uses low voltage , ionizes nothing and uses a direct wire to the receiver.

@pomodoro Many thanks for explanation about standing waves.

We learn nothing and make no progress if we abandon the hard work of others.

Anyways, regarding that single wire between the transmitter and receiver that Dr. Meyl is using. I am not an expert, but the effect drops off severely if one intercepts the direct path between spheres with a hand. I appreciate criticisam about that single wire, but there is a drop-off as well.

Since I am only a rookie, I relay heavily on name dropping ;-).

In 1895 Lord Kelvin specifically traveled to New York to visit Tesla's lab and for Tesla to show him the effect of the scalar field. Later on Lord Kelvin developed his own version of Maxwell equations that was based around scalar field vertices. So Dr. Meyl was not the only one beating that path.

Here is a link to Lord Kelvin's paper: On the Generation of Longitudinal Waves in Ether (http://rspl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/59/353-358/270.full.pdf+html?sid=afeb350a-072d-43b1-995f-f5dd195e48ac)

Has anybody tried to test this with bipolar Tesla coil? Than there would be no need for that single wire.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
@Farmhand

Those coils that you made are really nice.

Did you make them yourself?

What frequency were they tuned to?
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: pomodoro on January 31, 2015, 12:28:10 PM
The spheres act as capacitors, so your hand intercepts the field. At some wavelength, in the higher MHz, the capacitance of the sphere might resonate with the pancake coil and radiate some power as maxwell / hertzian waves. How much depends on the radiation resistance. Out of resonance, not much is radiated, but if close enough, the spheres communicate by an electric field as in a capacitor. Earthing and not connecting by wire will reduce the signal dramatically. Tesla also used a mast way too short for effective radiation at the wavelength of the frequency he used.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on February 01, 2015, 02:40:35 AM

Here is a link to Lord Kelvin's paper: On the Generation of Longitudinal Waves in Ether (http://rspl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/59/353-358/270.full.pdf+html?sid=afeb350a-072d-43b1-995f-f5dd195e48ac)

Has anybody tried to test this with bipolar Tesla coil? Than there would be no need for that single wire.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
@Farmhand

Those coils that you made are really nice.

Did you make them yourself?

What frequency were they tuned to?

Thanks for the link to Thomson's paper. I'll check that out.

Those coils were the first Tesla coils I constructed and operated at about 460 kHz. I experimented with a delay line between the transformers as the connecting wire as well, which was a length of cable coiled up and tuned with a capacitor to the resonant frequency so that there was a 1/4 Wavelength on the connecting wire as well, that did improve the performance and stability a bit.

To do it better ground planes should be used under the coils maybe.

......................

To comment on the hand interfering with the transmission, this is more likely the fact that if one places a grounded object like the
hand within the induction field of either coil the L/C of the coil changes and that puts the setup out of tune and the power drops
off, it's not shielding it's adding capacitance and de-tuning the coil.

Also when Meyl shows two different frequencies in my opinion he is showing a lower harmonic excitement at the lower frequency
which is less powerful and easier to disturb, then he increases the driver frequency to the frequency of resonance of the coils and
this shows a strong resonant response which is more powerful and more difficult to disturb.

These setups are not meant to radiate radio waves, they are not radio transmitters the elevated capacitance allows a large
potential to develop and the charge to be contained ( not leak off) then this high potential causes the current to flow into the
ground causing a ground disturbance, when tuned the ground disturbance created by the transmitter can be used to excite a
receiver at a distance to resonant activity, at the base of the transmitter is a ground plate and near or at that is a 0 volt current
node, at 1/4 wavelength from the transmitter the potential alternations of the standing wave is maximum. And so if the system
is tuned to the diameter of the planet then the farther you could get from the transmitter the greater the potential fluctuation
you have to excite the receiver, 0 volt node at the transmitter base and maximum potential alternation at the anti-node on the
opposite side of the planet. Now if the setup was tuned to 3 x 1/4 wavelengths across the planet then there would be one point
between the transmitter and receiver where the potential alternation would be about the same as at the receiver.  The system
could be tuned to have an odd multiple of the 1/4 wavelength between transmitter and receiver and this will result in a maximum
potential alternation at the receiver and at every odd multiple of the 1/4 wavelength distance. Going back from the 1/4
wavelength towards the transmitter would see the potential of the alternations decrease to zero at the transmitter. Simple.

Having said all that it would be almost impossible to totally suppress the emission of some radio waves which Tesla clearly states
as well.

Close to the transmitter the induction field can be used to power stuff, but that's not radiations.

Tesla states that his transmitters can be tuned to emit different ratios of radio waves to ground currents/disturbance/waves.


A radio transmitter on the other hand, the radiated power drops off with distance, and the transmitter is tuned to maximum radiation of "radio waves", but ground disturbance and ground current still occur to some degree.

A radio transmitter the radiated energy is maximized and the ground is the reference.

A Tesla transmitter the radiated energy is minimized the ground currents are maximized and the elevated terminal is the reference.

The connecting conductor is a transmission line.

.

.

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on February 01, 2015, 01:21:01 PM
@Farmhand

Thanks for detailed explanation. Very useful, I can learn a lot from that.

Your explanation of how Dr. Meyl's hand changed capacitance of the system and de-tuned L/C circuit is 100% spot on.

Q: when you design your stuff, do you start from equations or do you just follow trial & error method?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I've just read this article that somebody in this thread: Observation of scalar longitudinal electrodynamic waves (http://www.astro.ethz.ch/people/pdf_files/cmonstei/7210.pdf). Guys called Monstein & Wesley did a competent experiment with pulsating 433.59 MHz spherical source charge. They separated oscillating sphere by almost 1km (0.7miles) and still got resonance from a scalar wave.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on February 04, 2015, 09:00:33 AM
Well the very first Tesla transformers I made took some time to get the resonant frequency down to a low enough frequency so that
my home made input circuit could excite the "transmitter" primary at the full resonant frequency, at the time I was unaware of the online Tesla coil design calculators. Like this- http://www.extremeelectronics.co.uk/index.php?page=oltc_calc

They work very well for simple solenoids and there are different ones for different coil types, however they cannot predict exactly
the results when we use a 3 coil system ( primary - secondary - extra coil ).

So now to design a three coil setup I use a combination of the online calculator, regular calculations and my previous experiences
to get as close as possible to what I want. Then there is always a need to fine tune the coils to each other and also to use an
appropriate driver circuit so the frequency of excitement can be varied as well.

For example I know that when different loads are applied in different ways certain adjustments will need to be made to keep the
system in "full transfer power tune" or in " full terminal voltage tune". When actually transmitting power at the systems limits
to output power from the receiver output coil the voltage at the elevated terminals will begin to get pulled down by the load.

Being a tuned circuit it's all about the tuning and I find its always best if I can finely adjust the primary inductance and
capacitance as well as the secondary inductance (tuning coil between secondary bottom and the ground stake), it's not practical
to vary the elevated terminal capacitance "on the fly" so being able to vary almost every other parameter a bit either side of full
resonance is very useful.

some loads add capacitance and some loads can reduce inductance ect.

..
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: DROBNJAK on February 04, 2015, 01:08:32 PM
@Farmhand: Thanks Man, thanks. I love reading this stuff.

What do you think about bipolar coils? I was thinking, everybody says that both Tesla's and Meyl's power transfer is not valid, because of use of grounding. So, I thought ungrounded bipolar coil should prove it either way. But one would need to make and tune 4 coils!
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on February 06, 2015, 11:38:20 PM
Not quite, Tesla's documented actual experiments and demo's lighting a bank of globes at a distance are/were valid, however, his
"world system" was never demonstrated so there is only his claims about that. Many people make all kinds of silly claims on his
behalf that he never ever made. He never claimed any OU or extra energy from his transmission arrangements, I challenge anyone
to show words from Tesla that do claim extra energy from the operation of his transmission setups. I have many times and no can
provide these claims by Tesla all they have is his claims of magnification of voltage and current, he never claimed any excess energy
regarding his transmission systems. People misunderstand and misrepresent his claims about power as if power was energy. Big
mistake. Personally I don't think his system would have been as efficient as he thought or even be viable nowadays.

Meyl doesn't use an actual ground to the ground. He uses a connecting wire as I did in my demonstration. Ergo his claims of
scalar energy and not being able to shield or disrupt the energy transfer between the terminals is just BS. If Meyl connected
the connecting conductor to ground his effects would be diminished, and if he did away with the connecting wire and used
actual ground stakes at some distance apart his system would be lucky to even light a single 3 mm LED.

Because of the connecting wire the transmitter and the receiver can be in different metal clad sheds and the setup works the
same as if it was in the open, more or less.

His calculations mean nothing without a demonstrable "out of the ordinary result" which he can not produce, at least not that I
have seen.

He's a professor and I am a boilermaker who has a hobby of messing with all different kinds of stuff. I believe my results were
better than his. In my humble opinion he is knowingly misrepresenting what is happening in his demo's.

.



 
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: jbignes5 on February 07, 2015, 12:28:45 AM


Referring to your editorial comment of even date, the question of wireless interference is puzzling only because of its novelty. The underlying principle is old, and it has presented itself for consideration in numerous forms. Just now it appears in the novel aspects of aerial navigation and wireless transmission. Every human effort must of necessity create a disturbance. What difference is there in essence, between the commotion produced by any revolutionary idea or improvement and that of a wireless transmitter? The spectre of interference has been conjured by Hertzwave or radio telegraphy in which attunement is absolutely impossible, simply because the effect diminishes rapidly with distance. But to my system of energy transmission, based on the use of impulses not sensibly diminishing with distance, perfect attunement and the higher artifice of individualization are practicable. As ever, the ghost will vanish with the wireless dawn.

Nikola Tesla
New York, Oct. 21, 1907

 Did you use IMPULSE technology? If you didn't then you didn't replicate a thing Tesla did.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on February 07, 2015, 02:25:25 AM
1) Impulse Technology was used, but it isn't a requirement for Tesla's Transmission systems anyway, he clearly states in his book
on his work with alternating currents that he can excite his Magnifying Transmitter Primary with any arbitrary wave shape, and a
sinusoidal wave on the oscillating secondary circuit will result, (which is true). He also states in CSN that a high ratio of
transformation is better for power transmission and a system with a lot of resonant rise is better for signals. Both are tuned
circuits anyway, I believe.

2) I don't claim a replication of Tesla's transmission system.

3) What I claim is equal or better results than Meyl (who uses a sine wave excitement from a function generator), by using the
setup I built, which is like Meyl's, but I used a battery and a chopper circuit to power mine. I used two three coil Tesla Type
air core resonant Transformers to do it.

4) I don't claim a formal demonstration I just filmed what I did at times and shared it along with the details as I seen fit ir was asked for.

..

Maybe this looks more like "Impulse Technology". More power and voltage, and a high speed rotary spark gap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nkJtrKCdFg

Or this maybe. It's all good fun hey.
.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on February 07, 2015, 03:13:48 AM
@DROBNJAK, Oh about the bipolar setups they are different in that the primary excites both secondaries.
As my health is improving I hope to be in a position to continue with some experiments and measurements with a bipolar setup
which is air core and resonant, but not really a "Tesla Coil" as such, it has tuning capacitors across the secondaries rather than
"toploads".  I'll be trying to measure input and real power outputs at 420 Khz, which is almost a pointless exercise except I
might learn something. The tanks get resonating voltages up to 1600 volts peak to peak with 12 volts input at under one ampere,
less than 10 Watts input, no output, just a resonating tank. Still need to build a H bridge circuit to try with it. It's meant to be a lighting setup eventually, ala HF lighting, emergency light on the wall kinda thing, runs from a battery. I'll be trying to get some
accurate measurements with some different loads across the secondaries.

..
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Pirate88179 on February 07, 2015, 04:23:53 AM
@DROBNJAK, Oh about the bipolar setups they are different in that the primary excites both secondaries.
As my health is improving I hope to be in a position to continue with some experiments and measurements with a bipolar setup
which is air core and resonant, but not really a "Tesla Coil" as such, it has tuning capacitors across the secondaries rather than
"toploads".  I'll be trying to measure input and real power outputs at 420 Khz, which is almost a pointless exercise except I
might learn something. The tanks get resonating voltages up to 1600 volts peak to peak with 12 volts input at under one ampere,
less than 10 Watts input, no output, just a resonating tank. Still need to build a H bridge circuit to try with it. It's meant to be a lighting setup eventually, ala HF lighting, emergency light on the wall kinda thing, runs from a battery. I'll be trying to get some
accurate measurements with some different loads across the secondaries.

..

Farmhand:

I am happy to hear that you are getting better.  I enjoy following your experiments and projects.

Bill
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on February 07, 2015, 11:17:32 AM
Thanks Pirate, Trying to get better has been extremely boring, I find it very difficult to stop chainsawing, digging holes driving
tractor ect. Had to do it, I was spending too much time on the floor rolling around in agony, healing from back injury like bulging
discs is difficult, especially when I see so much that needs to be done around the place. If I start experimenting I get carried
away and end up not sleeping enough or spending too long bent over the bench.  So I bought some smart phones to play with.
Motorola Droid Razr HD XT925 is a handy piece of kit, they can take a bit of moisture as well, in a pinch. Good cheap/tough phone,
but a couple years old now, not a new line, still I cannot stand apple so no Iphones for me.

Phone water test.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzQUoJ-sIaY

Before I post any new video's I'll need a new camera that records to SD (old one is mini tape type).

I'm looking at getting a Fuji XP70 waterproof camera, it can shoot up to 240 frames per second as well for slo mo which might
be handy, also wifi file transfer so no need to dry off the camera and remove the SD or plug in a cable. Records in H264 - MP4
whereas the old one records a DV stream which makes a huge file to transfer and transcode but still not even HD.

If anyone knows of a better similar camera (must be waterproof) that's in the same price range then please let me know.

Fuji finepix XP70
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/xp/finepix_xp70/specifications/

Sorry for going so far off topic, excited about being able to make good video clips much easier. It's easy to fall behind the tech
these days, I'm nearly always about three years behind.
..
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: SeaMonkey on February 08, 2015, 07:53:23 AM
FarmHand,

It is a delight to read your explanations of what you've
observed in your experimentation and your understanding
of the theoretical/technical aspects.

I still remember just a few short years ago when you were
beginning this incredible journey of yours into the mysterious
world of electricity and electronics.  You've come a long, long
way!!

It is very good indeed to hear that your health continues to
improve.  Your ability to keep on doin' in spite of the pain
and physical difficulties is amazing.  Keep on keepin' on!
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on February 09, 2015, 02:48:47 AM
SeaMonkey, you are too kind, after a few months of participating in the other free energy forum I quickly learned that I needed
to apply a BS filter. It was you that made me realize that fact, at that time I shunned the other forums and posted only at EF and Then at Heretical Builders to get away from the constant OU fervor at EF. I shunned these forums because they actually had OU in their site names which irked me a bit. But I don't fit in on a conventional electronics forum I don't think, I stopped posting at Heretical because I thought they could use a break from me. So now I mainly post here. 

One thing I would like to do is to enclose my air variable capacitors in transformer oil (in cases) so they can take higher voltages.
I wonder if oil will affect their values at all as well, I guess I'll find out if I do it.

..

 
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Pirate88179 on February 09, 2015, 03:07:48 AM
SeaMonkey, you are too kind, after a few months of participating in the other free energy forum I quickly learned that I needed
to apply a BS filter. It was you that made me realize that fact, at that time I shunned the other forums and posted only at EF and Then at Heretical Builders to get away from the constant OU fervor at EF. I shunned these forums because they actually had OU in their site names which irked me a bit. But I don't fit in on a conventional electronics forum I don't think, I stopped posting at Heretical because I thought they could use a break from me. So now I mainly post here. 

One thing I would like to do is to enclose my air variable capacitors in transformer oil (in cases) so they can take higher voltages.
I wonder if oil will affect their values at all as well, I guess I'll find out if I do it.

..

 

What kind of oil I wonder?  I would suppose that you want oil with the highest dialectic strength?  Is there a chart of these oils or, do you just use say a 90 wt. gear oil?  I have always wondered about this.  Maybe, all oil is a better insulator than air so it makes little difference.

Let me know what you come up with.

Bill
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: MarkE on February 09, 2015, 03:29:53 AM
What kind of oil I wonder?  I would suppose that you want oil with the highest dialectic strength?  Is there a chart of these oils or, do you just use say a 90 wt. gear oil?  I have always wondered about this.  Maybe, all oil is a better insulator than air so it makes little difference.

Let me know what you come up with.

Bill
Plain mineral oil works well.  Motor oil has all kinds of additives that don't help electrical performance.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: MarkE on February 09, 2015, 03:31:55 AM
SeaMonkey, you are too kind, after a few months of participating in the other free energy forum I quickly learned that I needed
to apply a BS filter. It was you that made me realize that fact, at that time I shunned the other forums and posted only at EF and Then at Heretical Builders to get away from the constant OU fervor at EF. I shunned these forums because they actually had OU in their site names which irked me a bit. But I don't fit in on a conventional electronics forum I don't think, I stopped posting at Heretical because I thought they could use a break from me. So now I mainly post here. 

One thing I would like to do is to enclose my air variable capacitors in transformer oil (in cases) so they can take higher voltages.
I wonder if oil will affect their values at all as well, I guess I'll find out if I do it.

..

 
Transformer oil has a permittivity of 2.2, so your capacitance will increase over air by 2.2 times.

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/relative-permittivity-d_1660.html
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on February 09, 2015, 03:43:49 AM
One thing I would like to do is to enclose my air variable capacitors in transformer oil (in cases) so they can take higher voltages.
I wonder if oil will affect their values at all as well, I guess I'll find out if I do it.

Hi farmhand. Different oils will have a different dielectric constant (relative permittivity, symbolized as 'Epsilon r' [Er]) than air, so for sure
oil would change the capacitance. It looks like 'electrical grade caster oil' is good, as it apparently has a higher
break down voltage than air, and it also has a higher relative permittivity than air, so it will increase the
capacitance somewhat.

"Mineral oil is used extensively inside electrical transformers as a fluid dielectric and to assist in cooling.
Dielectric fluids with higher dielectric constants, such as electrical grade castor oil, are often used in high voltage
capacitors to help prevent corona discharge and increase capacitance."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric#Some_practical_dielectrics

Castor oil apparently has a relative permittivity of 4.7 (4.7 times greater than a vacuum).
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/liquid-dielectric-constants-d_1263.html
Dry air apparently has a relative permittivity of about 1.000536

All the best...
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on February 09, 2015, 03:51:19 AM
I've got about 30 liters or more of 2nd hand actual "transformer oil" from an industrial source. A friend of mine got it for me.
A capacitance increase of 2.2 times sounds handy as well. Hmmm might be a good project to get the blood flowing. extending the
shafts to adjust the capacitors to outside through the top of a container. Should be able to do it without any need for seals under
the oil level easy enough. I'll filter it even though it looks clean to me.

It might mean slightly longer wires to the circuit though dammit.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Void on February 09, 2015, 04:09:43 AM
Farmhand, I hope it is not the toxic kind of transformer oil containing PCBs, and whatever else some of them have.
Plain castor oil may possibly work well, and may be a lot safer if you are not sure what all is in the used transformer oil you have.
All the best...

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: TinselKoala on February 09, 2015, 06:37:04 AM
The dielectric constant of plain mineral oil  (the unadulterated kind sold in pharmacies, Mineral Oil USP)  is about 2.1-2.3 depending on temperature, moisture content, etc. I've got several transformers and capacitor banks sitting around in plastic jars of the stuff. It's pretty inexpensive too.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Farmhand on February 09, 2015, 10:05:12 AM
Void my friend, I'll definitely ask the guy that gave it to me, he will know for sure, I don't think he would have given it to me if it was the old toxic kind. It's fairly new but used and came from the union and safety heavy railways. But I will find out and if in doubt I will have it disposed of properly, I don't need any more health -problems, I'm beginning to wonder if the HV capacitors I bought from the Ukraine a few years back may have been contaminated and stolen from the old nuclear facility just over the border. Surely if sent overseas any radioactivity would be detected, I hope.

Tinsel, maybe in the U.S. the mineral oil from the pharmacy is cheap but I bought some caster oil for a bloated goat and it cost be over 10 dollars for about 350 mls less than half a liter anyway, at that price say $10 per 500 mls it could cost me $40 or more and
to make matters worse I would be lucky if in this hillbilly area the local town pharmacy even has any of anything I want, last time they didn't even have caster oil.

I don't mind buying it for a reasonable price so I might end up having to either travel to get it or have some delivered.

I need to make a pair of frames or L shaped stand so the capacitors can be mounted vertically then lowered into the
container and stay standing up before filing with oil.

Thanks all. Much appreciated.
..
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: TinselKoala on February 09, 2015, 01:28:19 PM
Heh... the castor oil is definitely expensive. Here, the food grade NF mineral oil in bulk is about $3.50 a liter. Or for "pint sized" bottles of USP grade at the pharmacy about double that. Still a lot cheaper than the castor oil.

I wonder if some light nondetergent motor oil would be "good enough".

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: SeaMonkey on February 09, 2015, 08:03:47 PM
A video about How to Make High Voltage Capacitors. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPD7skZ8OSo)

The breakdown voltage testing yields surprising
results.

A most interesting resource for capacitors of all kinds. (http://my.execpc.com/~endlr/oil_filled.html)
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Pirate88179 on February 10, 2015, 02:58:05 AM
You could use baby oil...which is mineral oil with fragrance additives, but, I assume the additives add to the cost/price.  I can get mineral oil here in KY pretty cheap, but no one seems to sell it in bulk, all consumer sized packages.

Bill

Here is a link to a gallon of mineral oil for $15.00 US:

http://www.kvsupply.com/su-per-mineral-oil-gallon?CAWELAID=983684669&CAGPSPN=pla&catargetid=320011160000087263&cadevice=c&gclid=CjwKEAiA0uGmBRDwj7mE1v-LlCYSJADxH16OVyLm5M1Nh1xfcvh0kevZWfXdCU09reOqd7nYWj3bjRoCkD7w_wcB (http://www.kvsupply.com/su-per-mineral-oil-gallon?CAWELAID=983684669&CAGPSPN=pla&catargetid=320011160000087263&cadevice=c&gclid=CjwKEAiA0uGmBRDwj7mE1v-LlCYSJADxH16OVyLm5M1Nh1xfcvh0kevZWfXdCU09reOqd7nYWj3bjRoCkD7w_wcB)

That is cheaper than the 16 oz. I got at the drug store for $4.00.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Panul on August 25, 2015, 01:28:20 PM
There are _zero_ confirmed instances of faster-than-light communication of information using electromagnetism, light or any other system. The experiment by Oldscientist is flawed due to incorrect assumptions about what a Faraday cage can do and how good ones are actually constructed (double-walled, fully isolated, or perhaps solidly grounded, sometimes even biased with external or internal power to the walls).

But if you want to experiment you can make a "scalar wave transmitter" using a Caduceus coil antenna:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-MA8rzZSqk
(Be sure to read the "Description" for details)

The schematic and construction details can be found on Jean-Louis Naudin's website archive.

this tinselkoala guy must be either a dissinfo agent or plain brainless brainwashed sheeple that is fed only by pop science propaganda . superluminal transmission is known for decades now, but if you want something more recent see the superluminal neutrinos CERN experiment. they've done it thousands of times. it's always the same result. but of course a few months later they rushed to alter the results to protect their holy cow, relativity. and their precious positions obviously, thus the cowardish butt kissing anouncement made later by the team.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: pomodoro on August 25, 2015, 01:49:36 PM
How about Twin Photons?  A random change of  spin on one and its 'twin' a million lightyears away instantly changes its spin. It was too spooky for Einstein but  for once he was  proved wrong. They exist and do just that, communicate between themselves instantly, no matter how far they are from each other. Unfortunately, we cant as yet use them for communication.

Spooky alright.

Here is just one of many such experiments
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/07/22/science/far-apart-2-particles-respond-faster-than-light.html (http://www.nytimes.com/1997/07/22/science/far-apart-2-particles-respond-faster-than-light.html)
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: TinselKoala on August 25, 2015, 04:49:09 PM
this tinselkoala guy must be either a dissinfo agent or plain brainless brainwashed sheeple that is fed only by pop science propaganda . superluminal transmission is known for decades now, but if you want something more recent see the superluminal neutrinos CERN experiment. they've done it thousands of times. it's always the same result. but of course a few months later they rushed to alter the results to protect their holy cow, relativity. and their precious positions obviously, thus the cowardish butt kissing anouncement made later by the team.

You follow the Standard Script 100 percent: You cannot refute me, so you insult me. Plus, you simply lie, like some schoolyard 12 year old who finds out that the Tooth Fairy is really his Uncle Pheel.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: minnie on August 25, 2015, 07:33:51 PM



 Panul, as far as I can see the neutrino incident is a good example of how
science should work. People were genuinely excited about the initial
finding, it would have opened up a whole new area of research. Alas
it wasn't to be.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: MarkE on August 25, 2015, 08:09:08 PM
this tinselkoala guy must be either a dissinfo agent or plain brainless brainwashed sheeple that is fed only by pop science propaganda . superluminal transmission is known for decades now,
Superluminal transmission of information remains an undemonstrated concept.  Entanglement has never been shown to allow one to perform an action in one location and communicate that action to another location in less time than it takes light to propagate from the former to the latter location.
Quote
but if you want something more recent see the superluminal neutrinos CERN experiment. they've done it thousands of times. it's always the same result.
That is false.  The results were not successfully duplicated by other prestigious laboratories that tried, and CERN found a faulty optical cable connector was corrupting their measurements leading to false results.  When they fixed the connection they no longer got apparent FTL measurements.
Quote
but of course a few months later they rushed to alter the results to protect their holy cow, relativity. and their precious positions obviously, thus the cowardish butt kissing anouncement made later by the team.
The CERN team reported their methods and results openly and honestly both when they had the anomalous apparent FTL results and after they repaired their equipment.  They sought scrutiny of their methods and encouraged replication of their experiments.  They were unafraid to be found mistaken.  IOW they acted as honorable and professional investigators.  They let the data tell the story, even if ultimately it was not the story they hoped to find. 
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Panul on August 25, 2015, 09:07:18 PM
You follow the Standard Script 100 percent: You cannot refute me, so you insult me. Plus, you simply lie, like some schoolyard 12 year old who finds out that the Tooth Fairy is really his Uncle Pheel.

the only one who follows a standard script is you. telling the truth and insulting are two different things and you accuse me of the later because you are concious of your error. http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=30990&sid=38b43dafb9157485e7d1f4d35ac4546f https://www.scribd.com/doc/270895877/Pvelocities-6000-Ver-b https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjz-5Lqtxow http://libra.msra.cn/Publication/11219924/superluminal-transmission-of-information-through-an-electromagnetic-metamaterial

as for the markE guy: yeah pal its the same wordplay over and over again. "group velocities", superluminal transmission "of information", etc. which isn't truth either cause it has been proven already. when it becomes standard science they'll find another excuse. "superluminal transmission of quantised macro-information!" or some stupidity of the sort.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: TinselKoala on August 25, 2015, 11:10:04 PM
the only one who follows a standard script is you. telling the truth and insulting are two different things and you accuse me of the later because you are concious of your error. http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=30990&sid=38b43dafb9157485e7d1f4d35ac4546f (http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=30990&sid=38b43dafb9157485e7d1f4d35ac4546f) https://www.scribd.com/doc/270895877/Pvelocities-6000-Ver-b (https://www.scribd.com/doc/270895877/Pvelocities-6000-Ver-b) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjz-5Lqtxow (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjz-5Lqtxow) http://libra.msra.cn/Publication/11219924/superluminal-transmission-of-information-through-an-electromagnetic-metamaterial (http://libra.msra.cn/Publication/11219924/superluminal-transmission-of-information-through-an-electromagnetic-metamaterial)

as for the markE guy: yeah pal its the same wordplay over and over again. "group velocities", superluminal transmission "of information", etc. which isn't truth either cause it has been proven already. when it becomes standard science they'll find another excuse. "superluminal transmission of quantised macro-information!" or some stupidity of the sort.

You're hilarious! You cite Eric Dollard !! And you cite "The Old Scientist" whose work has already been demonstrated to be flawed. That's a real laugh. And you misrepresent the only actual peer-reviewed paper as saying something it does not say. It's clear to me that you have no real understanding of your topic and you want to promote lying hustlers like Dollard. Go ahead, give him some money if you believe his flim-flam. We all know what he'll spend it on. Meanwhile, real science progresses, in spite of dropout trolls like you.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Panul on August 25, 2015, 11:39:26 PM
You're hilarious! You cite Eric Dollard !! And you cite "The Old Scientist" whose work has already been demonstrated to be flawed. That's a real laugh. And you misrepresent the only actual peer-reviewed paper as saying something it does not say. It's clear to me that you have no real understanding of your topic and you want to promote lying hustlers like Dollard. Go ahead, give him some money if you believe his flim-flam. We all know what he'll spend it on. Meanwhile, real science progresses, in spite of dropout trolls like you.

if eric dollard one of the greatest electrical engineers and experimentalists is a shill and a drunkhead (cause thats what you imply by saying we all know what he'll do with it. but it's only normal/expected that you use adhominems and exploit/magnify people's weaknesses to add to your "arguments"), then what that makes you? an amoebe? the old scientist's experiments are proven to be wrong? by what sources? academic zombies and disinfo agents like your highness? and where are these sources? "real science progresses?"  are you completely deluded? it progresses by obsessively holding onto obsolete theories like relativity? by using harmful radiations for our communications? by rejecting as "noise" the real deal, and exploiting for technology the real noise? by butchering the human bodies for procedures that can be managed with zero-invasiveness methods? by killing the cancer patients wth expensive and lethal chemotherapies? by killing the planet using 300 years old energy sources? by being dictated by economic, academic and political interests? that's how it "progresses"? of course i'm not saying there is  no bright side on the two sided coin, but the dichotomy you try to advertise is not exactly accurate. as for the secular science paper it was never used as a groundbreaking hit, because it doesn't try to disturb the status quo but to elucidate the subject through the spectre of the dominant scientific beliefs. but you can't say that's the case with mr Pappas and other scientists' status quo shattering materials.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Overmind on July 01, 2016, 08:08:03 AM
No, they are not BS. Putting the dictionary language issues aside, the wave itself is physically valid, mathematically confirmed and similar to common existing real-world versions of the same longitudinal propagation system (sonic waves, water waves, etc).


The only thing we are missing here is a viable simple detection system that can separate and analyze it independently from the standard hertzian waves.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: conradelektro on July 01, 2016, 08:38:23 AM
I got two books from Meyl and did some experiments which I reported in this thread:

http://overunity.com/15458/are-scalar-waves-bs/msg435244/#msg435244 (http://overunity.com/15458/are-scalar-waves-bs/msg435244/#msg435244)

Of course the believers were not interested in the experiments and preferred empty words over facts. It is so much easier to spread BS instead of building and measuring.

Naturally, I did some thing wrong (just to mention this BS argument before anybody else can write it). But none of the verbose believers could show anything tangible in this thread, not a single build or measurement.

No, they are not BS. Putting the dictionary language issues aside, the wave itself is physically valid, mathematically confirmed and similar to common existing real-world versions of the same longitudinal propagation system (sonic waves, water waves, etc).

The only thing we are missing here is a viable simple detection system that can separate and analyze it independently from the standard hertzian waves.

You may speculate and hope, but scalar waves remain BS till you demonstrate such a viable detection system. And nobody could do that till now, just words and inconclusive contraption.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Overmind on July 01, 2016, 09:02:39 AM
[size=0px]A viable detection system is what I will soon try to build.[/size]
[size=0px]
[/size]
[size=0px]Detection may be harder than one may think. Just consider that you cannot actually measure a size in an objective unversal way.[/size]
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: AlienGrey on July 02, 2016, 12:52:56 PM
I got two books from Meyl and did some experiments which I reported in this thread:

http://overunity.com/15458/are-scalar-waves-bs/msg435244/#msg435244 (http://overunity.com/15458/are-scalar-waves-bs/msg435244/#msg435244)

Of course the believers were not interested in the experiments and preferred empty words over facts. It is so much easier to spread BS instead of building and measuring.

Naturally, I did some thing wrong (just to mention this BS argument before anybody else can write it). But none of the verbose believers could show anything tangible in this thread, not a single build or measurement.

You may speculate and hope, but scalar waves remain BS till you demonstrate such a viable detection system. And nobody could do that till now, just words and inconclusive contraption.

Greetings, Conrad
What are you talking about I happen to be working on scalar waves, instead of talking out your bottom why don't you look up Eric Dollard or Nichol Tesla and his work on the subject also Henry moray and just what scalar waves are capable of doing in reality like for one you cannot 'stop' such a wave, look it up it was all tesla ever used and for another it's in your signature as an existing being and once scanned they could find you anywhere on the planet and they just need something of yours with your energy in it to find you ! think it's fiction well it's not it is already a reality.  Why don't you start a real thread on it and research it properly?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhuSn6sc7sc
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: conradelektro on July 02, 2016, 05:10:24 PM
@the Grey Alien:

I am the only one in this thread who offered more than words. I showed a real experiment and measurements.

I did not start a "proper thread" because I could not show anything new or useful. I reported a negative result which at least shows that scalar waves can not be shown as Meyl claims.

So, show something tangible, present a measurement and then you may talk.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Overmind on July 04, 2016, 08:41:53 AM
My logical approach on this that anyone could test: make an emitter tower and receiver. Transfer power between them. Measure the Hz components and mathematically calculate the loss/distance. The difference in power at the receiver compared to the calculated value should be the scalar component.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: AlienGrey on July 04, 2016, 03:53:33 PM
@the Grey Alien:

I am the only one in this thread who offered more than words. I showed a real experiment and measurements.

I did not start a "proper thread" because I could not show anything new or useful. I reported a negative result which at least shows that scalar waves can not be shown as Meyl claims.

So, show something tangible, present a measurement and then you may talk.

Greetings, Conrad
Loads or things work in counter space and Longitudinal waves and who the F are you to set barriers so you can use it for commercial use ??? in your kitchen is a microwave oven that is an over unity device ! you want the meal already made !
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: AlienGrey on July 04, 2016, 03:59:43 PM
[size=0px]A viable detection system is what I will soon try to build.[/size]
[size=0px]
[/size]
[size=0px]Detection may be harder than one may think. Just consider that you cannot actually measure a size in an objective unversal way.[/size]
It's already included in some detection satalites already orbiting the planet, and not very dificult to track if you know how it works.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: blueplanet on July 06, 2017, 01:24:55 PM
Somebody has mentioned that signals can pass through a Faraday cage.
Isn't it sufficient to prove its existence?
It is probably not just a belief.



I got two books from Meyl and did some experiments which I reported in this thread:

http://overunity.com/15458/are-scalar-waves-bs/msg435244/#msg435244 (http://overunity.com/15458/are-scalar-waves-bs/msg435244/#msg435244)

Of course the believers were not interested in the experiments and preferred empty words over facts. It is so much easier to spread BS instead of building and measuring.

Naturally, I did some thing wrong (just to mention this BS argument before anybody else can write it). But none of the verbose believers could show anything tangible in this thread, not a single build or measurement.

You may speculate and hope, but scalar waves remain BS till you demonstrate such a viable detection system. And nobody could do that till now, just words and inconclusive contraption.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: blueplanet on July 06, 2017, 01:35:51 PM
I have no time to go through all the posts in this thread. But i try to offer my 2 cents.

I suspect that  this scalar wave is a deceptively important thing. It is probably a nickname of something very important.
TB was probably not the first guy who used this term.
Again, we must not be brain-washed by our text book too much.
 :) :D ;D



Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: blueplanet on July 06, 2017, 01:44:01 PM
Folks,
One more thing.
Avremenko has mentioned scalar waves in his literature.
If scalar waves were no more than BS, it would not have been mentioned by Avremenko.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: forest on July 06, 2017, 02:00:56 PM
Yes, we need methods of differentiate  normal radio waves and scalar waves. I know they exists because of Tesla reactions to some news for example about the nature of radio and Roentgen rays.
Thay are magnetic waves with low electric component (electric here is a loss and occur in form of static electricity).
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: pomodoro on July 07, 2017, 02:24:49 AM
Tesla also believed in Martians  and that you can't split the atom.


If you want to play with scalar waves stick a metal plate on your oscillator and couple to its changing electrostatic field with another plate.  Do the same magnetically with  solenoids instead. Those are real scalar fields you can experiment with.   Problem is that they don' radiate they couple only.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Acca on July 07, 2017, 09:23:25 AM
Forest you are very right as here is your quote...

"They are magnetic waves with low electric component (electric here is a loss and occur in form of static electricity)."

Here is a video that I posted 4 years ago on my method of cancer treatment..  Here is the link to that video as the plasma tube makes "compression waves" I.E...scaler waves.. They are a "magnetic component of the EH wave.."

I am still alive because of this machine..


 https://vimeo.com/62416846 (https://vimeo.com/62416846)
 
 CANCER VIRUS DESTRUCTION THROUGH A RIFE PLASMA TUBE and scalar waves transmission[/font]

Acca...

Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: blueplanet on July 07, 2017, 09:26:09 AM
I think Avremenko's experiment is good enough.
You can extend his work.


Yes, we need methods of differentiate  normal radio waves and scalar waves. I know they exists because of Tesla reactions to some news for example about the nature of radio and Roentgen rays.
Thay are magnetic waves with low electric component (electric here is a loss and occur in form of static electricity).
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: blueplanet on July 07, 2017, 09:28:36 AM
Hi, thanks for your posting this info.
Very important information.


Forest you are very right as here is your quote...

"They are magnetic waves with low electric component (electric here is a loss and occur in form of static electricity)."

Here is a video that I posted 4 years ago on my method of cancer treatment..  Here is the link to that video as the plasma tube makes "compression waves" I.E...scaler waves.. They are a "magnetic component of the EH wave.."

I am still alive because of this machine..
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Acca on July 07, 2017, 10:23:11 AM
On scaler waves altering time..

Here is a different shot of a rotating plasma compression wave that was generated by a modulated tesla coil as you can see it has stripes and striations in the glass tube.. Now this tube has an affect on "local space time" as a mechanical clock will slow down or speed up if the rotation of the compression plasma is switched..

It depends on the amount of power one has put in to the effect ..

Here is a description for you from Warren York.. on the "time effect".. below,  I am experimenting on plasma compression waves now for many years now..   you need a very large electrostatic field of plus and minus ions in the effect are..  "a Van Degraff power of 1million volts static" and very dry air.... need to have two walls opposite covered with foil to place the charge there.. and the tesla coil(s) of the same frequency powered up to make standing waves there "must be MODULATED"in the audio range.. all electronics will start to act up so use only analog stuff..

I a sure that it's scaler compression waves that alter time in the affected area..


Acca..
 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B73Uhw7W3dmyVnZzRFpvQ0VBQ3M/view (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B73Uhw7W3dmyVnZzRFpvQ0VBQ3M/view)
 
 [/font]Acca...

 
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Acca on July 07, 2017, 10:38:19 AM
Forgot to include the Warren York diagram..

Acca...
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Acca on July 07, 2017, 11:16:18 AM

During the crystal energy experiments, York and Windell claim to have been able to modify the molecular properties of a sample of quartz crystal to create Hutchison-like materials effects, including a putty-like jellification of one section of crystal, and the hardening of another section to the point where it actually cut diamond. They did this by placing a quartz crystal sample in a cold-plasma beam powered by a high-frequency/high-voltage signal.
 Scalar info resource Warren York
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrb40pXxieo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrb40pXxieo)
 
 
Start at 19:45 to see the scaler video..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aa8vjmMnwPU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aa8vjmMnwPU)
 
 
David Anderson on time control technology through the use of  Tippler Cylinder..
Or use a spinning scaler compression wave to alter time.. like I have…
This works and scaler waves affect time
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaTIxZCNaZ4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaTIxZCNaZ4)
 
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: not_a_mib on July 09, 2017, 03:57:02 AM
Some of the scalar electrodynamic theories allow a wave mode with no electric (E) field, just the magnetic (B) and scalar (S) fields.  This would result in mathematically literal waves of BS flying through space.  ;)
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: forest on July 09, 2017, 08:44:52 AM
Some of the scalar electrodynamic theories allow a wave mode with no electric (E) field, just the magnetic (B) and scalar (S) fields.  This would result in mathematically literal waves of BS flying through space.  ;)


We don't need space ;-) we have ambient medium which is the magnetic field of Earth. Scientists found that magnetic field of Earth  is tightly joined with Sun field. So I assume every magnetic field on Earth is exactly joined to this also. From all inventors I found that only Barbosa&Leal are telling the  truth.
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: forest on July 09, 2017, 08:45:48 AM
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/news/mag-portals.html
Title: Re: Are scalar waves BS?
Post by: Acca on July 09, 2017, 09:25:19 AM
 Reality bites no BS here…   Just plain shock to the mind that reality is hard to swallow.. Don’t gag.. on this you may just throw up …. Here.. ….
 
https://vimeo.com/62416846 (https://vimeo.com/62416846)
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJG-Y_BTToY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJG-Y_BTToY)
 
Acca…
 
P..s…
 
Insult ??? maybe ?? Shock YES !!!
 
So life sucks when you live in the matrix… step down to the underground mechanics and live the life of discovery…Fool…