Black Crunch jams Universal cycle [Cosmology]

I got in without calculus, although like MacD I had "passed" trig. Caveat for the youngsters: I haven't tried to get into college for 36 years. Things change.

What does it mean, anyway, to have passed a course in High School where notoriously you pass if you don't get arrested?

It means that you DON'T have a set of mugs shots in book at the police station.... In some parts of America, that is considered an intellectual achievement. Welcome to the egalitarian educational paradise.

In other words, I don't believe trigonometry is a prerequisite for college.

It depends on what you want to major in...... trig is not very important to majors like Literature, Psychology, Foreign Languages, and so forth. But if you intend to major in ANY technical field, whether Engineering, pure science, or Mathematics, you are dead meat without it. In fact, I can tell horror stories about what happens to students who enter an Engineering & Science track in college without Calculus. Suffice to say you can't do Calculus without knowing some trig, and you can't do freshman Physics without Calculus.

As further evidence of the importance of trig to a technical major, I offer you the MIT cheerleader's favorite chant:

"Secant! Tangent! Cosine! Sine!
Three point one four, one five nine!"

I rest my case....

;-)

Well, at least Mac didn't get arrested or he wouldn't have graduated. This perhaps doesn't make him quite the expert he imagines, but what do a bunch of old fogeys know anyway?

This perhaps doesn't make him quite the expert he imagines, but what do a bunch of old fogeys know anyway?

A little physics, grammar, and humility....

What does it mean, anyway, to have passed a course in High School where notoriously you pass if you don't get arrested?

It means a lot more work for me once these illiterates get into my classes.

... once these illiterates get into my classes.

Don't worry about them. They can always find careers in creationism.

Thought you might find the following article of interest:

The following report comes from the BBC, 8 August, 2002: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2181455.stm ]

EINSTEIN'S THEORY 'MAY BE WRONG'

The theory that the speed of light is always constant has come under fire. Australian physicists propose that it may have slowed over the course of billions of years. It's entirely possible that the speed of light would have got greater and greater as you go back towards the Big Bang. Paul Davies, the theoretical physicist said: ?If true, it would mean a rethink of Einstein's theory of relativity.?

The idea is floated in a brief communication in the journal Nature.

It is based on astronomical data involving light from a quasar, a very distant star-like object. Observations suggest the light has taken about 10 billion years to reach the Earth. What is more, a key constant involving the interaction of light photons and electron particles seems to have changed. It appears to have been smaller 10 billion years ago.

According to Paul Davies, a physicist at Macquarie University, Sydney, this can be explained only if the speed of light or electron charge has changed since then. "But two of the cherished laws of the Universe are the law that electron charge shall not change and that the speed of light shall not change, so whichever way you look at it we're in trouble," he says.

Star Trek hope

Studies on black holes suggest that the second option is more likely, according to Davies' team. The theoretical physicist believes the speed of light was faster six to 10 billion years ago than its current value - 300,000 km (186,300 miles) per second. "It's entirely possible that the speed of light would have got greater and greater as you go back (through time) towards the Big Bang and if so it could explain some of the great mysteries of cosmology," he says. He admits that further work on light from quasars is needed to firm up the theory. In addition, the physics of black holes are known to be extremely shaky. But there are startling implications if the law that nothing can go faster than light is overturned.

"Maybe it's possible to get around that restriction, in which case it would enthral Star Trek fans because at the moment even at the speed of light it would take 100,000 years to cross the galaxy," says Davies. It's a bit of a bore really and if the speed of light limit could go, then who knows? All bets are off."

-----------------------------------------------------------------

HERBERT DINGLE writes:

"It is usually taken for granted that the processes of mathematics are identical with the processes of reasoning, whereas they are quite different. The mathematician is more akin to a spider than to a civil engineer, to a chess player than to one endowed with exceptional critical power. The faculty by which a chess expert intuitively sees the possibilities that lie in a particular configuration of pieces on the board is paralleled by that which shows the mathematician the much more general possibilities latent in an array of symbols. He proceeds automatically and faultlessly to bring them to light, but his subsequent correlation of his symbols with facts of experience, which has nothing to do with his special gift, is anything but faultless, and is only too often of the same nature as Lewis Carroll's correlation of his pieces with the Red Knight and the White Queen - with the difference whereas Dodgson recognised the products of his imagination to be wholly fanciful, the modern mathematician imagines, and persuades others, that he is discovering the secrets of nature.?
~Herbert Dingle, Science at the Cross-Roads, (1972) pp. 127-8.

WAL THORNHILL COMMENTS:
For many years Prof. Dingle wrote the entry for special relativity in the Encyclopedia Brittannica -- until he notoriously recanted. The nonsensical responses to his simple argument against Einstein led him to publish the book from which the quotes are taken. Einstein?s legacy lives on. There are so many assumptions hidden beneath the thinking in the above report that it should have been published in the Star Trek Manual, not the science journal, Nature. It is the second ?scientific? report to refer to Star Trek in recent months. The other, also from Australia, raised the future possibility of teleportation (?Beam me up Scottie?).

Both reports exhibit the malaise in physics brought about by its disconnection from reality and the modern need to indulge in show business to gain recognition and funding.

We still have no idea what light is. Our confusion is evident when we talk about a photon in one experiment and an electromagnetic wave in another. Maxwell is supposed to have mathematically described the electromagnetic wave, but he required a medium -- the ether -- for its transmission. Einstein ?thought? the ether away but no one is quite sure how he did that, even though the Michelson-Morley experiment was supposed to have clinched it.

HERBERT DINGLE:
?... Lorentz, in order to justify his transformation equations, saw the necessity of postulating a physical effect of interaction between moving matter and ether, to give the mathematics meaning. Physics still had de jure authority over mathematics: it was Einstein, who had no qualms about abolishing the ether and still retaining light waves whose properties were expressed by formulae that were meaningless without it, who was the first to discard physics altogether and propose a wholly mathematical theory.?
~Herbert Dingle, Science at the Cross-Roads, pp. 165-6.

THORNHILL:
The fact remains that everything we know about electric and magnetic fields requires electric charges, in other words, a medium, as a focus for the fields. If there is to be a wave, there must be something to wave! We know that the ?vacuum? of space is teeming with neutrinos. Countless trillions of the ghostly particles pass through each square centimetre every second. Maybe neutrinos constitute the medium of ?empty? space? It makes sense if, as I suggest elsewhere on this site, all particles are composed of orbiting massless electric charges. And neutrinos are the most collapsed form of particle.

ETIENNE KLEIN AND MARC LACHIEZE-REY:
?All hope to restore some unity is not lost, though. To start with, even in the absence of any theoretical or experimental proof, it is not unreasonable to assume that the particles known today are actually composites, and that their eventual description (which remains to be discovered) will involve a smaller number of new and truly elementary constituents.? ~Etienne Klein & Marc Lachièze-Rey, THE QUEST FOR UNITY -- The Adventure of Physics.

THORNHILL:
This brings us to the speed of light, ?c.? We know from experiment that ?c? varies depending on the medium. More particularly, ?c? varies depending on the electrical characteristics of the medium. The speed of light in a vacuum cannot then be simply declared a universal constant, because a vacuum is not empty space -- it is filled with vast but varying numbers of neutrinos and some other particles.

It seems more reasonable to suggest that the speed of light is the speed with which an oscillating electrical disturbance is transmitted through a dielectric medium. The speed of light is highest in a medium where the rate of charge polarization in the particles of that medium is greatest. Neutrinos, having the lowest mass, or inertia, of any particle, have the fastest rate of internal charge polarization and response to an electric field. Therefore ?c? is a maximum in a vacuum, paradoxically full of neutrinos.

The notion that c was considerably faster in the past has appeal to both cosmologists and creationists. Both camps have severe difficulties in explaining the observed universe, even with their vastly different time frames, unless things happened much faster initially. Cosmologists would like to see a near infinite speed of light immediately following the big bang and creationists about 10^11 times ?c.? Both are misled by their misunderstanding of the creation myths. It was no accident that a Belgian priest, Georges LeMaitre, proposed the big bang theory, as it came to be known. Science is as much driven by culture and religion as any other human activity.

Proof that the cosmologists are mistaken both in their speculations about light-speed and the big bang hypothesis comes from the very source referred to in the above report -- the light from a quasar. The above-quoted article says that the quasar is 10 billion light years distant. That is based on the most peculiar big bang theory that the volume of the universe is increasing. It follows the observation that faint objects have their spectrum shifted towards the red. The discoverer of this phenomenon, Edwin Hubble, was careful to not attribute this ?redshift? to the Doppler effect of the velocity of recession of the object, but theorists were not so circumspect. The redshift -- velocity - distance equation quickly became another of the many dogmatic assumptions of cosmology.

The astronomer, Halton Arp, plays the role of a modern Galileo in this story. He discovered that redshift is largely intrinsic to a quasar and is a measure of its youth, not its distance. The faint, unresolved star-like quality of a quasar is because it is a baby galaxy, recently born with high-redshift and low brightness from a nearby low-redshift active galaxy. The quasar referred to by Davies is nearby and faint, not 10 billion light years distant. He is not looking at 10 billion-years-old light. Such a discovery lays waste to big bang cosmology. The response of the cardinals of astronomy, now as in Galileo?s time, was to refuse to see what Arp had discovered and, in effect, to take his telescope away from him.

HALTON ARP:
?The greatest part of the progress independent researchers have made in the past decades, in my opinion, is to break free of the observationally disproved dogma of curved space time, dark matter, Big Bang, no primary reference frame and no faster than light information.?
~Halton Arp, The Observational Impetus For Le Sage Gravity.

THORNHILL:
The picture of the universe given to us by Arp makes far more sense than the big bang. We see only a small part of an immensity of unknown extent and origin. The objects around us are almost static and form discernible families with parent active galaxies giving birth to quasars in the jets from their cores. The quasars grow more massive with time and slow down to become companion galaxies. Their redshift decreases as they age.

The plasma cosmologists further show us that the entire process is driven electrically, the power being delivered by a vast cosmic web of power lines originating from beyond the visible universe. The galaxies are strung like beads on a string along those power lines.

Full text with photos available at: http://www.holoscience.com/news/slow_light.html

Be aware that this image (see website) is highly distorted because the galaxies have been placed by the computer at their redshift distances. It has been responsible for the ?fingers of God,? illusion, where echelons of galaxies appear to point toward us. Commonsense should have sounded the alarm bells immediately for theorists, instead of reverential awe. Nonetheless galaxies do form linear chains. Such structure is not expected from a gravity- driven formation of the Universe. However, it is expected from plasma cosmology, where galaxies form at the intersection of two intergalactic Birkeland current filaments.

Something else that is never mentioned in polite scientific company is the astounding discovery by Arp and William Tifft that the redshift of quasars and galaxies is quantized! It has led to the false impression of ?great walls? of galaxies at various distances from us. That too, should have set off another loud alarm. It spotlights the inadequacy of a purely mathematical quantum theory, divorced from any classical physics underpinning, and the nonsense that it only applies to the subatomic realm. If Einstein got anything right, it was his suggestion that quantum theory pointed to some lower level of complexity in particle physics, instead of requiring the removal of the foundation stone of physics -- causality. His god was not a gambler.

I agree with Davies that the charge on the electron has not changed. But neither has the speed of light. Unlike Davies, it seems to me that the basis of the physical universe is electric charge, governed by a near-instantaneous electrostatic force. All forms of matter and its interactions spring from that simple basis. Every particle and collection of particles is a resonant system of orbiting charges, from which comes resonant quantum effects and the manifestation of inertial mass. Resonance explains the puzzling non-radiating ground-state of an atom. Gravity, magnetism and nuclear forces can all be understood in terms of electric dipole forces between distorted systems of orbiting charge. Einstein is not required. Space cannot be warped or expand. Time is effectively universal and has nothing to do with space. Black holes do not exist. It is an Electric Universe.

There is no crisis of theory in an Electric Universe. The speed of light in a vacuum depends only upon the nature of the vacuum. A vacuum is not empty space. However, ?c? is unlikely to vary significantly in space. ?c? has no connection with the size or age of the universe. Size and age are meaningless concepts anyway, given Arp?s clear-sighted view of the cosmos. But can the Electric Universe offer any explanation for the redshifts?

I think so. We know from Arp?s careful observations that quasars are episodically ejected in pairs in opposite directions along the spin axis of an active galaxy. The brightness of the quasars is higher and their redshift lower the further away we find them from their parent active galaxy, and therefore the older they are. Their mass seems to increase with age and they slow down to eventually go into orbit about the parent as a companion galaxy.

Plasma cosmology provides the insights into what is going on in the centers of active galaxies. It does not require a mythical black hole, merely a plasma focus effect. A plasma focus effect is the result of a cylindrically symmetrical electrical discharge. It provides the most concentrated form of electrical energy known. It takes the shape of a tiny plasma donut, or plasmoid, lying in the plane of the spiral galaxy and at its center. The plasmoid accumulates electrical energy from along the spiral arms until it suddenly begins to break down, forming an intense jet of neutrons, particles and radiation along its axis. Electrons, being much lighter, are trapped in the focus for a longer time. The neutrons in the jet begin to decay into protons and electrons, forming hydrogen atoms and some heavier elements, by neutron capture. (Given the extreme electromagnetic environment, we should not expect the neutron decay characteristics to mimic those seen on Earth). The material in the jet forms a ?knot? and becomes an electron deficient (positively charged) quasar.

Meanwhile, electrons are being slowly released by the decaying galactic plasmoid and they stream in a thin beam after the quasar. They form the great radio jets seen emanating from the nuclei of active galaxies.

It seems that as the quasar attracts electrons its matter becomes progressively more polarized, or massive, as Arp found. It is similar to what we observe in particle accelerators -- the more a particle is distorted, or polarized, in an electric field, the more massive it appears to become. If an electron orbiting a nucleus becomes progressively more massive in a globally changing electrical environment, it will require to compensate at intervals by executing small quantum jumps to new resonant orbits closer to the nucleus. The energy of those orbits will be higher and the result is a quantized shift away from the red end of the spectrum. The quasar becomes brighter and less redshifted. It is not closer.

DINGLE:
?The idea then arose that it [the electron] was a sort of mist of electricity, and Eddington probably gave it the most candid description as ?something unknown doing we don't know what.? We are no wiser today; nevertheless, we speak of the mass of an electron as though it were equivalent to the mass of a lump of lead.?
~Herbert Dingle, Science at the Cross-Roads, pp. 141-2.

THORNHILL:
It is the lower energy electron orbits in new quasar atoms that may give rise to the effect remarked upon by Davies and his co- workers. If so, it is due to a different inertial mass of an electron in a quasar atom, not a different speed of light 10 billion years ago. The result is simply that Planck's constant and consequently the fine structure constant will differ by a very small amount from that measured on Earth. Once again we see the trouble caused by arbitrarily assuming universality of physical constants measured on Earth.

Another serious problem faced by conventional thinking is that the quantum shifts seem to occur galaxy-wide without delay. No object has been found with two different redshifts. Yet a change propagating at the speed of light would take something like 100,000 years to traverse a galaxy. It seems that the kind of particle dipole distortions that create inertial mass and gravity propagate at the near infinite speed of the electrostatic force. So, once begun, the quantum shift in atomic orbitals could spread across a galaxy in less than a second. I suppose it could be termed ?galactic quantum entanglement.?

So, the good news for Star Trek fans is that Einstein?s speed limit is repealed. But the Warp Drive and Teleporter are out, I?m sorry. They are illogical. Space cannot be warped. And matter can neither be destroyed nor created, despite the widespread misconception that the ?m? in E = mc^2 means matter, and that antimatter annihilates matter. [The only possibility that I can imagine for a Teleporter would be to create an identical physical copy from materials already to hand at the receiver. But there is far more to biology than meets the scientific reductionist eye. Would the copy be alive? And if so, who, if anyone, would it be? And what do you do with the original -- kill it and dispose of the body in the process?]

Despite all of these absurdities, gravitational big bang cosmology still comes out the clear winner in the science fiction category.

As for Prof. Davies recent book, How to Build a Time Machine -- save your money, space fans, and put it into antigravity research! As taxpayers we pay dearly for this fiction anyway.

It is incredible that we entered the 21st century with an advanced technology that is crucially dependent upon electricity and yet a cosmology where the powerful electrical force has no role, when we know that electric charge is the foundation of all the matter in the universe.

Davies? bewilderment is understandable, ?If what we?re seeing is the beginnings of a paradigm shift in physics like what happened 100 years ago with the theory of relativity and quantum theory, it is very hard to know what sort of reasoning to bring to bear.?

Precisely. The revolution in thinking will not come from the present generation of theoretical cosmologists. It must come from the next generation of practical electrical engineers, plasma physicists and observational astronomers.

ARTHUR LYNCH:
??I have no doubt that there will arise a new generation who will look with a wonder and amazement, deeper than now accompany Einstein, at our galaxy of thinkers, men of science, popular critics, authoritative professors, and witty dramatists, who have been satisfied to waive their common sense in view of Einstein's absurdities. Then to these will succeed another generation, whose interest will be that of a detached and half-amused contemplation; and in the limbo of forgotten philosophies they may search for the cenotaph of Relativity.?
~Arthur Lynch, The Case Against Einstein, Dodd, Mead & Co., New York, 1933.

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

I trust you folks aren't closed minded to the extent that you couldn't read alternate views.

Thornhill asserts that time is universal and not tied to space. Hawkings conceptualization of black holes would appear to contradict this assertion in that the gravity well of a black hole sucks not only matter into its well but space and time are warped deferentially from the Schwartzchild radius inward, in an eddy or swirling fashion. Let's take a closer look at another thought regarding the phenomena, as arising from an 'electric universe' that confroms to temporal flux of a fashion.

From the above exchange: The notion that 'c' was considerably faster in the past has appeal to both cosmologists and creationists. Both camps have severe difficulties in explaining the observed universe, even with their vastly different time frames, unless things happened much faster initially. Cosmologists would like to see a near infinite speed of light immediately following the big bang and creationists about 10^11 times 'c'. Both are misled by their misunderstanding of the creation myths. ...

Proof that the cosmologists are mistaken both in their speculations about light-speed and the big bang hypothesis comes from the very source referred to in the above report -- the light from a quasar. The above-quoted article says that the quasar is 10 billion light years distant. That is based on the most peculiar big bang theory that the volume of the universe is increasing. It follows the observation that faint objects have their spectrum shifted towards the red. The discoverer of this phenomenon, Edwin Hubble, was careful to not attribute this 'redshift' to the Doppler effect of the velocity of recession of the object, but theorists were not so circumspect. The redshift -- velocity - distance equation quickly became another of the many dogmatic assumptions of cosmology.
Is it possible that within the event horizon of a black hole, the speed of light increases exponentially, eventually ranging beyond the temporal connection of spcatime, resulting in the 'spitting out' of a new galaxy source and that event occurs beyond our temporal limits in such a way that a new reduction of 'lightspeed' and time limits results in a quasar appearing in the neighborhood of a massive galaxy with a massive black hole at its core but along a track at 90 degrees to the 'plane' of the parent galaxy, and thus along the polar axis of the black hole?

Yes, it's late back East, here, but while the family watches a DVD of Spy Game I would fancy a bit of outlandish discussion. Any takers?... Are the clusters of galaxies observed actually seeded galaxies formed by the above admittedly strange concept?

Except the observed possible variation in the speed of light is on the order of a few percent, not 10¹¹. An entire thread occured on this very subject in the recent past. Also, your article implies that all cosmologists wish the speed of light to have been higher in the past (coincidentally agreeing with creationists). However, most cosmologists (judging from the stuff they publish) are quite happy with a constant c; only a very few of them seem at all dissatisfied.

The 'observed' speed ... thus the naysayers argue that 'we have yet to observe from a different temporal reference when and distant past speed could easily have been faster'. The physics inside a black hole makes an acceleration of light speed quite possible, it's assumed as a constant max for the purposes of calculation, but even Hawking wouldn't claim it is a fix law inside black holes and near the surface of neutron stars.

Placemarker.

Ping to a similar line of questioning

You may find this #268 of interest.

WELLLLLL FRIENDS, Here's some interesting links related to the earlier long post. I'm in the process of verifying particularly some of the zero point energy docs' links and posting some of the intros and interesting graphics from those docs. Blessings,

The following doc is found at:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/

THIS SITE INTROD BELOW IS REACHABLE—at the moment—at the link above:

Dear new explorers and experimenters,

You are WELCOME in the JLN Labs web site dedicated to the search of Free-Energy solutions and new generation of space-propulsion systems.
Good exploration,
Jean-Louis Naudin ( France )

If we could produce electric effects of the required quality, this whole planet and the conditions of existence on it could be transformed. The sun raises the water of the oceans and winds drive it to distant regions where it remains in state of most delicate balance. If it were in our power to upset it when and wherever desired, this mighty life-sustaining stream could be at will controlled. We could irrigate arid deserts, create lakes and rivers and provide motive power in unlimited amount. This would be the most efficient way of harnesing the sun to the uses of man......" ( Nikola Tesla, June 1919 )

The ElectroHydroDynamics ( EHD) may open new ways in advanced propulsion. An EHD device uses a direct conversion of electrical energy into kinetic energy. A specially shaped electrostatic field creates an hydrostatic pressure (or motion) in dielectric media. If the media is a fluid like air (or aether), a flow is produced and this produces a motion of the device. A powered flow of medium (like air or Aether) within a shaped electrostatic field adds energy to the system which is picked up (as potential difference) by electrodes and thus produces energy.

This link:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/lifters.htm

IS introduced this way:

The Lifter is an asymmetrical capacitor which uses High Voltage ( > 20KV ) to produce a thrust.

The Lifter works without moving parts, flies silently, uses only electrical energy and is able to lift its own weight plus an additional payload. The Lifter uses the Biefeld-Brown effect discovered by Thomas Townsend Brown in 1928. The basic design of the Lifter has been fully described in the Townsend Brown US Patent N°2949550 filed on Aug 16, 1960 and titled "Elektrokinetic Apparatus", you will find in this patent the full description of the main principle used in the Lifter devices.

An aircraft equipped with an electrokinetic system of propulsion based on the system of Townsend Brown has many very interesting characteristics, like :

- Vertical Take Off and Landing (VTOL) capabilities,
- a reduced aerodynamic drag,
- an increase in its flight time and thus in its operating range,
- an absence of mobile control surfaces (ailerons, rudder, elevator ) and thus no reflective mobile surface to the radar waves,
- a high maneuvrability (an adaptive flight envelope ) due to an intelligent control of the laminar flow,
- a full silent flight,
- a quasi null thermal signature,
- the use of an electric power generator and thus no fuel is required,
- the electromagnetic waves scattering and stealth capabilities...
-

-

- -

- THE 194G Lifter “Maximus” with 60 g of payload -

- -

- Lightweight power supply for lifter. -

- -

- Build yourself your own Lifter1. -

- -

- The Brown-Bahnson Saucer v2.0 -

- -

- A Proposed Electrodynamic Thrusting Mechanism by Charles A Yost -

- -

- The NASA Two Dimensional Asymmetrical Capacitor Thruster -

- -

- The NASA Orbital Maneuvering Propellantless Thruster v1.0 -

- -

- The Serrano’s Field Propulsion Thruster v1.0 -

- ============================================
- END OF THE LINKS AND SAMPLING OF INTERESTING PICS FROM ABOVE DOCUMENT
- ===========================
-

- 2ND DOC BELOW FOUND AT: -

- http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/tbfrenrg.htm -

- IS INTRO’D THIS WAY: -

In the paper " The Final Secret of Free Energy " wrote in February 9, 1993, Tom Bearden has described the principle of a device which seems able to tap Free Energy from the energy flow ( the Poynting S-Flow ) in the vaccum during the short transient phase ( the relaxation time in a conductor ) when a source is connected to a resistive load. In this paper, I am trying to clarify a bit, the basic concept of this principle.

Tom Bearden claims that when a Source ( a dipole ) is connected to a resistive load, the most important part of the principle is the information transfered to the load at the speed of light by the S-Flow. The S-Flow is pure EM energy which flows through the space and outside the conductor. This energy is Free and only this part must be used as a "free lunch". Just after this very short time, after that the switch is closed ( the transient phase ), the current begins to flow in the circuit. This transient phase is named the Relaxation Time. In copper, the relaxation time is incredibly rapid, it's about 1.5 x 10-19 sec. When the current flows ( the permanent phase ), the circuit consumes power from the Source and dissipates energy by Joule's Effet, this phase must not be used in our case.

So, according to Tom Bearden, for tapping Free Energy, the purpose is to charge a " Collector " during its relaxation time and then, to switch this Collector to a common resistive load, just before that the electrons begin to flow in the circuit.

We took some trapped EM energy density (a chunk of potential gradient, a "voltage" before current flows) from the source, by switching that potential gradient (energy density, which is joules per coulomb) onto a collector (containing a certain number of coulombs of trapped charges) where the potential gradient activates/potentializes/couples-to these temporarily non translating electrons. So the finite collector collected a finite amount of excess energy [joules/coulomb x collecting (trapped) coulombs] on its now-excited (activated) free electrons. Then, before any current has yet flowed from the source, we switched that potentialized collector (with its temporarily restrained but potentialized electrons; with their finite amount of excess trapped EM energy) away from the source and directly across the load. Shortly thereafter, the relaxation time in the collector expires. The potentialized electrons in the collector are freed to move in the external load circuit, consisting of the collector and the load, and so they do so. -- has said Tom Bearden.

For the Collector it is necessary to use a conductive material which has a longer relaxation time than in the copper. This is only for the electronic circuit design and the limitation of its components. So, Tom Bearden has used " a Degenerate Semiconductor " which has a relaxation time of about 1 ms. The Collector is made with 98% Aluminum and 2% Iron.

THE following interesting graphic is in the document sourced at the above link:

“The Bearden’s Free Energy Generator principle – Animation by JL Naudin . . . “

I hope to get some more links verified and their introductions included with the links in another posting or two later this evening.

Blessings,
Q

2ND PART OF VERIFIED DOC LINKS AND INTROS:

http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/Final%20Secret%2013%20May%201994/index.html

PRACTICAL OVERUNITY ELECTRICAL DEVICES

(C) T.E. Bearden
May 13, 1994

Introduction

Recently, my associates and I have filed a patent application on what we believe will at long last reveal the mechanisms for practical overunity electrical devices. It is my purpose in this paper to provide additional information augmenting my former two papers, (1) "The Final Secret of Free Energy," Feb. 1993, and (2) "Additional Information on the Final Secret of Free Energy," Feb. 1994. In this present paper, with the permission of my colleagues, I release the gist of our work on separation of electrical charge into two coupled components Ø (m), where Ø represents the massless charge of the charged particle or mass, represents the fact that it is coupled or trying to couple to the special mass that makes up charged particles [i.e., the special kind of mass that will couple to the virtual photon flux density that is represented by the symbol Ø], and m represents the inert mass component of the charged mass. Since not all masses will couple with Ø , we indicate the type of mass that will couple with it, as m. Thus a charged mass is composed of (Ø ) ( m), which we consolidate to (Ø) (m).

Charge Is Not Quantized

An interesting immediate result is that the massless charge of a fundamental charged particle is not quantized; it changes as a function of the background potential in which it is embedded. So it is discretized as a function of the background potential (i.e., of the virtual photon flux exchange between it and the surrounding vacuum). Otherwise, e.g., there could be no Ø created on any charged particle q, and hence no E-field, and hence electrons would not move in our present circuits. Since they do move in our circuits, charge is not quantized.

Figure 1. Use of Charge Barrier Device to Achieve Overunity in a Shuttle Circuit

Figure 2. Use of Charge Barrier Device in a Shuttle Circuit With Controlled Feedback, to Achieve a True Negative Resistor.

“The Chung’s Negative Resistance experiment” doc is found at:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/cnr/index.htm

In a July 9, 1998, at the 5th International Conference on Composites Engineering in Las Vegas, Dr. Deborah D. L. Chung, professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering at University at Buffalo (UB), reported that she had observed apparent negative resistance in interfaces between layers of carbon fibers in a composite material. Professor Chung holds the Niagara Mohawk Chair in Materials Research at UB and is internationally recognized for her work in smart materials and carbon composites. The negative resistance was observed in a direction perpendicular to the fiber layers. A paper describing the research was submitted by Chung to a peer-reviewed journal, and a patent application was filed by the University. Document source "On Extracting Electromagnetic Energy from the Vacuum," IC-2000, by Tom Bearden

Now, On May 19th, 2001, I have been able to replicate successfully the Chung's Negative Resistance (CNR). You will find in these pages all informations and datas about the CNR experiment that I have done. The CNR experiment has been conducted so as to be closer to the original Chung's design which is fully described in the paper "Apparent negative electrical resistance in carbon fiber composites," by Shoukai Wang and D.D.L. Chung - Composites, Part B, Vol. 30, 1999, p. 579-590.

• The main CNR experiment : An Apparent Negative Resistance has been measured successfully
• CNR v6.0 tests : A four-lamina carbon fiber composite
• The CNR photos album
• How to build and test yourself the CNR
• How to build and test yourself a four-lamina composite CNR
• A simulated model of the CNR
• The CNR effect can be simply explained by the Ohms Law ?
• A CNR without Carbon Fiber....
• Drift-diffusion balance explains `negative resistance' of material by Nadya Anscombe ( Electronics Times )
• US5059582: Superconductor-metal laminates and method of making ( FULL patent ) by Chung; Deborah
• Industrial Inventions from the DOE Energy Related Inventions Program (ERIP) : Carbon Fiber Metal Matrix Composite Superconductor Sandwich (Chung)
CNR builders reports and tests feedback :
• A successful CNR replication by Roger Burley

3RD DOC

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/meg.htm

The Motionless Electrokmagnetic Generator, Extracting Energy from a Permanent Magnet with Energy-Replenishing from the Active Vacuum

from Thomas E. Bearden, Ph.D. James C. Hayes, Ph.D. James L. Kenny, Ph.D. Kenneth D. Moore, B.S. Stephen L. Patrick, B.S.

"..This one works beautifully and produces COP=5.0..." has said Tom Bearden

The MEG diagrams published in these pages are currently under test by JL Naudin and may be subject to modifications after that they have been published on this site. They are the result of some attempts of a private and fully independant replication by the author. These diagrams are not the original MEG diagrams being tested by the Bearden's teamwork or some accredited labs.

Disclaimer: The author assumes no liability for any incidental, consequential or other liability from the use of this information. All risks and damages, incidental or otherwise, arising from the use or misuse of the information contained herein are entirely the responsibility of the user. Although careful precaution has been taken in the preparation of this material, I assume no responsibility for omissions or errors in the diagrams or measurement datas published here.

US Patent 6,362,718 : Motionless Electromagnetic Generator See the full MEG patent with diagrams ( 15 pages )

Abstract

An electromagnetic generator without moving parts includes a permanent magnet and a magnetic core including first and second magnetic paths. A first input coil and a first output coil extend around portions of the first magnetic path, while a second input coil and a second output coil extend around portions of the second magnetic path. The input coils are alternatively pulsed to provide induced current pulses in the output coils. Driving electrical current through each of the input coils reduces a level of flux from the permanent magnet within the magnet path around which the input coil extends. In an alternative embodiment of an electromagnetic generator, the magnetic core includes annular spaced-apart plates, with posts and permanent magnets extending in an alternating fashion between the plates. An output coil extends around each of these posts. Input coils extending around portions of the plates are pulsed to cause the induction of current within the output coils.

Inventors: Patrick Stephen L; Bearden Thomas E.; Hayes James C.; Moore Kenneth D.; Kenny James L.
Appl. No.: 656313
Filed: September 6, 2000

Kudos Quix, thanks so much for the links! More tomorrow ...

There is a consortium of deposed Colonels in Nigeria that may wish to fund such projects. You will be hearing from them.

Is black crunch like chocolate captain crunch?Because cap crunch jams my universal cycle.