@pirate
Most people I meet think I am fairly optimistic however I am also very realistic. Sure we have big problems however admitting we have a problem is the first step to solving them... denial is not a solution.

Regarding your denial...http://nypost.com/2015/03/05/nyc-air-could-kill-you-doctors/. Most people agree nyc has major pollution problems at every level however you are too deeply immersed in it to know the difference. The problem is "normal" can be anything, a man living in a polluted slum next to the dump who eats trash may call this normal. A man living in the mountains breathing fresh unpolluted air and drinking mountain water straight from a stream may call this normal. As we can see in these examples normal may fall at completely different extremes of the spectrum.

I grew up 90 miles from the closest city, 5 miles from the nearest neighbor and spent most of my days outdoors. Thus endless miles of green prairie grass on rolling hills and clear clean rivers were my normal. Today I live on an acreage and my back yard would cover 14 of your city blocks with a creek, a good well, a dugout full of fish and green pastures for my horses. Wide open spaces free of people, no pollution, clean air, clean water is my normal by choice which is the absolute polar opposite to your lifestyle.

So of course we would have a difference of opinion because I could never live in what you call normal, to me it is not normal by any means compared to my lifestyle. No offense but to be honest I find it disturbing that cramming that many people into such a small polluted space is becoming the new normal.

AC

Well, I live in Kentucky which has more lakes per square mile than any other state except Alaska.  Our rivers and streams are very clean as are our wilderness areas.  I have no idea where you think we are "cramming that many people into such a small polluted space" ...nothing could be further from the truth.  More total negativity coming from you once again.  You really should try to look on the bright side...you know?  At least once in a while.  Being realistic is looking at life as it really is, not as you think it is with your negative outlook.

There are less than 3 million people in my entire state so, I have no idea what you are talking about.  By the way, no credible person quotes the NY Post...sort of like quoting the National Enquirer...same thing really.  If you have never been to NY you might not know that but, just a heads up for you.

Cheer up man.

Bill

@Pirate

Well, I live in Kentucky which has more lakes per square mile than any other state except Alaska.  Our rivers and streams are very clean as are our wilderness areas.  I have no idea where you think we are "cramming that many people into such a small polluted space" ...nothing could be further from the truth.  More total negativity coming from you once again.  You really should try to look on the bright side...you know?  At least once in a while.  Being realistic is looking at life as it really is, not as you think it is with your negative outlook.

I thought you said you were from NYC and then I thought what in the hell are you talking about?... no pollution. My bad Bill and I apologize for being a dork, lol.


Now I'm jealous with you talking about all those lakes and wilderness areas, I hear Kentucky is a very nice place.

So, I suppose that is 17.5 cents per kwh.  That is much higher than I thought but, they did just get a large rate increase.

17.5 cents per kWh seems pretty high, here in southern Alberta I have a contract with my local REA (Rural Electrification Association) and my rate is 7.2 cents per kWh. My rate has not changed in three years and it may be because their dropping in wind farms all over the place. The utilities are also installing HV power lines everywhere so the wind farms can run at maximum capacity. It makes sense here on the prairies with lots of open space and high winds coming off the Rocky Mountains. 




AC

@markdansie

Breakthrough energy is nothing if there is no breaking out mindset to match it. An inventor can by accident find a breakthrough effect, even build a device, show it, gets killed or is shut up, then it's gone forever. We have seen that many times on this forum.

But if the mindset matures and people start to open up to new perspectives of how our present energy actually works and not to what our present energy responds, because we are presently only in a response phase of our technology basically skimming the surface of our effects. We know if me make X turns of wire on this core and y turns of another wire on the same core, the x-y coupling can be predicted, therefore we know what we are doing. No we don't. We think we know what we are doing because what we are doing works. That does not provide why it works and why it does not work for OU. So what are we doing wrong? Well for one thing, we expect this next generation of advancement will be realized or dictated under our own terms, under our present EE constructs, under the Laws and formulae provided by what our present toys respond to. So we keep the blinders on and hope for a "miracle". But the miracle will not manifest itself. So what is wrong? hahaha

That's why I have been spending the last 5 years looking elsewhere. hehehe

Here is a small example of our present technological lunacy, even though it works.

Everyone has been taught how AC works. The sine wave indicates a half cycle on the hot and another half on the neutral wire of the AC mains wall socket and by this the current is "flowing" back and forth from one hot line direction then from the neutral line in reverse direction, etc. Does everyone agree with this basic widely accepted premise. This goes all the way back to Tesla so after 100 something years we should all be confident that AC works as it is called "a current is alternating in direction from hot to neutral to hot to neutral to hot and so on".

So on your bench your scope is plugged into the mains wall socket. Right. It is receiving half a cycle from the hot and half a cycle from the neutral line. Right or wrong. Let's say I am right.

Now we have I = V/R. This basically says for any line to have current, it needs voltage and resistance. Mix them how you want you still need those two ingredients. So for current to alternate in an AC hot/neutral pair, the voltage has to alternate as well since the resistance will, more often then not, be a fixed value. Right or wrong? Let's say I am right. OK, ok, forget the phasing issues because that is irrelevant. hehehe

So on your bench is a very small transformer and you pulse the primary with your FG set at 50% duty and 1 volt. You connect your scope probe and ground to the secondary to measure a very bad output in the mV range. A very weak wave form is shown at the 1 volt scope setting so you change the volts setting to 100 mV and see exactly how the slightest changes in that weak waveform in a much larger format. Great isn't it? So much insight indeed. But wait one minute. Something is wrong here. Knowing that the scope probe ground clip is actually grounded to the scope chassis that is actually connected to the neutral line as well as the earth ground line of the home how is this possible? How is it possible that you can measure a mV differential while your ground clip is also supposed to supply half the 120 vac so your scope can actually work? hahahahaha (5 years later) hahahahahaha

So simple you could laugh......... or cry. I cry because I have 100's of these small problems where logic is required to take a back seat to imperfect constructs.

Let's change channels. So, as the commoner becomes more and more aware of the actual powers that control our society from past to present we discover that not only our money is rigged, our school system is rigged, our physics is rigged to the point that one must concede that everything we think is real is derived from what has been permitted to be perceived as real by a few very powerful groups. A group of scientists in Geneva did a worldwide economic study on corporate ownership and found that there are 120 corporations who now own 80% of the World's wealth. So much power is so few hands. This had been growing incrementally since the 1750's. But noooooooo, it has to be a conspiracy theory so go back to sleep.

OK Question: After Morgan Stanley (1/120) burned down Tesla's tower in order to maintain full control over power distribution profits, do you really think he stopped there? Do you really think this was his only hindrance to mankind? Would you not expect him to call all of those responsible in academia as well as other government departments and order them to fully vet any future advancement of knowledge ensuring that anything that could mildly lead to independent energy production methods would be totally subverted. You bet your fat dollar bill he did. Not only him but actually that order came from the top echelons by our friends in the UK (/120). It's simple man. If one had the capacity and means to do a complete unbiased forensic analysis of how and what and by who technologies were introduced to the common man, we will realize that in every case the prime directive is "never give out anything that may lead to OU". We have been pounding our heads against a brick wall but that wall is not a natural wall of potential discovery, it is man made, man controlled, man enforced and nothing in all of our advancements was ever put forth from natural intellectual progression. It was totally manipulated from the start. Otherwise we would have  introduced the negative diode at the same moment that the positive diode was presented.

From the days of Faraday who would have preferred to spend his days blowing glass and polishing telescopic lenses to our present day, this wall thrives on the fact that people will accept whatever knowledge if it means putting food on the table. In the days of Faraday can you find one soul who is documented to have vehemently opposed his formulations for cause and effect? Where are the transcripts of the vetting process? Where was the opposition? How can there be any opposition when the same powers that hired Faraday where the ones that had the official power to integrate his ideas into the "accepted norms".

If a true society had one intent and that is for the betterment of all mankind and not only a few, then when society was first confronted by the proposed Law of Conservation of Energy that would thereafter become a leash for humanity to accept itself to be bound within its limits, those men should have been taken out and shot on the spot as the harbingers of intellectual stagnation. How can a science accept such a notion and call itself science? It is like telling all persons of faith, you can never be that good. It's spitting in the face of knowledge and the advancement of same. As a perfect vector, it is what a group of perverted minds would want to foment to ensure docility and abdication in the minds of the masses. You learn this way, or, you do not eat. You get too smart for your britches and you will end or you will work for them.

The OUer must be fully aware of the battle at hand and be advised that there are those who will act as your diversion. While you are busy drinking the EE Kool-Aid you will never feel thirsty enough to ask for something else. So today for our simple coil, we are asked to entertain resistance, inductance, impedance, reactance, capacitance, voltage, current, electrons, current flow, electron flow, alternating current, direct current, E fields, B fields, field collapse and so much more, all these in one little itty bitty coil. Talk about multiple personality disorder. Then once you have mastered these you are then asked to contemplate the wonderful world of ideal coils, ideal voltages, ideal capacitors. All of these mixed about with a barrage of formulas and Laws of cause and effect but when all are taken to a court of nature, none can provide any proof of same. All are simply enforced as the "That's the way it is technology" of the day, of our days and all simply creating another shell around man's mind that can no longer see a clear horizon. So...... were is this breakthrough? What is required is a mind break out because breakthroughs will habitually only add another layer to the shielding of our reality.

wattsup

@wattsup

Everyone has been taught how AC works. The sine wave indicates a half cycle on the hot and another half on the neutral wire of the AC mains wall socket and by this the current is "flowing" back and forth from one hot line direction then from the neutral line in reverse direction, etc. Does everyone agree with this basic widely accepted premise.

The hot wire generally alternates between +120v to -120v and the neutral wire which is bonded to ground is neutral. Which is a way of saying the potential of the hot wire simply rises to 120v with respect to ground then falls to zero, reverses polarity then again rises to 120v then falls to zero. As the neutral conductor is bonded to ground the hot wire can easily power a load connected to any good ground point. Remember voltage is the difference in potential between two points, the hot wire and the ground plane.


Note most power lines to residential transformers only have one wire, the hot wire with the Alternating Current and the second conductor is literally the ground. The ground is simply a massive reservoir of free electrons which the hot wire pumps... like an electron pump.


AC

@AC

I will open a new thread and lock it hopefully tomorrow where I will start on Spin Conveyance. I will also post it at OUR. From there if you wish we can continue this discussion either here (if this thread is not going anywhere further) or on a new companion thread.

I had prepared a long post but realize guys really need the base first. Once the base is understood, you guys are actually way smart enough to build new correlations to our effects. But let's just start from step one.

Sorry if my previous post may have been off topic.

wattsup

I have a question/thought related to the 'frictional coefficient' between two differently spinning charges in SCT.

  Imagine you have 2 cylinders next to each-other spinning at different rates.  If they touch, they transfer energy between each-other and eventually match spin velocities.  The amount of energy transfer in physics is the frictional coefficient.

  If you were to look at it one-dimensionally, space in CT would resemble a non-newtonian fluid (becomes harder the harder it is struck).  Spin leaks out with minimal affect at low energies but imparts significant change at high velocities (Tesla's Disrupted Discharges or damped waves).

  In conventional EE, it would be modelled as the 'near field vs far field'  or that  funny gap between fields and waves at ~50-500khz.  And of course, extremely high frequencies would appear as solid lumps of charge (IE: photons or radioactive particles), while extremely low frequency would appear with thermal effects.


  It would seem like one possible OU venue under CT theory would be to slowly spin up an object to high voltage and quickly discharge it, imparting some extra force on space in one direction but not the other due to this frictional imbalance.  Magnetostriction amplifiers would be the way to go if this is the case.


  I hope I am explaining that in a way that makes sense..  Does it?