Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Antigravity => Other antigravity machines and devices => Topic started by: raburgeson on April 02, 2005, 07:54:33 PM

Title: Doing the Math
Post by: raburgeson on April 02, 2005, 07:54:33 PM
   Going all through and closely scutinizing formula produced for energy
and theory I have been flaging obvious fabrications and mistakes made
and suprisingly most of these have appeared in the last 50 years.

    These fabrications have been impeding developement for years, a
serious examination with even grade school education reveal them
quickly. Let me give you A simple example. As math is taught in a
progressive manner and you are never taught an untruth to teach you
something in this subject, I will start here. At about 3rd grade you are
taught the order of mathmatical Hiarchy--My Dear Aunt Sally---
Multiply--Divide--Add--Subtract.In about 6th grade algebra you are
taught i is the imaginary number that basical is a multiplier of - and j is of
plus. this being said lets investigate one of the famous that are misleading
you. Einstien has in his equasions 0/-0 this is bullfeces 0/i*0 we must muliply
first and get 0/0, actually he had to multply first several steps ahead of the
step that lead to the step that had this reference in it.

   What I am pointing at is this don't be to ready to say it's been proven
by math to be impossible. Don't be steered by the famous favorites.
Create your own theries and do your own math and your own
experimenting and you will be better off.I dont say throw scientific fact
out, I'm saying they threw out alot of scientific fact by bugering math to
their own purpose, use your own education a little.
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: betajim on April 03, 2005, 05:29:39 PM
In about 6th grade algebra you are
taught i is the imaginary number that basical is a multiplier of - and j is of

Your sixth grade math is a bit rusty. ;) Either i or j is used to represent the
imaginary number, electrical engineers seem to prefer j for some reason. But i
or j don't have anything to do with - or +. In complex numbers i equals the square root
of -1. So that i2 = -1.

Take care, Matthew
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: raburgeson on April 04, 2005, 03:40:01 AM
Sorry I didn't write it all out for you
0/-0 = 0^2/i^2*0^2 =0/i*0=0/0=0
I tend to do a lot of math so I jumped a step but
notice I did it correctly , I unlike some scientist
can show were my figures come from.
Now you double check my work for a
hydrogen atom's electron I get
.3185:1 power ratio to the nuculii
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: betajim on April 04, 2005, 05:32:58 AM
Sorry I didn't write it all out for you
0/-0 = 0^2/i^2*0^2 =0/i*0=0/0=0

Still, why do you want to introduce i? The value -0 has nothing to do with
complex or imaginary numbers. The expression above 0^2/i^2*0^2 , if you
respect the common order of operations, evaluates to 0/(-1*0). Just what
you started with.

Just remember, when some limits are computed the answer IS -0, so that
isn't some made up number. A calculus textbook will have all the info.

Take care, Matthew
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: TechStuf on April 06, 2005, 12:41:07 AM
Raburgeson,? I think I know what you are alluding to....and have you considered that, without Einstein's considerable directive/misdirective influence,? The world might be a far different landscape?? There are many 'golden threads' otherwise covered over by what appear to be intentionally woven and diversionary threads in the spiral strand that is our stream of time.

And the time is fast approaching when all threads be laid bare and the deceitful mess woven largely by those whose self assumed custodianship of their fellow men will seal their fate.

All roads lead to GOD, they say.......But at the end of each and every one are forks in them that lead to His right Hand and His left.? So many are denying the abundant evidence of their Creator while worshipping instead, His creation.

Ask yourself why it is that nothing is truly straight in our universe??

The arcuate nature of everything.....

From Galaxies and beyond.....vortexual or arcuate motion.

It is everywhere in nature.? Everywhere.

A now famous Austrian naturalist amusingly observed this even in our language:

The word Universe literally rendered is:? Single Curve

Galaxies within it are largely spiral

Babies are born into it and start life by respiring

and leave it by expiring and shuffling off this mortal coil.

Consider the first lie ever told according to the Holy Scriptures.....The one that the serpent told Eve.

"You will be gods, knowing both good and evil".

"You will be gods!"

What does science and religion preach in virtually one unanimous voice today?

You are gods! No absolutes....Do as it pleases your godship!

I will end here (no doubt some are certain at this point that it should have been much sooner).....with the admonishment that men make for very poor gods....and have no business picking up the trumpet of a fallen angel and blasting away as though it is his own.....for it was no longer rightfully that fallen one's as well.

Besides, it attracts lots of, what for him will prove to be....Unwanted attention.? >:(


TS out

P.S.? Even the lowly science fiction writers of Star Trek fame understood the directive of 'non-interference' in the affairs of less advanced peoples.? Now things begin to move very, very quickly.

And the Finger of GOD will trace a path through mankind that will alter the paths of travel for many men.

And what did the above have to do with mathematics....?

I'm sure I don't know.

But in a way, I guess, 'that figures'.

Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: Phil on April 06, 2005, 06:44:27 PM
HUH? ???
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: TechStuf on April 07, 2005, 01:46:29 AM
Valid Question, indeed, Phil.  May you have your question satisfactorily answered!


Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: kenbo0422 on April 15, 2005, 04:45:38 AM
Einstein admitted that math wasn't one of his strong points..... ;D
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: Dinorben on April 15, 2005, 08:45:02 AM
Regardless of whether Einstein was good at maths or not, his theories have stood up against rigorous experimentation over many decades. They describe some of the more bizarre and non-inuitive aspects of our universe rather well - better, in fact, than any other theory. That doesn't mean they are right - but it does mean that until another, better, set of theories comes along we might as well assume that Einstein was right.

Claiming that Einstein was wrong without first coming forward with a better explanation of relativistic phenomena is just pissing in the wind. ::)

Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: TechStuf on April 15, 2005, 07:19:18 PM

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources"

Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: iceweller on April 16, 2005, 01:34:43 AM
  A rather famous quote from Einstein himself - but there's more. It is not fully correct that his theory has been demonstrated valid by rigorous testing - rather the contrary. It is like saying that the Michelson Morley experiment demonstarted that there is no Ether - that's also false as it was based on false premises (ether in motion relative to earth) - so who's to say what?  Furthermore, it really hasn't helped our everyday "science life" and the development of new technology has it? What happens is that the apparent effects are "linked" to the theory, but this does not mean it is really so. I have a couple of referenced articles where it is demonstrated that Einstein plagiarized more than one scientist without giving credit. Add to that that he was a 2nd grade clerk at the Swiss Patent Office and had all the time he wanted to scrutinize patents and ideas, then it is a logical deduction to believe that - without saying that he himself was the author of the above phrase.
    Einstein didn't receive the Nobel prize for his theory of relativity as most are lead to believe, he recieved it for his research on the "photo-electric" effect which demonstrated that light appeared to be "quantized" - but that's before the Quantum Mechanics "outbreak". Another myth is that he "invented" the theory of Relativity which is also false, as this theory was actually proposed by a Jesuit called R. Boscovich in the mid 1700s. This was then picked up by Einstein again, and reproposed. Add to this scenario the "Big Bang" theory, which is also another constructed one to fit the current scientific puzzle more neatly (Universal Entropy always increases) then you start to see that one lands in fairy tale land. Hannes Alfven (Nobel in Physics) demonstrated that the theory cannot be correct, due to several reasons he presented in his book, and he got practically "wiped" from the albo and branded as "heretic" notwithstanding the fact that he produced facts and evidence after he had been awarded the Nobel in 1970 - he died in 1995. He actually proposed a "masked" Ether based theory (he did extensive research on Plasma) with his "Galactic Magnetic Fields" which have been confirmed after his death. After all his fighting, still today, less than 10 years after his death, the "Big Bangers" are still high in their credo - but that's the whole point, because a credo is based on a religious belief, and that is  Platonic epistemology all over again: we are back to square one and the "herd" is happy, feels strong and most important of all, the "elite puppeteers" smile and have a laugh, it's all going down as planned!

Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: TechStuf on April 17, 2005, 07:40:13 AM
In the final analysis,  It appears that Einstein, undoubtedly a complex individual, was a 'big picture specialist' whose peculiar position enabled him to serve an important role as a 'buyer of time' for many.

For not only can one man make a difference....but it's his difference that makes the man.

Trite cliche?  Why not.

It will ultimately be shown that man's history is rife with instances of radical advancements.....derailed.  Or at least 'side tracked'. 

And the 'spurs' are running out of space it would seem.

May a few never forget the powers truly at work here and their place among them.  The true discernment of which is quite near the beginning of wisdom.


Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: sypherios on January 19, 2006, 07:41:49 PM
I have a simple question... I read about the antigravity demonstration done with quartz crystals. I was wondering if it were possible to use a car battery to get the electricity needed to make any change in the quartz mabe even significanly lighten it.

sincerly Sypherios
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: raburgeson on March 06, 2006, 05:05:00 AM
Sorry, I took the question to a main stream post, I don't have any info in my library on quart except a discription of a vehical haul that was quartz with a inlaid gold lattice. No additional info on power source or for that matter any other part of the vehical, might be a mis-direction. It is not consistant with any other observation of a craft. Other mis-directions probably include anti-matter and plasma with thousands of atmospheres of pressure. Let me make an example of what I believe is honest disclosier, ACC American Computer Corperation has released information I believe is factual involving transistor design and reversed engineered capacitor from alien technology. Look it up, it's easy the understand how it works. Caps the size of molecules that work at increadible speeds and produce little or no heat. Elements in wich work the same as co2 in a laser. Energy absorbed by atoms and molecules expand (orbit size increases) and when they give off energy they contract. In the fore mentioned cap. the material expands and makes contact like a switch. It's not something that requires genius to develope but, it is something that has been overlooked by all because we have all been directed away from this type of thinking. The computer your sitting at is a toy, you've been happy with it and you think you have a really up to date monster in front of you. It hasn't gone through your mind this should be a 10240000 bit 4 octahtz machine with septobytes of storage now have you.
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: kenbo0422 on March 08, 2006, 12:28:15 AM
Hey Guys, been awhile since I've been on here...  Anyway, one of the things I read, about two years ago was the development of an analog computer.  The analog system was extremely simple and the processor is supposed to be already here and about $15US.  The graphics are of course analog which matches most CRT monitors with photographic quality.  The thing that caught my attention was the disk storage.  Take an ordinary digital HD and instead of storing bits, store whole bytes or words or more using an analog configuration.  The higher the magnetic signature at a place where only a bit was stored the bigger the number is.  In other words, increase your HD capacity by a minimum of 8x.

I am no way a HD engineer, but I can see some possible problem with magnetic signatures affecting each other on an analog system, so I imagined using every other bit storage area to give separation (don't know if it would be necessary, any suggestions??).  But even then, 4x the capacity with byte storage and more with higher numbers stored.  This would even work with the present digital systems with an appropriate interface and internal drive mods to allow analog read/write.

What do you think?
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: raburgeson on March 08, 2006, 03:17:49 PM
They shouldn't need to skip space, just use a lens that writes records a bit smaller. Let me up the anty analog signals can be muliplexed a whole program could reside in a 1 bit space. Why we'll never see it, they can barely copy protect things now, it would be almost impossible to protect something in this config.
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: kenbo0422 on March 09, 2006, 02:58:55 PM
Never thought of that.... hmmmmmm....    As far as personal HD's are concerned, copy protection wouldn't be necessarily a problem or a need, although from your response, it sounds like you're talking more about CD and DVD with the 'lens' referral.  Just think, the gain could just about determine your HD capacity.
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: raburgeson on March 19, 2006, 09:28:26 PM
Well we do need to get a theory that works, Amen. But for now we need to know about 25 theories. And as time goes on the number will increase. They say in one theory matter oscillates in and out of existence, somewhere the instruction code for in is getting screwed up. Test the internet for time slips, super rare in the past they are becoming more frequent in numbers and lasting much longer now. Science is not investigating the cause of this and it maybe a survival matter. Instead their priority has been to hide their work from us.
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: raburgeson on May 23, 2006, 09:37:16 PM

 Did you see the article about about light travelling faster than light and even reversing? Cool huh?
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: raburgeson on March 23, 2007, 03:55:03 PM
Particals above the speed of light now and particals instantly leaving a tube the same time it enters it and 2 particals leaving 2 tubes when 1 is fired into 1 tube. Simplified for those people not following.

I have great reservations about a few things. Mostly people don't want to face the fact that Unified Theory is completely flawed. What? Are they afraid to learn something new? Bearden may be a disinformer. Several branches of science have already trashed Unified Theory, amoung these is partical physics. Even Electrical Engineers have identified the fact that energy traveling above the speed of light goes into another dimension. The fact is I believe the government chose Einstien as the disinformer in 1904. Bearden says the model is flawed that's an understatement. I don't trust anything else he says though. We have to do a lot of reading and keep up with advances. A new theory is going to evolve, they will try to leave us out of the loop. There are enough of us to figure out the truth. We have to be careful this time not to fall into the pit of disinformation.

 I have one bitch to make today because I really want to purchase one, They learned how to bend light and said invisibily clocks were going to be manufactured inb the near future. The govt. shut that company down and it's on the shelf now ( it has to be, there has been no news of it since). I'm really getting tired of the gov, we need to have a revolution in this country, a real bloody one.
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: bitRAKE on March 23, 2007, 08:41:27 PM
Many people only concern themselves with what is functional with no desire to understand at a more complex level. Many people seem to believe that focusing on something makes it real.

Unification of all these vantage points is a lot of work - certainly beyond any individual. I am hard pressed to find blatant disinformation - usually it boils down to a skewed or limited perspective. This kind of gives us some insight of where people are at intellectually with respect to our own understanding. Once we've learned something it is always a good idea to question the validitity or applicability - lest we get carried away.

I've worked for the US government and it is real crap; but the people I worked with/for were not aware. Those that knew something was wrong had no idea how to fix it. So many abstraction layers have been put into place that there seems to be no bottom up solution.

Physics has some similarities - where is the universal simple truth to teach the children? Bohm had it right all along from a philosophical perspective - if science isn't simplified then it becomes it's own barrier to discovery. We've seen the results of this in mathematics for years. Maybe, there is no simple solution - just a constant struggle.

Thanks for reading my babble...
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: mapsrg on October 06, 2007, 08:19:41 AM
On the subject of new computers etc... there was a computer system in the sixties that used light.Like the laser ,its inventor got nowhere...Apparently the tech was lost but new research in this area is being undertaken.
On the math subject a system of maths using vectors was used in 19th century but was hard to use so another system was introduced around the same time as our modern theories of physics were developed.The old system could describe things mathematically that the new one cannot.Things got lost in translation ,the old system was based around Quaternions.It is interesting to note that they were investigating things like time travel with this maths. :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) 
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: Mr.Entropy on October 07, 2007, 06:34:04 AM
Did you see the article about about light travelling faster than light and even reversing?

It's actually very interesting.  Whenever the press reports on one of these light-pulse-comes-out-before-it-goes-in experiments, they quote the scientists reassuring us that this does not violate causality or relativity.  The rest of the article text, however, which gives a description of the experiment for laymen, clearly says otherwise, and this makes the reassurances unconvincing.

What's needed is a layman's explanation of why causality isn't violated.  It goes something like this:

These systems that appear to transmit pulses backward in time only work for pulses that are confined to a very narrow band of frequencies.

When a pulse is confined to a narrow band of frequencies, its envelope has a somewhat predictable shape.  It starts at zero amplitude, builds slowly to full amplitude, maybe oscillates slowly a bit, and then gradually dies down, asyptotically approaching zero again.   The pulses that are best confined to a narrow band have the familiar bell curve shape.

The slowly-changing envelope means that the pulse is necessarily pretty long.  In the experiment, it's not like the whole pulse comes out before they decide to send it in -- the pulse is long, so that would mean sending it back in time by a significant amount!  Instead, the pulse that comes out is shaped just like the pulse that goes in, and the noticible features of that pulse, like the peak, come out before they go in.  But nothing noticable comes out until well after that slow buildup at the start of the pulse starts going through.

As I said above, confining a pulse to a narrow band of frequencies makes its shape predictable.  The narrower the band, the better you can predict the later parts of the pulse by observing the earlier parts, and that's exactly what these systems do.  As the pulse begins to enter such a system, it predicts the shape of the part of the pulse that is going to enter the system soon after, and emits that right away, making it appear as if the pulse has been sent back in time a bit.  If the scientist decided to shape the pulse in such a way that it defied those predictions, then it wouldn't be confined to the narrow band of frequencies, and what came out of the system would no longer resemble what went in.

We can do an exactly analogous thing ourselves.  Lets say that I agree to send you the full text of a shakespearian play every day, by dial-up internet, and you agree to forward it to my mother by e-mail through your broadband connection.  At 5pm, say, I begin my transmission.  A moment later, you begin to receive it: "ENTER Kent, Gloucester, and Edmund".  You say to yourself "Oh, that's King Lear", grab a copy of "King Lear", and e-mail it to my mother.  But I haven't even finished sending it yet... GASP!  MY MOTHER HAS RECEIVED MY COMPLETED TRANSMISSION BEFORE I FINISHED SENDING IT!

You can perform this miracle reliably, every day, at any time, because we have ageed to limit the transmissions to shakespearian plays, in exactly the same way that the scientists above have agreed to limit their transmissions to narrowband pulses.


Mr. Entropy
Title: Re: Doing the Math
Post by: raburgeson on June 01, 2014, 09:45:05 PM
I ask this because I think it may be relevant. Have you seen the video of a toroid arraignment creating a vortex? Inversely does a vortex create a toroidal effect in the matter it passes through/by? Would this reaction to matter cause the spin of the electron? Could the electron now somewhat known as a plasma be a high flux density packet of magnetic field? I asked once a long time ago in here why water is an arraignment of atoms 104.5 degrees. Could this be an effect related to a lifter by interaction between magnetic fields?