Motion

[dipayankar]

Plasma Technology I thought was high temperature physics. Here we are discussion low temperature physics... I will anyway look into these videos (interesting)...

Not convinced.

But have a look at this - we all should be aware of the new theories on the Electric Universe - Plasma Cosmology.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V026kSw4XCs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlnFsO9RN4c

[G_burnett]

Hi Tina;
Energy is actually “matter in motion” so in a way you're right. Since energy is conserved, this would also infer that motion is conserved. The problem with our thinking is that we tend to believe that we can change the quantity of motion of material systems; we can’t! We simply change the type of motion within the system, not the total quantity.

I like this post Dave.

In that this is few months old and I posted the Harvard experiment that saw light what I believe you define light, stopped and then started again, and the later experiment where the light was then picked up once frozen to no emit and moved to another cloud and started ... would you clarify to me the above post you made in reference to the experiments? I am having a hard time with this. She seemed to have stopped matter in motion by freezing it. Then when stopped in direction actually stopped in motion from emit of visible spectrum in a progressive darkening as she slowed it to a walk first ... it does seem she indeed changed the quantity of forward motion giving the light direction parameters and did not just change the matter to a spin effect increase which would give emit still. .. further in the pickup and placement restarting the matter frozen at rest by uncondensed showing that the quantity "potential" was still there but changed?

just my morning ponder ~kind regards g

[dipayankar]

I wonder where the Special Theory of Relativity stands now since the basic postulate was that the velocity of light is always constant. If the velocity of light is a variable, then do we need to introduce any more constants in this theorum?

I like this post Dave.

In that this is few months old and I posted the Harvard experiment that saw light what I believe you define light, stopped and then started again, and the later experiment where the light was then picked up once frozen to no emit and moved to another cloud and started ... would you clarify to me the above post you made in reference to the experiments? I am having a hard time with this. She seemed to have stopped matter in motion by freezing it. Then when stopped in direction actually stopped in motion from emit of visible spectrum in a progressive darkening as she slowed it to a walk first ... it does seem she indeed changed the quantity of forward motion giving the light direction parameters and did not just change the matter to a spin effect increase which would give emit still. .. further in the pickup and placement restarting the matter frozen at rest by uncondensed showing that the quantity "potential" was still there but changed?

just my morning ponder ~kind regards g

[G_burnett]

I wonder where the Special Theory of Relativity stands now since the basic postulate was that the velocity of light is always constant. If the velocity of light is a variable, then do we need to introduce any more constants in this theorum?

Drift of wave in spiral event?

I am waiting for Mr Dave to reply Dip but to get deeper into maybe what he will prove me wrong... I will post this interaction event and say




yes introduce spin?

Click on picture for link to source as citation please

Enjoy Graham

[dleviwing]

In that this is few months old and I posted the Harvard experiment that saw light what I believe you define light, stopped and then started again, and the later experiment where the light was then picked up once frozen to no emit and moved to another cloud and started ... would you clarify to me the above post you made in reference to the experiments? I am having a hard time with this. She seemed to have stopped matter in motion by freezing it. Then when stopped in direction actually stopped in motion from emit of visible spectrum in a progressive darkening as she slowed it to a walk first ... it does seem she indeed changed the quantity of forward motion giving the light direction parameters and did not just change the matter to a spin effect increase which would give emit still. .. further in the pickup and placement restarting the matter frozen at rest by uncondensed showing that the quantity "potential" was still there but changed?

Hi Graham;
There are many misconceptions in this Bose-Einstein condensate experiment; the main problem is that the language is dumbed down for the general public. Light is an electromagnetic wave motion conducting through an electromagnetic medium just as electrical charge is. The electrical field used to stop the vibration of the sodium ion structure simply transfers the motion of the wave to an electrical field state of motion that maintains a stress on the structure until the field is removed allowing the vibration to continue. You should get the details of the experiment if you wish to know more of the actual process. Lasers do the same thing as the condensate except for a much shorter period of time; this is actually the principle behind the “gas lasers”.

What you really need to answer is, “What system does the wave motion belong to, the sodium ions or the universe. The medium of light is part of the universe system thus it is a change in the state of the sodium system that produces a change in the universe system.

Since these type of explanations require a rather long winded post, it’s best that you just think them through using the fundamental basics we’ve discussed before; rather than think of it as light changing the electrical energy state of the electron it is the change of energy state of the electron that sustains the state of the light. Most of these principles can be found in solid state physics publications.

BTW: I'm glad you liked the post; thanks.

[G_burnett]

Hi Graham;
There are many misconceptions in this Bose-Einstein condensate experiment; the main problem is that the language is dumbed down for the general public. Light is an electromagnetic wave motion conducting through an electromagnetic medium just as electrical charge is. The electrical field used to stop the vibration of the sodium ion structure simply transfers the motion of the wave to an electrical field state of motion that maintains a stress on the structure until the field is removed allowing the vibration to continue. You should get the details of the experiment if you wish to know more of the actual process. Lasers do the same thing as the condensate except for a much shorter period of time; this is actually the principle behind the “gas lasers”.

What you really need to answer is, “What system does the wave motion belong to, the sodium ions or the universe. The medium of light is part of the universe system thus it is a change in the state of the sodium system that produces a change in the universe system.

Since these type of explanations require a rather long winded post, it’s best that you just think them through using the fundamental basics we’ve discussed before; rather than think of it as light changing the electrical energy state of the electron it is the change of energy state of the electron that sustains the state of the light. Most of these principles can be found in solid state physics publications.

BTW: I'm glad you liked the post; thanks.

Hi Dave thank you for the reply.

I rethought my post afterwords and ponder knowing I was being a bit stupid in memory loss and getting on the right platform off subject in other ponder that was connecting for a moment lol.

the energy state of the electron changed allows the absorb of energy that then with further tweaking by laser wave acting on the mass in the clump condenses it further to further absorb potential ..? I sort of had that picture in my head after I thought more of it.

I am glad to see you mentioning electrical energy state as it seem a subject in base theorem of others i am just reading on that is causing conflict in NASA acceptance of certain predictions having been made they had not calculated for. Tina posted the link to a gentleman independent researcher that has had varied predictions based on some some fundamental laws in electrical effect that are a thorn in there side with no comment stated by NASA in them coming true .. specifically the comet impact event of a white flash to the brass projectile sent in just before impact .. and emit on the moons of Jupiter they said were coming from a vent but but NASA seems to have altered pictures to depict that when other event seemed to describe it from the fellows predictions ... but it did not come from a vent?

they must be really into some thing to be so lets say first look seemingly... misleadingly secretive ... which may not be a bad thing as long as it is a future boon for all. ... the circle may bring it full round about? They have my curiosity up now. Dangerous thing to do.

I am reading more into the predictability of event using the theorems of this fellow and going back to the interesting basics for full understanding as it leads to FS.

I must go down the path to postulate that the vortex arms using the standard would not form as they do in the inverse square law without consideration of FS effect on the particle mass in transient fluid form state with FS medium meld ... is it salt in water or sand in water.. leaning toward a meld of similar to salt in water .. or sand alignment for of electrical current content of effect "butsomuchmore" unquote Mr Einstein ... to alignment factors... magnetic field ... adjustment in resonance sort of picture. ..keeping an open mind but subject to change. lol Kind Regards ..g

...as an after thought an revisit to Tina's links going through the four video posts informative lectures and revisiting specifically the effect of the crater creation denied by instrument failure I am sure it could be predicted that the instruments did not fail. The creation of a crater of such magnitude immediately caught the eye of the Military in the destructive ability of discharge and was censored. The never ending arm of the US military to get one up on potential enemy's saw a non nuclear effect with dust the result and dust over radiation is something they can relate to. I am surprised that the disclosures in those links have not resulted in more then just ignore the buggers they will not be believed and they were made to disappear ... I challenge the release of information denial to say they should release all pertinent information about the so called instrument failure for review and urge the Cosmo independents to use there math an give pictorial presentation to the size of the crater that was created and share the most destructive force possible less it causes such an imbalance of word power we are all ending up in war the possibility. But then thats ethical Sage having a few words to you all. ~ G

[dleviwing]

Hi Graham;
Having a little bit of experience in these fields of high energy plasma, I can safely say that they are well understood with current electrical theory.

As you know I view the electromagnetic radiation throughout space as being the medium of fundamental substance known as the Aether. If we were to remove all FS in this state then there would be no such thing as force at a distance; no gravity, no magnetism, no charge, no weak force, and no strong force. It seems rather silly to me to view any of them as the single prime mover for the formation of our universe; it requires them all to form the universe as we know it. All the atomic and subatomic forces contribute to the process of gravity so Tina’s links are just people looking at the same thing and using different perspectives to explain it; technically they’re wrong but I’m sure there are enough frustrated want-to-be scientist to gain an audience for such nonsense.

BTW: NASA couldn’t keep a secret if it wanted to and military-intelligence is an oxymoron.

[G_burnett]

Hi Graham;
Having a little bit of experience in these fields of high energy plasma, I can safely say that they are well understood with current electrical theory.

As you know I view the electromagnetic radiation throughout space as being the medium of fundamental substance known as the Aether. If we were to remove all FS in this state then there would be no such thing as force at a distance; no gravity, no magnetism, no charge, no weak force, and no strong force. It seems rather silly to me to view any of them as the single prime mover for the formation of our universe; it requires them all to form the universe as we know it. All the atomic and subatomic forces contribute to the process of gravity so Tina’s links are just people looking at the same thing and using different perspectives to explain it; technically they’re wrong but I’m sure there are enough frustrated want-to-be scientist to gain an audience for such nonsense.

BTW: NASA could’t keep a secret if it wanted to and military-intelligence is an oxymoron.

I kind of got that impression to of them lol but sage was having a moment, oxymoron ... thats a good word ... just rolls of the tonger nice ... even if they are doing some cover up like not having a an open review of the failure of equipment ... star wars are a bit passé with the open net.

I was pointing out the lack of reading to your posts using the word electrical field effect being applied and in more a high level of conversation of terms which I find very interesting still, I have not read all your posts having not a year or so free right now as i would like to do but will continue my studious look.

The usual out there of whether or not some thing is white or black or in or out is effect i try to ignore in perspective that a rose is a rose is a rose by any other name is still a rose ... a lack of unity for demand of platform is not the promotion I think is right but will not ignore the stand to see other view from geometric vectoring and if for little more then to see the symmetry of thought.

In this manner the flash bang effect may not have been such a surprise on the copper rocketry to that test ... and accounted for. ... or it was expected heh heh ..

In back to reality of plasma fusion in space knowing the containment needs to the event ... to lasting continual event is much different then the moment scalar down as much so as the conditions in a sun up wards on the scale of conditions ... note i do not say medium. The potential in FS would be indeed the factor.. density of aether content, MF strength and frequency of charged particles wave increasing density to what .. fusion and lets not forget the spin effect, motion created as constant, decreased or increasing mass in motion .. a transient state that can have direction and to the whole thing we give it the name of FS ... I know I left a few things out, probably sound like a true electrician!

Kind regards G,

[dleviwing]

Graham;
It sounds like you may be ready for the Toronic translation of QED. I’ll start a thread latter and see who wishes joins the Feynman world of QED diagrams.

[G_burnett]

Graham;
It sounds like you may be ready for the Toronic translation of QED. I’ll start a thread latter and see who wishes joins the Feynman world of QED diagrams.

Yes I have been having some discussions with sage on the Toronic collision model and the Toronic Particle Universe Model

When one hears the term collision as in CERN or other events on that level it seems to put one off the BIG event ... ponder.

The Toronic inversion .. I am having little luck in seeing it out in ponder or a bad search engine the cause or sage using it to much lol. Point me to some others that might be into this if known? Or why not it was not looked at?

On first glance it is adaptable model to both the BIG and the small view...

Not to mention a few au'natural n between. IMHO .. there is then also ... remnant of before, if I could be so bold to say it. (don't hit me too quick master Dave) .. and still the FS constant ..

Just a drop in the bucket? reverse fractorization ... hmm think I go play with my wolf bitch a while. Kind regards Graham.