Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Discussion board help and admin topics => Half Baked Ideas => Topic started by: Lunkster on January 26, 2021, 04:44:08 PM

Title: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: Lunkster on January 26, 2021, 04:44:08 PM
Theory of Lunkativity:

Definition:
This theory is a modification to the theory of relativity that replaces the time variable.
The theory of Lunkativity will show how time will be replaced by the variable called Lunk.
The variable Lunk will, in most cases, be the same value as time in the relativity formula, one of the differences is that the value will be derived from the difference from the transmitted frequency to the observer signal frequency.  The angle between the transmitter and observer will need to be incorporated into this term as well.

The problem of using variable time for the relativity theory:
Lets look at the following scenario:
There is a train that travels from West to East on the tracks at 100 mph.
There is a platform with an observer on it 1 foot from the tracks with a sound meter and stop watch.
When the train goes by the platform, it will blow a horn at 10Khz. Starting 1 block before the platform until 1 block after the platform.  There are five more observers.  One is one block out from the platform, another I mile out from the platform, another 2 block west of the platform, another 2 block east of the platform and the final observer is on the train.  Each observer is measuring the duration of the sound and the frequency of the sound.
The train travels by the platform starting the horn one block before the platform until one block after the platform travelling at 100mph.  The six observers compare the data they collected.  All the observers on the ground got different results.  The ground observer that was 1 mile from the platform obtained results that were similar to the observer on the train.  These two observers saw the same 10K hz. Frequency for the same amount of time.  The person closest to the train on the platform observed the same time, but the frequency started at 9khz to 11khz.  The person one block out observed the same time but the frequencies changed from 9.5khz to 10.5khz having the same time frame.  The person 2 blocks west of the platform observed a constant 9khz with an increase of time by 10%.  The person 2 blocks east of the platform observed a constant 11khz with an increase of 10% of time.
If time was different on the train than what it is on the ground, then why did the observer 1 mile away from the train have the same data as the man on the train.  Also why did all of the different ground observers have different sets of data.  A different rate of time on the train than for all of the ground observers who collected different data sets does not make sense to me.  The Lunkativity theory does explain all of these different test results having the same rate of time both on and off the train.



What is the Lunkativity theory?
Time is a universal constant. 
Waves traveling in a specific medium, travel at a constant rate of speed.
Understanding the propagation of waves as they are created in one plane and then observed in another plane makes the difference.  Lets look at another scenario to describe what is happening.
Now lets say you have a hovercraft that is moving from west to east across a pond at 1 m/s.  Now lets say that five stones are dropped at a rate of one per second.  The waves that are created with each stone dropped into the water moves at 2 m/s.  Now if you had one person on the west shore measuring the time it takes from the crest of the first wave to the crest of the last wave, he would measure 12 seconds.  On the other hand a person on the east shore would measure 4 seconds for the time of the first to last crest to arrive at the shore.  Now lets say there is an observer on the south shore of the pond.  He would measure 8 seconds which is that same rate as the stones that were dropped into the pond off of the hovercraft.
Waves are not created instantaneously, they take time to be created so that a distance is traveled between the start and the completion of that wave.  Now the 5 stones represent one wave signal from the start to the finish of the wave form.  The dropping of the stones at a constant rate represent the constant speed of a wave traveling in a constant medium.  So what is happening is as the waveform is being created from a moving transmitter,  it’s speed in a different plane moving at a different speed is dependent of both the direction of transmission and the difference in speed between the planes.  The difference in speed of the planes along with the change in direction of wave travel can be calculated for the frequency that will be received by the observer.  Also these calculations can be used for modifying the lunk term that replaces the time term in the relativity formula.  In this way time will be constant when using the Lunkativity theory.  I will let the mathematicians create the formulas for this theory.

Jay Lunke



Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: conradelektro on January 26, 2021, 10:36:51 PM
About a moving observer:


If an observer moves at speed s and the speed of light is c, it holds that:


s + c = c (whatever speed one adds to c will still result in speed c)


Has the Lunkativity-man thought about this?


Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: Newton II on January 27, 2021, 02:30:44 AM
How about animals which have flow of time in a different scale?  One year of man is equivalent to seven years of dog.  Is speed of light for dog c*7  or c/7 ?


https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/small-animals-live-in-a-slow-motion-world/
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: Lunkster on February 08, 2021, 05:37:45 PM
I want to respond to the comments made about this theory by clarifying the theory with formulas and examples to support it.

I believe the time is a universal constant.
I believe waves from through a medium at a constant rate of speed.
I believe that the mechanism of different wave lengths between the transmitter and receiver
is caused by the change in distance between the transmitter and receiver during the time it takes to propagate a wave. 
The moving transmitter Propagates an array of frequencies due to these distance changes viewed from different angles of travel as the transmitter moves through the medium.

The 5 page files has detailed examples of how this happens.
The files will be more clear and informative of what is happening.
I am sorry to say that time travel is not possible with this theory.

Lunkster
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: geovat on June 17, 2022, 02:05:49 AM
Einstein said that physical time travel is not possible because the human body cannot physically support the manipulation of space and that only a projection would be possible.  Some self-proclaimed scientists claim that they invented or discovered time travel and even teleported objects in time and space.  I sit now and wonder how they solved the paradoxes problem?
Based on Einstein concepts I will write here an example of a paradox: suppose that the phone I hold in my hand is a time travel device and when I press the home button I travel through time in the time of the dinosaurs. Next what I see around me is T-Rex hunting me and I run and press again the home button to return back in my time. When I'm back home with my phone in my hands I will not remember anything, neither a clue that I maybe traveled couple millions years in the past. Why that? It's simple, because my phone doesn't have a quantum computer inside.Why don't I remember anything about my time travel and why do I need a quantum computer?
When you have dinner and jokes with T-Rex million years in the past the Universe has suffered a dilatation that moved all the things in space continum in that moment and in your travel interval and when you press the home button to return back in your time you will return before you traveled and you will remember nothing, you will even don't know that you traveled back or that your experiment was a success or not. If You program your device to go back in your time but plus a couple minutes, days or hours delay in the future then you will make another paradox, you will meet the other you and one or both version will be neutralized and the memories for the time traveling also will be gone if the future version will remain. The only way to return back exactly in the same moment when you have gone in the past is to use the time dilatation calculation and this is possible only using the stelar map, advanced orbital positioning system mapping and for now only quantum computers can do that.
If you travel at the JFK event and someone will make you a photo by mistake then you will know that your time travel experiment was a success even if you don't remember anything . The paradoxes list continues with other situations and stuff.
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: onepower on June 17, 2022, 06:39:29 AM
geovat
I thought the whole Einstein variable space/time theory was nonsensical but understandable from a society obsessed with false beliefs.

First, variable space/time came about because nobody was smart enough to figure out what a "Field" is so they fudged the math. They wanted to get rid of the Aether theory so they made the constants of space and time variable to compensate for there lack of real understanding. However later even Einstein admitted that variable space/time is absurd and cannot work without a medium to carry energy. However not before he got stinking rich off his bs theories so that was a win.

The new and most current theory which replaced the Aether is Dark Energy/Matter.

Here's a clue, many supposed that time was variable because at high velocity there clocks appeared to run slower. So of course when any clock runs slower all the measurements of time in the universe must have changed. Uhm what?... that's quite possibly the stupidest and most far fetched explanation possible. In fact the most logical and probable explanation is that the material oscillation of the clock changed producing a measurement error proportional to the velocity.

I don't suspect most understand the nature of this problem so I will go further. If most understood that space/time is not variable but the properties of matter are then all bets are off. We could build a craft like a UFO simply by modifying the property of inertia so an object can accelerate with no counter force or gravity effects thus very little energy is expended. We could also build a FE device by modifying the properties of matter during half the cycle but not the other, asymmetrical cause and effect.  Ergo, when the properties of the thing in question change then so must the laws governing them.

Here's another clue, in countless cases where people came into close contact with a UFO it interrupted all electrical devices and the clocks. The clocks not only appeared to run slower many literally stopped. Most real FE inventors should know this effect well and any very HV/HF disruptive discharge will wreak havoc with all electric and many mechanical devices.

So here's the deal, variable space time is complete nonsense. The most powerful business people at the time pushed Einsteins crazy theories because they knew it would disrupt all the real science for decades. It worked and most have been wasting there time chasing mystery particles, wormholes, multiple universes and other such nonsense. 70 years on the greater majority are still burning fossils fuels for energy so these sadistic business people definitely got there money's worth.

Regards
AC
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: geovat on June 17, 2022, 03:50:08 PM
We have two objects, say two watches fixed precisely at the same time.  We also have a source that modifies space (or the laws of physics) by creating a phase out of phase with the surrounding space.  Thus one clock is a witness, the other clock is the receiver of the phase shift field and the source is the transmitting object.  One clock is in the normal space and the other in the space out of phase with the field created by the transmitter.  On the clock under the action of the phase shift time begins to flow differently, the clock lagging behind or accelerating ahead of the control clock.  Does this example represent a time travel?
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: onepower on June 17, 2022, 06:12:51 PM
geovat
Quote
We have two objects, say two watches fixed precisely at the same time.  We also have a source that modifies space (or the laws of physics) by creating a phase out of phase with the surrounding space.  Thus one clock is a witness, the other clock is the receiver of the phase shift field and the source is the transmitting object.  One clock is in the normal space and the other in the space out of phase with the field created by the transmitter.  On the clock under the action of the phase shift time begins to flow differently, the clock lagging behind or accelerating ahead of the control clock.  Does this example represent a time travel?

I think your making the same classic mistakes most people do.

1)People infer properties to things which are not actually present only imaginary.
For example, you said "time begins to flow differently". Time is not a substance and it cannot flow, time is a "measurement of something". Time is fundamentally a measure of motion relating to how fast something changes ie. moon cycles, inertia in pendulum weights or atomic/molecular oscillations. Ergo, time is actually a measure of how inertia effects mass as this is the primary cause for the period of oscillations or cycles in question.

2)People often invoke the false cause fallacy based on there misunderstanding.
False Cause: Many people confuse correlation (things happening together or in sequence) for causation (that one thing actually causes the other to happen). Sometimes correlation is coincidental, or it may be attributable to a common cause.

Based on 1 and 2 we can begin to see how the fiasco of time travel came about...

Most people made the amateur mistake of confusing "something" with "the measurement of something". They supposed that time wasn't just a measure of the motion relating to the change of something but a real substance which could flow like water. Once the illusion that time was a flowing substance was complete they could then imagine something moving within said flow. However even a child is bright enough to ask... how do you get from the measurement of something oscillating which is time to riding a dinosaur with your great great grandmother?. The logical answer is there is no correlation and it shows a complete lack of understanding in my opinion.

Here's a clue, people make the same mistakes with heat. Heat is not a substance and it cannot flow, heat is a "measurement of something". Heat is fundamentally a measure of molecular motion relating to how fast the atoms/molecules oscillate ie. there energy state. Should we also presume that if heat flows we could magically ride on it's flow to other places or times as if by magic?. Well no and the concept is absolutely ridiculous. 

What this does show is how far removed many have become from nature and reality...

Regards
AC
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: sm0ky2 on June 17, 2022, 11:23:08 PM
Yes but the “time” it takes for “heat” to travel from one side of the substrate to the other is synonymous to the rate of energy flow caused by such an event.


If we reverse the flow of energy, thus changing the direction of the flow of heat….
Does “time” also move backwards?
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: sergeyman on June 18, 2022, 07:16:30 PM
geovat
I think your making the same classic mistakes most people do.

1)People infer properties to things which are not actually present only imaginary.
For example, you said "time begins to flow differently". Time is not a substance and it cannot flow, time is a "measurement of something". Time is fundamentally a measure of motion relating to how fast something changes ie. moon cycles, inertia in pendulum weights or atomic/molecular oscillations. Ergo, time is actually a measure of how inertia effects mass as this is the primary cause for the period of oscillations or cycles in question.

2)People often invoke the false cause fallacy based on there misunderstanding.
False Cause: Many people confuse correlation (things happening together or in sequence) for causation (that one thing actually causes the other to happen). Sometimes correlation is coincidental, or it may be attributable to a common cause.

Based on 1 and 2 we can begin to see how the fiasco of time travel came about...

Most people made the amateur mistake of confusing "something" with "the measurement of something". They supposed that time wasn't just a measure of the motion relating to the change of something but a real substance which could flow like water. Once the illusion that time was a flowing substance was complete they could then imagine something moving within said flow. However even a child is bright enough to ask... how do you get from the measurement of something oscillating which is time to riding a dinosaur with your great great grandmother?. The logical answer is there is no correlation and it shows a complete lack of understanding in my opinion.

Here's a clue, people make the same mistakes with heat. Heat is not a substance and it cannot flow, heat is a "measurement of something". Heat is fundamentally a measure of molecular motion relating to how fast the atoms/molecules oscillate ie. there energy state. Should we also presume that if heat flows we could magically ride on it's flow to other places or times as if by magic?. Well no and the concept is absolutely ridiculous. 

What this does show is how far removed many have become from nature and reality...

Regards
AC

I think hi refer at the clock indicators movement. When the clock needles move in other way than it should be we can use the term "time flow" .
Also I don't see any correct answer at geovat question so I will try to answer: If the space is altered around one clock could be also the perception altered, could be the clock internal mechanicals altered and may be also another unknown phenomenon but also could be the space curve and yes the "time" distortions.
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: sm0ky2 on June 18, 2022, 07:57:10 PM
To grasp the concept of time dilation there is a key point
being the perspective.
Rather than engaging in the dauntless prospect of adjusting the length of our measure (1 second)
Einstein gathered to observationally lock the rate of exchange (c).
this reverse prospect denies us investigation of variable values for (c),
but defines a precise value for (t) by reverse engineering the observation.


But only when the two are compared from a single perspective.


I will use the Lunar satellite for this discussion, because in the future the moon is governed by a Lunacracy, and it just seems fitting.


From our measureable perspective the earth is spinning at roughly 1k mph, to everything we see
From the Sun’s perspective we move at ~67k mph
And from a theoretical stationary center of the Milky Way 260k mph


Forget the galaxy for a moment, we’ll just stay here
The earth moves at 68k relative to a point in space.
the moon, which circles the earth at  2.2k mph has 2 distinct time references from our perspective.


The first when it passes the earth on the outer celestial half of its orbit
The moon is moving at 69k mph, relative to our point in space.
The second is on the inner half of its celestial orbit
The moon is moving at 67k mph, relative to our point in space.


From the points perspective, time on the moon both speeds up then slows down, and averages out the same.


From the earths perspective time on the moon moves slower.
From the moon’s perspective, people on earth grow old and die faster.


Because of the constraints on the equation:
Time, itself, is relative.
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: sm0ky2 on June 18, 2022, 08:02:25 PM
The energy equation indifferentiates mass from energy.
Making an electromagnet time-dialation machine a possibility.


Time is not reversible in the sense of going back to before ‘now’.
Wherever now is…..


But, within the effective field, the rate of the progression of time can be altered.
Either sped up or slowed down. And in one discrete quantum case, returned to the state when the machine was turned on.
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: sm0ky2 on June 18, 2022, 08:06:05 PM
Our quantum computers will never give us a playground with a reset button,
At least not in any of our lifetimes.


However, if enough research and funding went into it,
An agricultural field in an emf that was able to grow crops in minutes
What would comparably be months of our time…
This is not really a far stretch.
The real question is: does the crop $ pay for the energy cost of maintaining the field.
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: onepower on June 19, 2022, 07:47:37 PM
Smoky2
Quote
The energy equation indifferentiates mass from energy.
Making an electromagnet time-dialation machine a possibility.

It makes sense that Energy and Mass cannot be divided because all energy relates to the motion of a mass ie. kinetic. Energy is not something but a measure of the past or present work performed on a mass leading to it's present motion. Using the logic that if something is in motion some work must have been performed to set it in motion at some point in time.

However I fail to see the connection between Mass-Energy and the possibility of a time-dialation machine. I understand how a velocity near or faster than light could be perceived as a variation on the perception of time however that would only be an illusion.

Quote
But, within the effective field, the rate of the progression of time can be altered.
Either sped up or slowed down. And in one discrete quantum case, returned to the state when the machine was turned on.

I would correct your statement and say, the rate of the progression of time can be "perceived" to be altered. However a perception or belief does not support the actual reality of a situation. Time cannot change...

The concept in question isn't difficult to understand. For example, we have trouble tracking UFO's because a standard radar has a range of around 200 miles and sweep of 360 Deg over 2 seconds. However if a crafts velocity is so great it can move through the sweep area faster than 2 seconds it doesn't register. In fact the radar software rejects any abnormal deviations of velocity from normal as an error. Hence the reason they can move about and seldom be detected. This is a good example of how many confuse the measures of time and velocity.

So in every case a perceived variation in time can easily be explained by an unexpected velocity or change in velocity.

For example, I have seen first hand what many here dream about. A device which can produce a wave like disturbance which travels through any material, even a Faraday cage, as if it wasn't even there. As well, the theory is simple and based on known physics. You see the only reason a Faraday cage can shield an EM wave is by opposing the wave through induction ie. Lenz law. The induction is a function of conduction hence the reason the cage must be a conductive material like copper.

However as Tesla implied, if the rate and magnitude of the disturbance is greater than the ability of the material to conduct hence induct then there is little or no opposition. So in fact what were talking about, which so few can seem to understand, is grade school physics. We simply produce a disturbance which changes faster than the ability of the material to oppose it. When the cause is changing faster than the surrounding effects, it negates said effects.

In fact, this phenomena creates chaos with all electronics and measuring equipment like clocks for obvious reasons. I could easily fool you or anyone else into thinking time was being manipulated. The trick is having the knowledge and understanding to realize time is not being manipulated a material property is...

Regards
AC
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: sm0ky2 on June 20, 2022, 06:04:22 PM
i agree, with your premise.
But it is not all inclusive.


Sure we can trick our apperatus
We can even send signals through our walls and cages
by planning where the nodes are or frequency to great or small, etc


I suppose, if the light between the mirrors never changes velocity
but the mirrors do
this may be only an illusion. (maybe)


The atomic clock is a little harder to dismiss.
Did we ‘trick’ the atom by speeding it up?


if something is 100,000 light years away, but we see it in a state 120,000 yrs ago…
are we merely visually delayed in our perception by our illusion of dialation?
or would an observer at closer to its speed actually ‘be’ in its’ time?
We have no real way of knowing this beyond the mathematical.


In a laboratory, however:


We do have the capability to exceed the 2 MV / cm^3 required to break the threshold of spacetime distortion.
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: sm0ky2 on June 20, 2022, 06:10:55 PM
Perception inside the field is just as it is everywhere.
1 second is 1 second


However, the number of seconds that go by during a period of measurement
differs from the number of seconds that go by outside the field.


It is for this reason, i believe that time progresses differently in different regions of space.
Based on the cosmic conditions in that region.
Further, if that we were able to somehow tap in and measure things in this other region of space
we would find that not only time, but speed of light and other universal factors propegate at a different rate compared to our own. But also if measured by their perspective, it would all be the same.
Like measuring 1 second.




People in this other region of space may have the equivalent of 1000 yrs go by
But during the same measure we have only endured a single year.


The rate of ‘time’ itself may change as our galaxy drifts through space interacting with other galaxies
or even periodically as the Milky Way plays its’ dance with Andromeda
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: onepower on June 21, 2022, 02:26:00 AM
Smoky2
Quote
Perception inside the field is just as it is everywhere.
1 second is 1 second

However, the number of seconds that go by during a period of measurement
differs from the number of seconds that go by outside the field.

The argument breaks down almost immediately when considering that "the number of seconds that go by" and "during a period of measurement" both represent time. So it looks like...

"However, the time that goes by during a period of time differs from the time that goes by outside the field".

Like Einsteins flawed argument it's just a clever way of saying variable time in which case time has no meaning. If time has no meaning it also implies most of physics has no real meaning because velocity, work and energy become variable as well. If time is not constant then nothing is constant and anything can happen which of course digresses to creationism ie. anything is possible.

This is why Nikola Tesla and many other great minds all but said Einstein was a either an imbecile or a quack. Any rational person should have noticed that variable time leads to variable velocity which leads to variable energy or creating something from nothing. I mean why stop with time?, we could also stretch a meter or lighten a kilogram. If were going to jump head first down the rabbit hole why limit our opinions?.

It's cool, I'm just disappointed that so many supposedly intelligent people fell for such an obvious scam. However in his later years Einstein did claim his theory was nonsense and unworkable without a Aether. Apparently nobody was listening...

Regards
AC



Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: kolbacict on June 21, 2022, 12:20:05 PM
We all know what the speed of light is.
What is the speed of darkness?
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: sm0ky2 on June 25, 2022, 02:55:21 PM

For great distances from source:

V = c - [(angle of obstruction from parallel light vector) * (surface area / distance) / (c * distance from source to shadow) /(distance from source to destination)]
You end up with a velocity of shadow propagation with a vector
the magnitude is then divided by the index of refraction of each medium the light passes through,
and if there is more than 1, this is averaged over its’ fraction of the distance then added together.


For close distances:


V = [ c / index of refraction of the medium ]


The equations get increasingly complex when there is relative motion between light source, obstruction, and/or destination.
Title: Re: Theory of Lunativity
Post by: onepower on June 25, 2022, 11:57:54 PM
Quote
We all know what the speed of light is.
What is the speed of darkness?

Zero, you cannot measure the speed of nothing.

Darkness is not something it is an absence of something, a lack of light. Many people fall into these simple logic traps or false cause fallacies by making false assumptions about the nature of a problem. A common fallacy is confusing something with a measure of something ie. heat or time as a substance when it's only a measurement.

Your question is equivalent to asking, what is the speed of a lack of photons?. Nothing, there is no speed.

Regards
AC