Caroline,

Your intuition is 180 degrees out. In this reproducable experiment,
the rotation induced in the second disc is always opposite the rotation
of the first. Why is that?

Neil

"c.h.thompson" wrote:

> Hi Jhan
>
> My intuition says the opposite: one rotating disc will try and make the
> other rotate in the SAME direction!  As you say, we need to suck it and see.
>
> Caroline
>
>                                  ***********************
>
> Jhan Davis' message, 16:2:00:
>
> Claude, Ross, et al -
>         The technology of this is still something we're all thinking about,
> but what I'm getting a good feel for now is that anytime you spin a disk,
> you're just *supposed* to have another disk, as physically equivalent as
> possible to the first, positioned at some distance from it along the axis of
> rotation, spin planes parallel, positioned so that they share the same axis
> of rotation, but are loosely-coupled (not rigid axis) so that they can
> rotate
> separately.  I'm hesitant about saying that they should be spaced 2pi radii
> apart, or 2e radii apart, along the rotation axis, but we should attempt to
> find values that work.  There's bound to be a numeric trick in it.  Now for
> the fun part...
>         I'm sensing that clockwise rotation of one disk "should" induce
> counterclockwise rotation in the other, & vice-versa, when they're properly
> spaced apart.  This is related to the concept of energy flow within the
> Compton Radius vortex.  Also to the connectedness of all things in the
> universe.  Maybe subatomic particles have this characteristic.  In which
> case
> I'd also expect the universe, as a super-particle, to have the same singular
> topological feature.  Let's build the doggone thing and see what happens!
> - Jhan
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To Post a message, send it to:   forcefieldpropulsionphysics@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> WANT FREE MAGAZINES?
> Sample over 500 magazines in 30 categories-- all for FREE at
> FreeShop.com, your source for thousands of free and trial offers!
> http://click.egroups.com/1/1610/2/_/187292/_/950708565/
>
> eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/forcefieldpropulsionphysics
> http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications

I agree with Jahn.

I have an explanation for why the effect happens.

Does anyone else?

Neil

JhanDavis@... wrote:

> Claude, Ross, et al -
>         The technology of this is still something we're all thinking about,
> but what I'm getting a good feel for now is that anytime you spin a disk,
> you're just *supposed* to have another disk, as physically equivalent as
> possible to the first, positioned at some distance from it along the axis of
> rotation, spin planes parallel, positioned so that they share the same axis
> of rotation, but are loosely-coupled (not rigid axis) so that they can rotate
> separately.  I'm hesitant about saying that they should be spaced 2pi radii
> apart, or 2e radii apart, along the rotation axis, but we should attempt to
> find values that work.  There's bound to be a numeric trick in it.  Now for
> the fun part...
>         I'm sensing that clockwise rotation of one disk "should" induce
> counterclockwise rotation in the other, & vice-versa, when they're properly
> spaced apart.  This is related to the concept of energy flow within the
> Compton Radius vortex.  Also to the connectedness of all things in the
> universe.  Maybe subatomic particles have this characteristic.  In which case
> I'd also expect the universe, as a super-particle, to have the same singular
> topological feature.  Let's build the doggone thing and see what happens!
> - Jhan
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To Post a message, send it to:   forcefieldpropulsionphysics@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> You have a voice mail message waiting for you at iHello.com:
> http://click.egroups.com/1/1381/2/_/187292/_/950678812/
>
> eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/forcefieldpropulsionphysics
> http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications

Hi Jhan

My intuition says the opposite: one rotating disc will try and make the
other rotate in the SAME direction!  As you say, we need to suck it and see.

Caroline

                                  ***********************

Jhan Davis' message, 16:2:00:

Claude, Ross, et al -
         The technology of this is still something we're all thinking about,
but what I'm getting a good feel for now is that anytime you spin a disk,
you're just *supposed* to have another disk, as physically equivalent as
possible to the first, positioned at some distance from it along the axis of
rotation, spin planes parallel, positioned so that they share the same axis
of rotation, but are loosely-coupled (not rigid axis) so that they can
rotate
separately.  I'm hesitant about saying that they should be spaced 2pi radii
apart, or 2e radii apart, along the rotation axis, but we should attempt to
find values that work.  There's bound to be a numeric trick in it.  Now for
the fun part...
         I'm sensing that clockwise rotation of one disk "should" induce
counterclockwise rotation in the other, & vice-versa, when they're properly
spaced apart.  This is related to the concept of energy flow within the
Compton Radius vortex.  Also to the connectedness of all things in the
universe.  Maybe subatomic particles have this characteristic.  In which
case
I'd also expect the universe, as a super-particle, to have the same singular
topological feature.  Let's build the doggone thing and see what happens!
- Jhan

Hi All

Re Gary Bekkum's introduction to Andrei Kirilyuk (see e.g
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9906077
)

I've had some correspondence with Andrei and he is a man with a vision,
working in very difficult conditions in the Ukraine.  He might well have
similar ideas to Ross', but extracting them from his verbiage is not always
easy.  He says he's made an effort in the latest editions of his papers to
make them more readable!  Do have a look.

Cheers
Caroline

No news???

Claude

Claude, Ross, et al -
         The technology of this is still something we're all thinking about,
but what I'm getting a good feel for now is that anytime you spin a disk,
you're just *supposed* to have another disk, as physically equivalent as
possible to the first, positioned at some distance from it along the axis of
rotation, spin planes parallel, positioned so that they share the same axis
of rotation, but are loosely-coupled (not rigid axis) so that they can rotate
separately.  I'm hesitant about saying that they should be spaced 2pi radii
apart, or 2e radii apart, along the rotation axis, but we should attempt to
find values that work.  There's bound to be a numeric trick in it.  Now for
the fun part...
         I'm sensing that clockwise rotation of one disk "should" induce
counterclockwise rotation in the other, & vice-versa, when they're properly
spaced apart.  This is related to the concept of energy flow within the
Compton Radius vortex.  Also to the connectedness of all things in the
universe.  Maybe subatomic particles have this characteristic.  In which case
I'd also expect the universe, as a super-particle, to have the same singular
topological feature.  Let's build the doggone thing and see what happens!
- Jhan

At 03:25 AM 2/15/00 +0900, you wrote:
>Dear Ross,
>
>>>>I would say that Spacetime is nearly crystalline while Ross says it is a
>>>>fluid!
>>>
>>>You are both right!  The aether itself is fluid, and does not necessarily
>>>have any wave centres.  What wave centres it does have can move freely.
But
>>>groups of them become crystalline.
>>
>>Correct.  Aether is a fluid, spacetime is a structure of standing wave
>>energy IN that fluid.
>
>Yes but what I mean is that your Spacetime(that is the standing waves in
>the fluid called aether)seems rigid like a crystal except in places where
>there is mass to aether conversion.In this case,if I understand,the aether
>flows but I,still,do not visualise the process entirely.When the aether
>flows within the standing wave structure of Spacetime how does it
>integrate,geometrically,within Spacetime?

The aether is no where a crystal, and neither is spacetime.  It is all
dynamic and stretchable to a degree, always distorting slightly.  The
motion of an electron through  a region distorts spacetime as it passes
through.  Even a diamond crystal really isn't rigid if you get down to the
dynamic motions of the carbon nuclei, they are dancing around all the time.
  (well, except at absolute zero temp but forget about that since even
absolute zero is blazing hot as far as spacetime is concerned.

>

>>Crystalline is just a first cut concept thought, and it would be better to
>>think of the "crystallinity" as being more like a structure of lines on a
>>sheet of rubber that can stretch and deform in plastic manner, yet which
>>maintains a relation between all of the adjacent cells of the spacetime
>>standing wave structure.
>
>Ok.So how does the flow of aether from stars distort the surrounding
>"reticule" of Spacetime? I mean how does the stretching Spacetime,suffused
>with a flow of aether, look like?

Literally, new spacetime nodes (or cubicals as Claude calls them) are
flowing out of the star with the flow of aether.  This is how the universe
is expanding.

Look, the aether emission is really nothing more than the continuation of
the big bang vaporization of a huge black hole aether condensate core that
breached confinement, blew up and boiled violently.  The last remaining
droplets of aether condensate got trapped in spherical standing wave focal
points, ie, the acoustic pressure anti nodes.  As a result, they couldn't
vaporize, and they all became synchronized and locked together via the
communciation of wave energy in coherent fashion (via spacetime!!!!!!!!!!)
      Today, the only way for the boiling process to continue is via
changing the nuclear configurations via fusion, and so the flow of aether
is just the continuation of that boiling process that started violently 13
billion years ago.

The boiling leads both to flow of aether and to flow of spacetime, out of
stars like our sun, and hence, to the expansion of the universe.

When you light a campfire, you are at the same time, pushing the universe
away, and emitting aether and spacetime nodes.  You are emitting so little
that you don't notice any inertial push away from the campfire.  But when
the sun does it with a big burst, we call it a coronal mass ejection and
millions of tons of matter are blasted inertially across the solar system
due to the emission of a burst of aether and hence, spacetime nodes.



>
>>Not just matter anti matter reactions.  ALL exothermic reactions are aether
>>emissive.
>>Conversely, all endothermic reactions are endothermic.<---
>
>???

Ooops.  All endothermic reactions are aether absorptive.

  For exothermy, aether flows out.  For endothermy, aether flows in.

Check out a hurricane.  Vaporization near the surface is endothermic, so
spacetime is slightly curved such that air is blown inward.  Then, it rams
into itself and rises, condenses and thus releases aether and is thrust
outward.  The spacetime curvature is really really tiny, but not zero.  The
fact that it is not zero is what tips the scales to make a hurricane stable
and to even exist.

The more important parameter though, is the synchronization of the earths
rotation with the solar aether waves which gently rock the earth at a
variety of frequencies.  The 5 minute period is the strongest, but there
are other periods of importance.

Venus has the most pronounced synchronization.  The planet essentially
isn't rotating, but the air / cloud patterns precess around the planet
every 4 days, in cadence with the solar oscillation period of that
frequency.  Saturns ring gaps will be found to be harmonics of the solar
oscillations, and as well, many are due to rocks or moons which can sweep
an area clean.  Scientists know about the rocks and moon effect, but they
don't know about the solar variation in solar gravitational potential.
That effect has yet to be discovered, but I am hoping that LIGO will have
sufficient sensitivity to do so and to identify the solar acoustic
fingerprint (see SOI or GONG research).


>
>>>Yes, there could be variations in intrinsic aether density ...
>>
>>If you work with waves, you tacitly have already accepted that this is so,
>>whether or not you recognize it.
>>
>>
>>Ross Tessien
>
>Cheers,
>
>Claude

Subject: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Re: Inertia and extracting
anaccelerationforce from a rotating disc


Thanks Terry and Hurrah for the revolution, it's doing well.

Adrian


> Claude,
>
> Thought that you might find this interesting. I relates closely to
> several of you recent post.
>
> Terry
>
> Excerpt from web page found at:
>
> http://www.padrak.com/ine/INE22.html
>
> Paul Baumann: The Methernitha Free-Energy Machine

Subject: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Re: Thank you Bernie


Hohum, Caroline, which was exactly what I did to you and I was told I'm
"rude"  Adrian


> Graham:
> I happen to think that Vesselin was treated unfairly, and I think that Dr
> Haisch is making a mistake in hiring scientific conservatives, (No
original
> stuff ever came from such people.
>
> CHT:
> It's no use kicking against the pricks, Graham!  "Intellectuals", working
> mainly with pure thought and not doing real expts in the lab, have no
choice
> but to surround themselves with yes men, otherwise they get distracted
from
> their vision.  So the question is "Are pure intellectuals a waste of
time"?
>
> No, I must have got this a bit wrong, as I don't think I myself am a waste
> of time!  So what do I mean?  People who have committed themselves to a
> detailed model that extrapolates a long way from what we can actually
> observe HAVE to set up their own schools, only devotees admitted, so as to
> maintain the "purity of their vision".
>
> This gets us back to that quote from Conan Doyle: "It is a capital mistake
> to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to
> suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."
>
> Deduction: if you find yourself in this position, unable to take notice of
> alternative theories, you may be the one and only person to find the true
> path, or you may be just living a fantasy.  Most likely you just have the
> beginnings of a good idea and have ruined it by "fossilising" it in
> mathematical form too early!
>
> Cheers
> Caroline
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To Post a message, send it to:   forcefieldpropulsionphysics@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> What's the coolest new Web resource? It's the AskMe Page, which allows you
> to have your own Q&A platform, interact with peers and earn rewards! It's
> simple, fun & FREE! Get it now! Click here:
> http://click.egroups.com/1/1459/2/_/187292/_/950660198/
>
>
> eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/forcefieldpropulsionphysics
> http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
>
>
>
>
>

Thanks, I agree and dislike the stuff anyhow but my name is elected, not my
choice either. I think Cyrano and Dan do this.

Adrain


> FROM GRAHAM ENNIS.
> (fOUNDER AND MODERATOR OF THIS DAMN LIST!.)
>
> Look Guys, this is a serious list for the discussion of serious stuff.

>Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 22:21:59 -0600
>From: "Gary S. Bekkum" <gbekkum@...>
>Organization: SCI vs PSI
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; U)
>X-Accept-Language: en,zh,zh-CN,zh-TW
>To: cyrano@...
>Subject: Re: Spacetime,as seen by Ross Tessien
>
>You might be interested to know that a theory very much like the one you
>describe has been created by Dr. Kirilyuk in the Ukraine.
>
>Gary
>
>
>http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9906077
>
>
>General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology,
>abstract
>gr-qc/9906077
>
>From: Kiril@... (Andrei Kirilyuk)
>Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 15:50:29 GMT   (133kb)
>
>Universal gravitation as a complex-dynamical process,
>renormalised Planckian units, and the spectrum of elementary
>particles
>
>Authors: Andrei P. Kirilyuk
>Comments: 71 pages; 15 pages of the necessary minimum (1-8,48-56);
>PostScript 3.0; a part of the author's
>book "Universal Concept of Complexity by the Dynamic Redundance
>Paradigm: Causal Randomness,
>Complete Wave Mechanics, and the Ultimate Unification of Knowledge"
>(Kiev, Naukova Dumka, 1997; 550 p.,
>in English), see physics/9806002
>
>     The new, complex-dynamical mechanism of the universal gravitation
>naturally incorporating
>     dynamical quantization, wave-particle duality, and relativity of
>physically emerging space and time
>     (quant-ph/9902015,16) provides the realistic meaning and
>fundamentally substantiated modification
>     of the Planckian units of mass, length, and time approaching them
>closely to the extreme values
>     observed for already discovered elementary particles. This result
>suggests the important change of
>     research strategy in high-energy/particle physics, displacing it
>towards the already attained energy
>     scales and permitting one to exclude the existence of elementary
>objects in the inexplicably large
>     interval of parameters separating the known, practically more than
>sufficient set of elementary
>     species and the conventional, mechanistically exaggerated values of
>the Planckian units. This
>     conclusion is supported by the causally complete (physically and
>mathematically consistent) picture
>     of the fundamental levels of reality derived, without artificial
>introduction of any structure or 'principle',
>     from the unreduced analysis of the (generic) interaction process
>between two primal, physically real,
>     but a priori structureless entities, the electromagnetic and
>gravitational protofields. The naturally
>     emerging phenomenon of universal dynamic redundance
>(multivaluedness) of interaction process
>     gives rise to the intrinsically unified hierarchy of unreduced
>dynamic complexity of the world, starting
>     from the lowest levels of elementary objects, and explains the
>irreducible limitations of the basically
>     single-valued approach of the canonical science leading to the
>well-known 'mysteries', separations,
>     and loss of certainty.
>
>Paper: PostScript only
>
>(N.B.: delivery types and potential problems)
>
>refers to , cited by
>
>
>Links to: arXiv, gr-qc, /find, /abs (-/+), /9906, ?
>
>
>
>
>www-admin@...
>
>

>X-Sender: tessien@...
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1
>Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 19:06:21 -0800
>To: cyrano@...
>From: Ross Tessien <tessien@...>
>Subject: Re: Ross:Spacetime,as seen by Ross Tessien
>
>At 03:28 AM 2/15/00 +0900, you wrote:
>>Dear Ross,
>>
>>Caroline asks the questions below:
>>
>>>1.Spacetime oscillates, like a metronome, with myriad of waves centres.
>>>------ Seems likely.  I imagine the wave centres in open space to be
>>>perpetually moving, like the molecules of a liquid?
>>
>>If I understand Ross the wave centres leading to the standing wave
>>structure of Spacetime are not moving but,maybe,I did not understand!
>>Ross:what about this?
>
>The wave centers of spacetime do move around.  They sort of dance around.
>Think of painting a gridwork on a balloon surface, and then blow it up, let
>air out, hit it, etc.  The grid work stretches, contracts, distorts, but
>the gridwork remains coherent.  That is spacetime.  It can be distorted,
>but it remains coherent.
>
>>
>>>4.This drives the resonances we call "particles" which are, fact,
oscillons.
>>>------- Or are they more like crystals, or Bose-Einstein condensates?
In an
>>>oscillon, there is lots of random motion and, as I understand it, the whole
>>>thing has only a statistical kind of existence.  Also it is directly
>>>dependent on reflections from smooth walls - it is a cavity effect.  I
don't
>>>know all the facts about the things, but this is what I guess.  I imagine a
>>>"particle" to depend more on direct forces between the group of wave
centres
>>>involved.  To form it, the aether undergoes a change of state.
>>>
>>>5.The oscillations of Spacetime give rise to "organised cubicles" made of
>>>wavelets.
>>>------ These sound more like my (current) idea of "particles".
>>>
>>>6.There are four different kinds of these "cubicles".
>>>------ Which are?
>>>
>>>7.They maintain phase coherence between different resonances.
>>>------ The wave centres within my "particles" would have phase coherence
...
>>>
>>>Tell us more about these "cubicles"!  The whole scheme sounds "resonant"
>>>with my own ideas, but mine are still very much in the air.  If open space
>>>is full of these wave centres, how come it offers so little resistance to
>>>motion?  How do particles move?  Do they push the fluid aside, or do they -
>>>as Lorentz thought - absorb it at the front and release it at the rear?
  Or
>>>some of each?
>>>
>>>Caroline
>>
>>Cl.
>
>
>Cubicals is the simplistic model I use to introduce the concepts.  Just
>black and white cubes tiling all of the ocean of aether.  That is easy to
>grasp, but not truly correct.
>
>Spacetime actually must have four important phase angles, not just two.
>
>The "colors" or phase angles are "charge" .   So you have positive,
>negative, neutral plus and neutral minus at phase angles of 0, 180, 90, and
>270 respectively.
>
>So the tiling is a quadrature dynamic tiling and very difficult to envisage
>how it works.  You cannot simply tile it in stationary form, it is a
>dynamic moving structure that changes shape with time as you progress
>through the phase angles from 0 to 90 180 270 and back to 0 again (360).
>
>Each electron resonance is coupled to the timing of 180 degrees.  Each
>positron is coupled to 0 degrees, and neutral resonances are coupled either
>to 90 or to 270 degrees.
>
>If you think in terms of "particles", you will never understand motion
>because you think of a substance moving through the ocean of aether, where
>the aether is a different thing.  You must think in terms of waves that are
>spherically concentric, for the most part, and then distort their
>reflections that lead to the center of the spherical resonance precessing
>in some direction.  So the center of the resonance is moving as the waves
>successively converge in new locations that move along a line in the
>direction of the "particle" motion.  But the aether itself really isn't
>moving any more than the water in the ocean is moving as waves lap past the
>kelp.  It is sloshing back and forth as the solitons move by, but there is
>no net flow of aether for the most part.  (The photon or electron or other
>solitons do carry with them a net amount of aether associated with their
>density gradient, so there is a net flux of aether through the region the
>resonance moves through).
>
>rt
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Dear Terry,

Thanks for the infos.I will have a look.By the way Switzerland is my home!!!

All the best,

Claude

Claude,

Thought that you might find this interesting. I relates closely to
several of you recent post.

Terry

Excerpt from web page found at:

http://www.padrak.com/ine/INE22.html

Paul Baumann: The Methernitha Free-Energy Machine

Also known as the "Swiss M-L Converter" or the "Thesta-Distatica." The
spiritual and communal group of Methernitha is located
in Switzerland, and a videotape may be available on loan from the Space
Energy Association that summarizes their community and
shows the device in operation. An English transcription of that video is
also available (Methernitha, 1989). The device contains two
counter-rotating disks (about two feet in diameter) that are set in
motion by hand. They continue to spin thereafter, and the
machine generates usable power that lights or powers small tools. The
device appears to operate continuously and generates a
continuous 3 to 4 kiloWatts power at about 220 Volts and about 10 Amps
DC. From an analysis of Wimshurst electrostatic
generators, this would require a power increase factor, or over-unity
factor of about 20. Groups of investigative scientists from
Europe and Japan have been allowed to examine the device in the 1980's,
and have all verified these claims without understanding
the machines principles of operation (Nieper 1984).

Paul Baumann is the inventor of the Thesta-Distatica, and is today the
spiritual head of the Christian Community Methernitha in
the village Linden, near Bern, Switzerland. He claims to have received
the design and operating principles of the device while in
deep meditation. Two machines have been described by a member of their
community, Stefan Marinov: one machine has a disk
diameter of 20 cm and delivers some 200 Watts of power, and another has
a disk diameter of 2 meters that continuously gives 30
kiloWatts of electrical power.

Graham:
I happen to think that Vesselin was treated unfairly, and I think that Dr
Haisch is making a mistake in hiring scientific conservatives, (No original
stuff ever came from such people.

CHT:
It's no use kicking against the pricks, Graham!  "Intellectuals", working
mainly with pure thought and not doing real expts in the lab, have no choice
but to surround themselves with yes men, otherwise they get distracted from
their vision.  So the question is "Are pure intellectuals a waste of time"?

No, I must have got this a bit wrong, as I don't think I myself am a waste
of time!  So what do I mean?  People who have committed themselves to a
detailed model that extrapolates a long way from what we can actually
observe HAVE to set up their own schools, only devotees admitted, so as to
maintain the "purity of their vision".

This gets us back to that quote from Conan Doyle: "It is a capital mistake
to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to
suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."

Deduction: if you find yourself in this position, unable to take notice of
alternative theories, you may be the one and only person to find the true
path, or you may be just living a fantasy.  Most likely you just have the
beginnings of a good idea and have ruined it by "fossilising" it in
mathematical form too early!

Cheers
Caroline

Greetings,
Jim Cox is holding his 2nd Antigravity Conference in Nevada June 23-25

Web site http://www.padrak.com/agn

Best,
Ron Kita

Dear Graham,

>No Claude,
>I am not!!!!.

No joke? Strange indeed,then.

>But this does happen.Also, I like your strange vision of the structure of
>the Aether being changed. Remember the man who discovered the structure of
>the Benzine molecule

Yes,Kékulé.

after he dreamt of entertwined snakes.Sometimes the
>mind gives up from its inner depths something that is not yet mature enough
>to come to the surface. Like something stirring in the deep Ocean.

Yes but it is not sometimes,it is all the time,in fact!!! You can learn to
detect and see these images.Aside from verbal language I have got these
images all the time,even when I speak to a person.For example,I will see
images which express my non-verbal perception of the person in front of
me.Our brain is continuously producing ever transforming images but
education kills this innate ability at a young age.

As for me I went the first time to a school very late:7 years old! Until
that time I did not know reading or writing,which might explain the
persistance of this traditionnal mode of thinking.

By the way,concerning the apparition of such symbolic images,which express
the ongoing auto-organisation of memory,you can see on
:http://dog.net.uk/claude(From Dreams to Consciousness,1976-1998).

I learned from experiences that these images often express partial
solutions to a problem our memory is trying to auto-organise. These images
can appear years before the problem is solved and they evolve with time
until,one day,very often just after waking up from a dream,you get an image
which explains you in totality the solution of the problem you were
thinking of!

I called these final images "solution images".

You might not believe it,but I got such a solution image,maybe 10 years
ago,on how to build a machine to visualise dreams on a screen!

Another one is how to build a conscious machine...

However,there is no funds or interest for these concepts as these ideas
came much too early to get recognised!

All the best,

Claude



  The
>Kraken wakes!.
>
>Graham.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <cyrano@...>
>To: <forcefieldpropulsionphysics@egroups.com>
>Sent: 14 February 2000 14:09
>Subject: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Re: An image..and another one
>
>
>> Dear Graham,
>>
>> >Very strange Claude!!!
>> >You have described  something out of my half-written up patent
>> >application!!!!. Morphogenesis in action!!!
>>
>> Are you joking?? I do not believe in telepathy,by the way!
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Claude
>>
>> PS:Here is another image I got last year about Saucers'interactions with
>> the vacuum for high "speeds".I have not found the meaning,if any,of this
>> image but,in it,a Saucer was changing the properties of the vacuum.
>>
>> This vacuum looked like something composed of bonds akin to chemical
>bonds!!!
>>
>> What would happen is that these "bonds" would be induced to change
>> configuration,in a cyclical manner,so changing,locally,the properties of
>> the vacuum.
>>
>> Then the saucer would just follow a piece of this
>> modified,self-moving,"bubble"of vacuum,bringing it from a place to
>another.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To Post a message, send it to:   forcefieldpropulsionphysics@eGroups.com
>> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
>forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Save cash today!
>> http://click.egroups.com/1/1414/2/_/187292/_/950582666/
>>
>> eGroups.com Home:
>http://www.egroups.com/group/forcefieldpropulsionphysics/
>> http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
>>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>To Post a message, send it to:   forcefieldpropulsionphysics@eGroups.com
>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Save on products you choose!
>http://click.egroups.com/1/1416/2/_/187292/_/950650524/
>
>
>eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/forcefieldpropulsionphysics
>http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
>
>
>
>
>
>

No Claude,
I am not!!!!.
But this does happen.Also, I like your strange vision of the structure of
the Aether being changed. Remember the man who discovered the structure of
the Benzine molecule after he dreamt of entertwined snakes.Sometimes the
mind gives up from its inner depths something that is not yet mature enough
to come to the surface. Like something stirring in the deep Ocean. The
Kraken wakes!.

Graham.

----- Original Message -----
From: <cyrano@...>
To: <forcefieldpropulsionphysics@egroups.com>
Sent: 14 February 2000 14:09
Subject: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Re: An image..and another one


> Dear Graham,
>
> >Very strange Claude!!!
> >You have described  something out of my half-written up patent
> >application!!!!. Morphogenesis in action!!!
>
> Are you joking?? I do not believe in telepathy,by the way!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Claude
>
> PS:Here is another image I got last year about Saucers'interactions with
> the vacuum for high "speeds".I have not found the meaning,if any,of this
> image but,in it,a Saucer was changing the properties of the vacuum.
>
> This vacuum looked like something composed of bonds akin to chemical
bonds!!!
>
> What would happen is that these "bonds" would be induced to change
> configuration,in a cyclical manner,so changing,locally,the properties of
> the vacuum.
>
> Then the saucer would just follow a piece of this
> modified,self-moving,"bubble"of vacuum,bringing it from a place to
another.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To Post a message, send it to:   forcefieldpropulsionphysics@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Save cash today!
> http://click.egroups.com/1/1414/2/_/187292/_/950582666/
>
> eGroups.com Home:
http://www.egroups.com/group/forcefieldpropulsionphysics/
> http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
>

FROM GRAHAM ENNIS:
Dear Fellow Humans, We will never get off this little ball of rock if We
start squabbling like this amongst ourselves.

There is a MISSION in what we are doing, that is bigger than anyone of Us.
We should stop all this nasty Primate behavior, and try and work it out.

I happen to think that Vesselin was treated unfairly, and I think that Dr
Haisch is making a mistake in hiring scientific conservatives, (No original
stuff ever came from such people.It is just a waste of money.The Brahmin
caste system of academic science will just belittle the Institutes efforts
anyway, no matter how "Respectable" it trys to be. ). At the moment, We are
in a critical position, just like that of the early Nuclear Scientists, in
the twenties. We have great visions, and little money. There is also much
danger, because of where this work will lead. In these circumstances, mutual
solidarity and  support are important, and also mutual co-operation as well.

If We start splitting into factions at this early stage, the whole project
will be retarded, perhaps for a decade. It is clear that relations have
broken down for  some of Us, and cannot be repaired. If any of us are able
to help Vesselin, please do so, but  please bear in mind the above simple
thoughts.

Graham.

----- Original Message -----
From: Adrian <afme@...>
To: <forcefieldpropulsionphysics@egroups.com>
Cc: Administrador del Nodo <Postmaster@...>
Sent: 15 February 2000 03:15
Subject: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Re: Thank you Bernie


> Does it not all make one so proud to be a member of the human race.
>
> Adrian,
>
> snip.
>
>
>
>
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To Post a message, send it to:   forcefieldpropulsionphysics@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Save cash today!
> http://click.egroups.com/1/1414/2/_/187292/_/950586147/
>
> -- 20 megs of disk space in your group's Document Vault
> -- http://www.egroups.com/docvault/forcefieldpropulsionphysics/?m=1
>

FROM GRAHAM ENNIS.
(fOUNDER AND MODERATOR OF THIS DAMN LIST!.)

Look Guys, this is a serious list for the discussion of serious stuff.
It is about force-field propulsion physics. It is not  about paranoia, the
CIA, squabbles amongst American intellectuals, etc etc etc.
Keep this stuff off the list, or I will have to start filtering everything
again. This stuff is fascinating to the participants, but not to everyone
else, and just clogs up bandwidth. Go start a quantum consciousness list if
you want, but please, keep to propulsion on this list.
Thanks.
Graham.

----- Original Message -----
From: Jack (by way of cyrano@...) <sarfatti@...>
To: Administrador del Nodo <Postmaster@...>; Adrian Francis van
der Meijden <afme@...>
Cc: <forcefieldpropulsionphysics@egroups.com>
Sent: 14 February 2000 18:38
Subject: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Re: Laugh or cry?


>
>
> Dan Smith wrote:
>
> > Paul,
> >
> > Thank you for this attempt at moderation.
> >
> > There is a division here between a minority of us who believe that there
are
> > serious issues at stake here that urgently need resolution, and most of
the
> > rest who find Jack's post-modern, 'merry prankster,' theatrical physics
> > mildly amusing.
> >
> > Yes, I would be smiling too, if I weren't crying.
>
> [Jack]
>
> That's your nature. You know I am being Merry, I am a Prankster, and it's
all
> real! SPECTRA is real. The whole damn thing is real. Mark my words. You
ain't
> seen noth'in yet.
>
> > [Dan]
> >
> > Yes, the whole quantum conundrum is the number one embarrassment of the
> > Scientific Establishment.  It positively threatens, now more than ever
to
> > bring down the entire system of modern Materialism.  This is
particularly
> > true now with the rising tide of the quantum consciousness movement.
>
> [Jack]
>
> Which I basically created, certainly focussed, with Werner Erhard's money
> at the
> Month Long at Esalen in 1975. Stephen Schwartz says I was merely a pawn in
the
> hands of Harry Margolin the KGB lawyer who did the money flow for est. Now
I
> don't know if I buy that from Schwartz.
>
> > [Dan]
> >
> > Jack was a mover and shaker in the earliest days of that movement,
> > influencing many impressionable minds, mine included.
>
> [Jack]
>
> Well, that shows what an idiot you were then and are now, because I had
> absolutely no idea what I was doing back then. I was sleep walking through
it
> like Parisfal! I was young 33 more interested in fucking beautiful women
and
> there were plenty around willing and I was able. I was drafted into this
whole
> thing. Either by SPECTRA or by the CIA, the Brits from my UKAEA days, or
by
> the
> KGB or who knows by whom? However, now I know exactly what I am doing. I
have
> been under fire and all of this betrayal and insanity is making me
stronger
> and
> more resolved to get the job done. To Make It So.
>
> In 1975 I had no idea what quantum theory really meant. No one did of
> course. I
> had no clear idea of what consciousness was either. No one did back then
of
> course and no one does now except for me an a small number of the others.
>
> Hey Dan, you say your mind was impressionable? What about my mind did you
ever
> think of that? Ask Paul Green now a professor of  mathematics at
University of
> Maryland who knew me at Cornell. Ask him to tell you the story of the
"$50,000
> bicycle." Me and Fred Wolf were like Dan Akroyd and Bill Murray in Ghost
> Busters
> back then.
>
> [Dan]
>
> >  Jack, with his
> > intellectual and political skills, would have been one of a handful of
> > tempting targets.
>
> [Jack]
>
> Target for what? I don't like that word "target". Speaking of "targets".
> Stephen
> Schwartz, not BIG BANG but BIG MOUTH, tells all the intelligence agencies
> on the
> internet including the Russian High Command for the Chechnya Campaign that
he,
> BIG HERO is fighting against the Russians as a "Bandit Chief ... somewhere
> inside Chechnya" on a "SAT phone"! How long do you think it will take the
> Russian Military to pinpoint the location of that SAT phone signal and to
take
> it out? Not long. However, as usual Schwartz is lying and fantasizing and
is
> almost certainly boozing it up with grappa in some seedy bar in Sarajevo
in
> the
> Bosnian version of Under The Volcano.
>
> [Dan]
>
> >  Ira was another, but he was too serious for this most
> > devious plan.
>
> [Jack]
>
> So, who Mr. Know It All, framed Ira Einhorn for the murder of Holly
Maddux, or
> do you think he did it?
>
> > [Dan]
> >
> > Then comes the twist, it is Jack's second wakeup call.  Spectra sends
Jack
> > to Brazil, where Bohm's boys are putting together an international Swat
the
> > Quantum team.  Jack comes back, and is soon ensconced as its leading
light.
> > Now he is threatening to derail the movement that he helped to start.
One
> > might suppose that Jack was a Spectra Sleeper from the beginning.
>
> [Jack]
>
> That's pretty good for the TV Series. It's not the way it happened
however.
> Remember I was a Research Fellow at Birkbeck College with David Bohm in
> 1971 and
> I did not go to Brazil with Fred Wolf until 1985. It was paid for by IBM
> Brasil,
> and SPECTRA was RCA. I think I had already been contacted overtly by
"retired"
> CIA station chief Harold Chipman however. I have to ask the usual
suspects, my
> North Beach Irregulars, the Triestniks, what they remember.
>
> > [Dan]
> >
> > Across the Bay is Henry Stapp the quietly serious, self-effacing
> > intellectual guru of the Quantum Mind.  Jack is doing everything he can
to
> > distract public attention from what is serious and divert it into his
> > version of quantum pranksterism.
>
> [Jack]
>
> Dan, you are too stupid to know when you are being stupid. I am not that
> stupid.
> I know when I am stupid. It's a big difference. Let Stapp compute t(C)
> otherwise
> he has nothing but a lot of very obscure Bohrian excess metaphysical
> baggage. I
> agree Henry is a nice serious man who is impeccably honest and true to his
> confused and wrong inconsistent ideas which are not leading to anything as
> important and practical as my two formulae.
>
> > [Dan]
> >
> > The advent of the Quantum indeterminism in the last century of the
Second
> > Millennium, signaled the overthow of the Mechanistic paradigm.  It has
been
> > the single greatest factor of our still incipient spiritual liberation
from
> > that pernicious world view.
> >
> > Yes, to say that I am biased against determism, is like saying that I am
> > biased against the idea that my mother is a whore.  That should be an
> > understatement for any *self-respecting* human.
>
> [Jack]
>
> That's a very revealing anger Dan. People used to walk up to me asking me
"Are
> you a psychiatrist?"
>
>
> [Dan]
>
> >
> > Now, in waltzes Jack at the eleventh hour of our spiritual liberation,
and
> > wants to take it all back.  He wants to dissect our souls and put them
on
> > chips to populate the universe like a plague of silicon Spectra locusts
with
> > mechanical voices.  Yes, this is a joke, but a very distracting, and
> > possibly disruptive joke.
>
> [Jack]
>
> No, do not confuse my joking manner with the facts. The facts are much to
> serious not to joke about. Dan Smith, now hear this, you too Ron Pandolfi,
> let's
> get this real straight. I AM NOT JOKING ABOUT THE REALITY OF SPECTRA. The
> existence of that "metallic voice" claiming to be a computer, probably
> conscious, on board some kind of flying saucer is a real fact experienced
by
> several high ranking people in the intelligence and US government weapons
> laboratories if James Schnabel is telling the truth. Colonel John
Alexander
> says
> he is telling the truth. Plus we have The Star Gate Conspiracy book of
> Picknett
> and Prince with more corroboration. So the phenomenon is real. It's no
joke.
> What is its meaning. Well I have a theory about its real meaning. It is a
> testable theory.
>
> By the way Dan, have you read John Lilly about the "solid state entities"?
> If my
> theory is correct we are in a loop in time and I have already set off a
> chain of
> events which will lead to the construction of conscious computers of the
> SPECTRA
> class as part of our Space Navy.
>
> > [Dan]
> >
> > Paul, if you do not get Jack's Joke on the World, I do have to wonder.
Even
> > Jack thinks it's a riot, as long as the Spectra money keeps flowing.  It
> > will be a big hit on Jerry Springer.
> >
> > "All aboard!," you 'merry pranksters.'
> >
> > Dan
>
> [Jack]
>
> Dan, as usual your sense of humor is challenged. You do not get the joke.
Or,
> rather, the joke is on you. You miss the Bohm point.
>
> --
> "But the real glory of science is that we can find a way of thinking such
that
> the law is evident. ... For a successful technology, reality must take
> precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." Feynman
> "I want to know God's thoughts ... the rest are details." Einstein
> The Millennium Peak proves that quantum theory is dead and post-quantum
theory
> is alive.
> http://www.well.com/user/sarfatti/
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To Post a message, send it to:   forcefieldpropulsionphysics@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> eGroups eLerts!
> It's easy. It's fun. Best of all, it's free.
> http://click.egroups.com/1/1231/2/_/187292/_/950598534/
>
>
> eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/forcefieldpropulsionphysics
> http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
>
>
>

Dear Graham

GE:
A little thought. I really am uncertain of my understanding of PHI, but had
an insight today, (1 am in morning) .

CHT:
A brave attempt, but already you have diverged from my idea, and as that is
not fixed yours might be a good direction to go, but first let's try and get
my original picture clearer:

I see the aether as a plenum, but I'm not trying to model that.  I'm just
accepting that it is effectively a continuous, smooth, medium, with
properties that it is the task of physics to try and find out.

I'm postulating that at every point in space the aether has a definite value
of a parameter "phi".  Ross seems to have persuaded me that it also has an
intrinsic density: phi-waves, in order to propagate, need to be accompanied
by pressure waves.

Now I'm postulating that the difference between condensed matter and open
space is the presence in the former of aether wave-centres.  Tight-packed
groups form nucleons (I'm not convinced of the existence of quarks).
Electrons are looser groups.  In fact, the description of electrons in a
metal as forming a gas is about right, except that one conventional electron
is a group of many wave centres. Perhaps electrons can sometimes consist of
groups of wave-centres in the form of a "condensed gas", i.e. a drop of
liquid.

An important feature of the model, from my point of view, was that I had
been thinking of electrons as purely waves, and could not imagine how they
managed to produce "radiation".  But if they are clouds (or droplets) of
little wave centres, each emitting phi-waves, the combination of many
phi-waves can be "radiation".

So my wave-centres are not close-packed - except maybe within nucleons.  In
open space phi-waves propagate freely, patterns of the mean intensity of
their oscillations being "electromagnetic waves".  In open space there is no
rotation - or at most very gentle rotation when aether density variations
and/or large-scale phi-wave-intensity variations cause "refraction".
Apparently circularly polarised waves - light or magnetism - are just
circular patterns that propagate linearly, as described in my Nature of
Light essay.

I've just been searching for the relevant passage - that essay does seem a
bit waffly!

What I found was:

"One often sees pretty pictures of light propagating.  Circularly polarised
light is supposed to move with the electric field rotating to form a spiral.
In a sense it does, but remember, in open space there is no "electric field"
as such.  This only materialises when light interacts with solid bodies.  In
open space, there is just a pattern of compression and rarefaction of the
underlying tiny phi-waves.  One can think of the compressed regions as being
like the material of a screw, or perhaps better, of a spring.  But instead
of thinking of the spring as twisting as it moves longitudinally, you need
to visualise it simply moving rigidly along.  No twisting.  If you are at
rest in its path, standing, say, at a point along its axis, you will
perceive it rotating around you, but this will be slightly illusory.  Each
"bit" of the spiral is just a little region of compressed phi-waves, and it
is travelling in a straight line!"

That's about it, except that I now think that electromagnetic waves are
formed from patterns in the average phi-wave intensity - which will vary if
the aether is compressed but can also vary if the density of emitting
wave-centres varies.

GE:
Consider this. If the disturbances in the Aether plenum are  there, as
little wave/spherical disturbances, then they have radius.

CHT:
If you want to describe the next level down from phi-waves and wave-centres,
you may well need little spheres of definite radius, but I am not trying to
model this level.  I'm assuming any particle-like structures are almost
infinitely small.

GE:
The radius of this wave is very small. < than Planck radius.
Wormhole size, in fact.

CHT:
What's a wormhole supposed to be?

GE:
At that scale, all normal phenomena break down.
There is no time within the radius of the "Thingy"

CHT: I know time will not be important, but that is not to say it does not
exist!

GE:
Only outside the soliton boundry is there normal
phenomena. The packing density of these thingy's is dependent on the radius,
which is dependent on the energy of the thingy. Thus the various vacuum
states, from superfluid to crystalline.

CHT:
Perhaps you ARE talking about my wave-centres, only we are a long way from
understanding the aether still!  Does the aether itself have different
states, of do different arrangements of wave-centres correspond to different
states?

GE:
Also, various charge states?

CHT:
I think we'll find we don't need "charge" as such.  We just have various
effective forces, all of which are due to wave-centres doing what they think
best, trying to get comfortable in a constantly changing world!

GE:
Are we
looking at the ultimate object here, the thing from which fundemental
phenomena such as quarks and gluons are made?

CHT:
Yes, these thingies are what all the "elementary particles" are made of, but
they are not really the ultimate stuff of raw aether.  They are just special
places where the aether switches to a stationary oscillating state.

GE:
Are charge states exchanged between thingies?

CHT:
I don't know.  I sketched yesterday an idea in which phi oscillated between
0 and some positive value, so that all wave-centres were more alike than if
some were in the '+' state while others were '-'.  While in the "zero"
state, I've just realised, they are busy absorbing random phi-waves, somehow
integrating all the phi so as to re-inforce the '+' state when it comes
round again ...

GE:
Lots of silly ideas above. Also, having to use the name thingy, as I refuse
to use the name "Particule" any more. Let us call this Pii........as the
fundamental character is the radius, and that is determined by the  charge
state and  the  other properties of the thing.

CHT:
What's wrong with just "wave-centre"?  Too ambiguous, I suppose.  They are a
bit like Milo's electrons, but much smaller.  They are "aether oscillation
centres" of AOCs!

I wasn't thinking of their radius as being that important.  They might not
all be the same size!  They are more likely to have a minimum size, below
which they die out.   The radius might be constant, but might increase with
the strength of the oscillation.  These are very small creatures, though -
much smaller than electrons, I think, so perhaps it does not matter to us
whether or not they are all identical.  There are too many possibilities!
Perhaps they are born small, grow to some limit, then tend to form the
groups that we call nucleons.  At this stage I imagine they WOULD all have
to be identical, in order that atoms of each element can have a fixed
specification.

GE:
All just very late night speculation, really......but a tiny idea in there.

CHT:
Useful feedback for me!  Maybe a warning, too.  We MUST be modest in our
ambitions, considering our ignorance of the facts.  One of my correspondents
sent me this quotation the other day:

"It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one
begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."

   - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (1859-1930)

Cheers
Caroline

Claude:

Here is another interesting image:

A disc(or "particles")rotating within a condenser structure.

CHT: Would that paper of Nick Reiter's be relevant?
http://www.alliancelink.com/users/avalon/varicap2.htm

The initial idea was that any movement of the capacitor plates produced a
temporary current, but I think he went on to look at rotation.  We could ask
him.  Address is  <nreiter@...> .  He thought the energy for the
current was somehow coming from the aether.  I haven't yet tried to
understand it - I'm not really into capacitors ...

Caroline
c.h.thompson@...
<http://www.aber.ac.uk/~cat>

Historical considerations about the aether:

>Date: Wed, 02 Feb 00 13:55:34 ARG
>From: Administrador del Nodo <Postmaster@...>
>X-Mailer: UUPC/PcCorreo 3.0
>To: cyrano@...
>
>"The syncretic heritage of a divine ether.
>
>No wonder, then, that, as time went by, the Aristotelian thorough scholar
Th. Hobbes, just so hardly a Christian scholastic as Haeckel, but also
thinking the nature, just as these, with the unique available terms and
academic categories entailing, and making necessary, "pre-theoretical
intuitions" and the root metaphors from Christian Aristotelianism,
prefiguring every physical reality as inseparable of local motion in a
space indifferent to it, avowed:
>Spatium est phantasma rei . . . Tempus est phantasma motus.
>
>So the old primary discrimination of the Indo-Iranian languages, between
substantive realities and verbal transits, was driving its way towards the
ineluctable identification of real segments of distance with unreal
"segments" of duration, our culture thereby waxing consolatively (in Dorian
values) blind for the singularity of the "personal" spaces and for the
thinness or ephemerality of the animal existence (hominid and other
psychisms) one instant at a time.
>
>(And instantaneities ought to wait for contemporaneous research on
dissipative systems to again find, if still tepidly, physicochemical
descriptions remarking their productive creativity).
>Yet, inside the syncretic myth, in its branches avowing space extramental,
Neoplatonism embraces space as the ultimate universal ground. This view of
a divine ether stood central and predominant along all its historical
turnabouts, from Alexandria to Isaac Newton and beyond, through the
practicing Hermeticisms of many founders of the scientific enlightenment
who nurtured lifelong preoccupations regarding the ultra-physical
counterparts of the physical reality. Jewish sages in Alexandria had first
passed it into the Kaballah. This Greek-Jewish heritage, a systematized
amass of ancient Mediterranean views, then passed into dialectical form
from Alexandria to Antioch, and from there to Nisibis and Edessa, via the
Christian Monophysites and Nestorians. The Nestorians were specially
helpful in the diffusion of Greek learning, to a great extent in Syriac
translation, to lands as far eastwards as Persia. In the third century,
Shapur I founded Jundishapur, as a prisoner-of-war camp fo!
>r the warriors he caught in the war against Valerian. But Jundishapur
became a leading Persian scientific centre in the Pythagorean-Parmenidean
tradition, where astronomy, mathematics, medicine, and logic, including
elements of the Indian and Persian sciences, were taught in Greek and
Sanskrit, and later in Syriac. This school lasted long after the advent of
the Abbasid caliphate. To the Islam also more esoteric aspects of the Greek
learning passed through the community of Sabaeans of Harran, particularly
concepts from the Pythagorean thinking emphasizing the prelation of the
cosmological unity over "separate" things. The ideology transmitted by the
Sabaeans is indicated by the fact that this religious community traced its
own origin to the Old Testament prophet Enoch, regarded as the founder of
the sciences of the heavens and of philosophy and, sometimes, identified
with the Trismegistus Hermes.
>
>The Sabaeans, thus become stalwart champions of the Parmenidean "deep
connectedness", enjoyed an outstanding erudition in astronomy, astrology,
and mathematics, framed in a metaphysics tightly cloven to that of the
Pythagoreans. They probably provided the link between the Hermetic
tradition and certain particulars of the Islamic esoteric doctrines, which
integrated elements of Hermeticism not coming directly from the Kaballah.
The Indian and, to a lesser degree, the Persian sciences contributed to the
Arabic systematization of this conceptual assemblage, as its Oriental
source. In mathematics and astronomy, zoology, anthropology, and certain
topics of alchemy, the tradition of Indian and Persian sciences within the
Muslim culture was dominant. This not presented any new regional
phenomenon: according to the legend, the pre-Kaballistic Hebrews learned
alchemy and mathematics from the Magi, in their Babylon captivity. Early
contacts between the Muslims and the Chinese science, e!
>specially in alchemy, perfected after the Mongol invasion as regards
technology and the arts, contributed congruent views of space as well as
other elements of Chinese medioeval developments. All along this course,
the active factors of the syncretic myth selected ideological congruencies
prepared in these respective sources, and thence connected them in a most
strong system of reciprocal entailments, required by and derivable, as
description of the reality, from the Pythagoric-Parmenidean metaphysical
prefigurations.
>
>Neglecting the unbarterable islands of extramental exclusivity that
navigate on dispersion.
>
>A central one, for the present concerns, is that the notion of a separate
self is the result of ignorance, so much stressed in the "science of the
Balance" or alchemic spirituality and, specially, by the influential
Murciane scholar and wandering Sufi mystic, Ibn 'Arabi (1165-1240). This
Islamic synthesis of the ancient arts and sciences of the Mediterranean and
Oriental peoples, along with the concepts and points of views contained in
the translations which the Islam sampled, arrived to the Western
Scholastics. There it was assimilated according to its own inner
constitution, coinciding about space on a view of the simultaneous
extension as a macroscopic continuum of divine nature. From this source,
the simultaneous extension arrived to Spinoza as an attribute of God, to
Newton as God's boundless uniform sensory organ to accommodate all motions;
and to many views of dispersivity and transformation, as "substances"
making the universe and the divinity mutually correlated, as i!
>f they were body and soul. But, of course, such macrocosm-microcosmos
parallel satisfies conceptual tensions already well developed in the
Orphism and, before, in many protohistoric high cultures. This space as an
"absolute reality", Parmenidean ultimate Being, substantial substrate of
all matter and forces possessing "a greater reality than substances
themselves"; "the postulation of an infinite, subsistent non-substance",
Clarke called "simply a monstrosity" -- though he kept himself within the
essentialist atmosphere. And Kant later called it a "unthing", because of
its noncompliance to admit reduction to a subjective construct.
>
>The subjectivist branches of such tradition, avowing all dispersivity
intramental (whether perceptually experiential, logically conceptual, or
transcendental condition as the observer's sensory organ to accommodate all
motions) arrived to deem space as sheer appearance (Hegel) and bare
dispersal of the observer real duration (Bergson). But all agreed that, by
itself, dispersivity is insentient. Entailing: causation is always
observed from outside.
>
>Motion, Hobbes therefore garneredfrom this Western cultural atmosphere, is
the universal cause of all natural events; no reality changes in time if
not by local motion, and every change is local motion. Any generation,
corruption, or alteration, is some kind or combination of local motion,
involving motion transfer from contiguous masses.
>
>Therefor motion never can begin, or have birth, inside one body: Motum
nisi a moto et contiguo [corpore] generari non posse (Elem. Philos. VIII,
7), except the several conatus of the elements towards their natural places
(e. g., the conatus ad centrum terrae, or ad altum).
>Thus all sensations not either are anything else than translocative
motion, viz., mutual actions and reactions in percussional sense, held to
go on in a three-dimensional nature: In omni sensione rerum externarum
actio fit & reactio mutua (De Corpore IV, xxv, I, 330).
>Chiefly from Willis and Vieussens on, this "Mechanical Origin . . . of . .
. Qualities" (Boyle), regarding the production of sensations by tenuous
movements organized in the brain substance by action of the animal (J.
Mayow's nitro-aerial) spirits (Lavoisier "oxygen"), was developed by most
of the great Western neuroanatomists. Albeit, as aforementioned, while the
operation of the deictic tissue certainly burns oxygen and glucose, the
deixis itself, as circumstanced to interaction vectors, may be perfectly
sustained on anaerobic substrates.
>Far from foregoing any string theory, however, for most scientists such
tenuous brain movements were to add up into one concrete "impression", one
left invariant for every content of memory. How would a shape last, save by
partaking in the duration of its substrate?
>
>Such engrammatic articulation of percussional hindsights, belonging in the
main tradition of the syncretic myth, surged upon the old root-metaphor of
the gradually impressed, initially inane wax, the written waxen tablets of
Mnemosyne, supported by Descartes' parable of the repeteadly folded paper
sheet that, late in the XIXth century, was to give birth to Exner's
"Bahnung" theory and to Semon's protoplasmic "engram". It currently stays
in vogue, once again, as long-term imprints in the metabolism or trophic
chemistry of the neurons.
>
>What did matter, of course, was reducing any possible topic of physics to
what can be extended in length, breadth, and depth. All those impressions
are shape-facsimiles, conceived as functional facilitations purveyed by
tangible, and invariant, spatial traces of past actions done, "im-printed"
in the brain parenchyma. Marcus Aurelius would have smiled."
>
>(De: SENSING: A New Fundamental Action of Nature,
>          by Alicia Avila and M.F. Crocco
>         (Folia Neurobiologica Argentina vol. X:
>          Inst. for Advanced Study, Buenos Aires, 1996, Pages 759-762)
>           Amities,
>             Mariela
>
>=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>       Prof. Mariela Szirko,
>       <postmaster@...>
>
>       Centro de Investig. Neurobiologicas, Ministry of Health
>& Welfare, Argentine Republic; and
>       Lab. of Electroneurobiological Res., Neuropsychiatric
>Hospital "Dr. Jose Tiburcio Borda", Buenos Aires City Govt.,
>       Office:  Phone/Fax (54 11) 4306 -7314
>                e-mail <postmaster@...>
>       Electroneurobiologia: Pagina de Red
>                http://contenidos.ciudad.com.ar/borda
>       Standard disclaimer: Las opiniones de este mensaje son
>personales y no comprometen las dependencias a cargo de la firmante
>  Reply to THIS message,  ONLY to: <postmaster@...>
>=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>
>

Claude -
     I'd have to guess that this means that (a) the disc is one pole of the
condensor (b) the other pole of the condensor is the wiring/physical
structure which points to the disc, forming gaps around it at four points
(minimum) with two of the points being diametrically-opposed across the
diameter and connected together in a soldered wiring joint above the top of
the disc, and the other two points being diametrically-opposed across the
diameter but 90-degrees offset from the first two, being connected together
at the wiring junction below the disc.  My vision (of your vision!) includes
wiring the two connections coming from the external elements of the condensor
to the wires coming out of each end of a coil (the inductive elements of your
previous vision).   This vision is very much in line with what I'm doing.
The "spin" you see may be an induced field-effect rather than a rotating disc
or particles.  I see the spin as a kind of *cosmic swirlie* or vortex in
visual-miniature (a scaled-down abstract of the universe itself and of all
particles).
     We need visionaries!  Keep up the good work, Claude!  Nobody'd be more
thrilled than I if we could tie this all in physically, structurally, with
Jack's E+18 caged electrons and E+36 soft photons producing about a second of
our attention and a Star Gate!
     Celebrate the Unity in our forum's Diversity!

- Jhan
   resident pre-Socratic

Here is another interesting image:

A disc(or "particles")rotating within a condenser structure.

Cheers,

Claude

(Claude)

>>Yes but when an object moves or rotates,this slightly changes the
>>frequencies of its resonances,through Doppler-Fizeau shift,correct? And
>>this is the origin of inertia,correct?

(Ross)

>Both the resonant frequency of the objects "particles" AND the resonant
>frequency of the surrounding spacetime structure change.  They are
>interlinked.  Yes, this is where inertia originates.

Claude:

Which means that if we act,artificially,on a part of the system
it,automatically,modifies the other component of the system.

Thus I come back to my idea of extracting an acceleration force from a
rotating disc or any matter in rotation(mercury,protons,etc).

So what we know is that if we rotate a disc,for example,we get a
Doppler-Fizeau shift in the frequencies of the atoms which compose the
disc. This shift induces a distorsion of the Spacetime within the rotating
disc,thus an acceleration force.

This acceleration force is confined radially within the disc for evident
reasons.

This force is,in principle,extractable.To this effect we have to orient all
the atoms experiencing Doppler-Fizeau shift into a collective and similar
direction.

This will produce,then,a local distorsion of Spacetime structure of which
the consequence will be to polarise the rotating disc relative to the
Cosmos wave energy.

This polarisation will induce movement of the disc.

Cheers,

Claude

Given spectra exists and is mechanical it then it follows it was made and
designed and programmed by some entity, therefore there exists a
meta-spectra mind or mind state. How would you know whether one of those on
earth, embodied, and iff so again, it would not do a thing unless its
interference becomes objectionable and that in terms which: Would a human
understand?

Adrian.

Subject: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Re: Spacetime,as seen by Ross


> Dear Ross,

==== IFF the aether maintains the ST fabric then "tradition' has it as
erupting into the plasmoid as a form of "now you see it, now you don't:" [is
the indeterminacy phase] which gets stabilised somewhat, probably by a self
locking resonance systematics. It also breaks down via a plasmoid state as
nuclear explosions show. This also appears to match the figures of thought
fabric whereby a sloppy gleam in the eye of the beholder turns self locked
by 'identification' to be changed into a workable and repeatable action.
This seems to entail a morphogenesis of sorts.  I imagine "mother nature"
relying on well established 'methods' to design and maintain life. Therefore
'as above,. so below' or the system is self integrative. We can hardly be in
tune of resonant with our environment unless it is agreeable both ways OR we
need a vast and complex 'translation" proggie for which our brain is quite
inadequate.

This includes what one may call harmonics or making itself agreeable to
itself in its expansion of variety. I'm still unsure about the waves
although they come in handy for us to imagine with. Unless there is a way to
have them 'scale free' I cannot see the system as a whole have continuity.
Since 'consciousness' seems to be a vastly misinterpreted pastime I won't
comment on that.  I don't think IT IS anything  except itself.  IFF C is
conscious as a whole of itself it does not need to be self conscious or as
it appears to erupt for us.

Adrian

> >>>I would say that Spacetime is nearly crystalline while Ross says it is
a
> >>>fluid!
> >>
> >>You are both right!  The aether itself is fluid, and does not
necessarily
> >>have any wave centres.  What wave centres it does have can move freely.
But
> >>groups of them become crystalline.
> >
> >Correct.  Aether is a fluid, spacetime is a structure of standing wave
> >energy IN that fluid.
>
> Yes but what I mean is that your Spacetime(that is the standing waves in
> the fluid called aether)seems rigid like a crystal except in places where
> there is mass to aether conversion.In this case,if I understand,the aether
> flows but I,still,do not visualise the process entirely.When the aether
> flows within the standing wave structure of Spacetime how does it
> integrate,geometrically,within Spacetime?
>
> >Hence, the structure of the standing waves is in a
> >sense, crystalline, whereas the fluid that is buzzing with the wave
energy,
> >is a fluid, aka aether.
>
> Agreed.
>
> >Particles such as electron are spherical
> >resonances, again of the same fluid, aether, and those resonances are
> >coupled to and driven by, the spacetime standing wave energy.
> >
> >Crystalline is just a first cut concept thought, and it would be better
to
> >think of the "crystallinity" as being more like a structure of lines on a
> >sheet of rubber that can stretch and deform in plastic manner, yet which
> >maintains a relation between all of the adjacent cells of the spacetime
> >standing wave structure.
>
> Ok.So how does the flow of aether from stars distort the surrounding
> "reticule" of Spacetime? I mean how does the stretching Spacetime,suffused
> with a flow of aether, look like?
>
> >Not just matter anti matter reactions.  ALL exothermic reactions are
aether
> >emissive.
> >Conversely, all endothermic reactions are endothermic.<---
>
> ???
>
> >>Yes, there could be variations in intrinsic aether density ...
> >
> >If you work with waves, you tacitly have already accepted that this is
so,
> >whether or not you recognize it.
> >
> >
> >Ross Tessien
>
> Cheers,
>
> Claude
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To Post a message, send it to:   forcefieldpropulsionphysics@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Which First Lady would have made the best President?
> http://click.egroups.com/1/1478/2/_/187292/_/950596439/
>
>
> eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/forcefieldpropulsionphysics
> http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
>
>
>
>
>

Dan Smith wrote:

> Paul,
>
> Thank you for this attempt at moderation.
>
> There is a division here between a minority of us who believe that there are
> serious issues at stake here that urgently need resolution, and most of the
> rest who find Jack's post-modern, 'merry prankster,' theatrical physics
> mildly amusing.
>
> Yes, I would be smiling too, if I weren't crying.

[Jack]

That's your nature. You know I am being Merry, I am a Prankster, and it's all
real! SPECTRA is real. The whole damn thing is real. Mark my words. You ain't
seen noth'in yet.

> [Dan]
>
> Yes, the whole quantum conundrum is the number one embarrassment of the
> Scientific Establishment.  It positively threatens, now more than ever to
> bring down the entire system of modern Materialism.  This is particularly
> true now with the rising tide of the quantum consciousness movement.

[Jack]

Which I basically created, certainly focussed, with Werner Erhard's money
at the
Month Long at Esalen in 1975. Stephen Schwartz says I was merely a pawn in the
hands of Harry Margolin the KGB lawyer who did the money flow for est. Now I
don't know if I buy that from Schwartz.

> [Dan]
>
> Jack was a mover and shaker in the earliest days of that movement,
> influencing many impressionable minds, mine included.

[Jack]

Well, that shows what an idiot you were then and are now, because I had
absolutely no idea what I was doing back then. I was sleep walking through it
like Parisfal! I was young 33 more interested in fucking beautiful women and
there were plenty around willing and I was able. I was drafted into this whole
thing. Either by SPECTRA or by the CIA, the Brits from my UKAEA days, or by
the
KGB or who knows by whom? However, now I know exactly what I am doing. I have
been under fire and all of this betrayal and insanity is making me stronger
and
more resolved to get the job done. To Make It So.

In 1975 I had no idea what quantum theory really meant. No one did of
course. I
had no clear idea of what consciousness was either. No one did back then of
course and no one does now except for me an a small number of the others.

Hey Dan, you say your mind was impressionable? What about my mind did you ever
think of that? Ask Paul Green now a professor of  mathematics at University of
Maryland who knew me at Cornell. Ask him to tell you the story of the "$50,000
bicycle." Me and Fred Wolf were like Dan Akroyd and Bill Murray in Ghost
Busters
back then.

[Dan]

>  Jack, with his
> intellectual and political skills, would have been one of a handful of
> tempting targets.

[Jack]

Target for what? I don't like that word "target". Speaking of "targets".
Stephen
Schwartz, not BIG BANG but BIG MOUTH, tells all the intelligence agencies
on the
internet including the Russian High Command for the Chechnya Campaign that he,
BIG HERO is fighting against the Russians as a "Bandit Chief ... somewhere
inside Chechnya" on a "SAT phone"! How long do you think it will take the
Russian Military to pinpoint the location of that SAT phone signal and to take
it out? Not long. However, as usual Schwartz is lying and fantasizing and is
almost certainly boozing it up with grappa in some seedy bar in Sarajevo in
the
Bosnian version of Under The Volcano.

[Dan]

>  Ira was another, but he was too serious for this most
> devious plan.

[Jack]

So, who Mr. Know It All, framed Ira Einhorn for the murder of Holly Maddux, or
do you think he did it?

> [Dan]
>
> Then comes the twist, it is Jack's second wakeup call.  Spectra sends Jack
> to Brazil, where Bohm's boys are putting together an international Swat the
> Quantum team.  Jack comes back, and is soon ensconced as its leading light.
> Now he is threatening to derail the movement that he helped to start.  One
> might suppose that Jack was a Spectra Sleeper from the beginning.

[Jack]

That's pretty good for the TV Series. It's not the way it happened however.
Remember I was a Research Fellow at Birkbeck College with David Bohm in
1971 and
I did not go to Brazil with Fred Wolf until 1985. It was paid for by IBM
Brasil,
and SPECTRA was RCA. I think I had already been contacted overtly by "retired"
CIA station chief Harold Chipman however. I have to ask the usual suspects, my
North Beach Irregulars, the Triestniks, what they remember.

> [Dan]
>
> Across the Bay is Henry Stapp the quietly serious, self-effacing
> intellectual guru of the Quantum Mind.  Jack is doing everything he can to
> distract public attention from what is serious and divert it into his
> version of quantum pranksterism.

[Jack]

Dan, you are too stupid to know when you are being stupid. I am not that
stupid.
I know when I am stupid. It's a big difference. Let Stapp compute t(C)
otherwise
he has nothing but a lot of very obscure Bohrian excess metaphysical
baggage. I
agree Henry is a nice serious man who is impeccably honest and true to his
confused and wrong inconsistent ideas which are not leading to anything as
important and practical as my two formulae.

> [Dan]
>
> The advent of the Quantum indeterminism in the last century of the Second
> Millennium, signaled the overthow of the Mechanistic paradigm.  It has been
> the single greatest factor of our still incipient spiritual liberation from
> that pernicious world view.
>
> Yes, to say that I am biased against determism, is like saying that I am
> biased against the idea that my mother is a whore.  That should be an
> understatement for any *self-respecting* human.

[Jack]

That's a very revealing anger Dan. People used to walk up to me asking me "Are
you a psychiatrist?"


[Dan]

>
> Now, in waltzes Jack at the eleventh hour of our spiritual liberation, and
> wants to take it all back.  He wants to dissect our souls and put them on
> chips to populate the universe like a plague of silicon Spectra locusts with
> mechanical voices.  Yes, this is a joke, but a very distracting, and
> possibly disruptive joke.

[Jack]

No, do not confuse my joking manner with the facts. The facts are much to
serious not to joke about. Dan Smith, now hear this, you too Ron Pandolfi,
let's
get this real straight. I AM NOT JOKING ABOUT THE REALITY OF SPECTRA. The
existence of that "metallic voice" claiming to be a computer, probably
conscious, on board some kind of flying saucer is a real fact experienced by
several high ranking people in the intelligence and US government weapons
laboratories if James Schnabel is telling the truth. Colonel John Alexander
says
he is telling the truth. Plus we have The Star Gate Conspiracy book of
Picknett
and Prince with more corroboration. So the phenomenon is real. It's no joke.
What is its meaning. Well I have a theory about its real meaning. It is a
testable theory.

By the way Dan, have you read John Lilly about the "solid state entities"?
If my
theory is correct we are in a loop in time and I have already set off a
chain of
events which will lead to the construction of conscious computers of the
SPECTRA
class as part of our Space Navy.

> [Dan]
>
> Paul, if you do not get Jack's Joke on the World, I do have to wonder.  Even
> Jack thinks it's a riot, as long as the Spectra money keeps flowing.  It
> will be a big hit on Jerry Springer.
>
> "All aboard!," you 'merry pranksters.'
>
> Dan

[Jack]

Dan, as usual your sense of humor is challenged. You do not get the joke. Or,
rather, the joke is on you. You miss the Bohm point.

--
"But the real glory of science is that we can find a way of thinking such that
the law is evident. ... For a successful technology, reality must take
precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." Feynman
"I want to know God's thoughts ... the rest are details." Einstein
The Millennium Peak proves that quantum theory is dead and post-quantum theory
is alive.
http://www.well.com/user/sarfatti/

Dear Ross,

>>>I would say that Spacetime is nearly crystalline while Ross says it is a
>>>fluid!
>>
>>You are both right!  The aether itself is fluid, and does not necessarily
>>have any wave centres.  What wave centres it does have can move freely.  But
>>groups of them become crystalline.
>
>Correct.  Aether is a fluid, spacetime is a structure of standing wave
>energy IN that fluid.

Yes but what I mean is that your Spacetime(that is the standing waves in
the fluid called aether)seems rigid like a crystal except in places where
there is mass to aether conversion.In this case,if I understand,the aether
flows but I,still,do not visualise the process entirely.When the aether
flows within the standing wave structure of Spacetime how does it
integrate,geometrically,within Spacetime?

>Hence, the structure of the standing waves is in a
>sense, crystalline, whereas the fluid that is buzzing with the wave energy,
>is a fluid, aka aether.

Agreed.

>Particles such as electron are spherical
>resonances, again of the same fluid, aether, and those resonances are
>coupled to and driven by, the spacetime standing wave energy.
>
>Crystalline is just a first cut concept thought, and it would be better to
>think of the "crystallinity" as being more like a structure of lines on a
>sheet of rubber that can stretch and deform in plastic manner, yet which
>maintains a relation between all of the adjacent cells of the spacetime
>standing wave structure.

Ok.So how does the flow of aether from stars distort the surrounding
"reticule" of Spacetime? I mean how does the stretching Spacetime,suffused
with a flow of aether, look like?

>Not just matter anti matter reactions.  ALL exothermic reactions are aether
>emissive.
>Conversely, all endothermic reactions are endothermic.<---

???

>>Yes, there could be variations in intrinsic aether density ...
>
>If you work with waves, you tacitly have already accepted that this is so,
>whether or not you recognize it.
>
>
>Ross Tessien

Cheers,

Claude