Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-19 Thread James Bowery
 conjure up.
 But I accept that may not be the case for most.

 John

 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:44 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.comwrote:

 What would be an acceptable control experiment that could distinguish
 between placebo and real effect?  What about double blind?


 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 5:13 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 Let me add that I also know that this has nothing to do with visual
 effects because this is only one form I have used to effect the aether.

 It started when I made a coil a bit over a year ago, I could very
 very faintly at first feel something in my hand.
 It was near the level of imagination at first, but it became more
 apparent as the energy gathered in my hand until it was undeniable.

 I thought it might have had a conventional explanation until I found
 it worked for a few minutes after turning the power off.

 I learnt more and made one that needed no power and was stronger, I
 tested it on people and found a majority could feel it.

 I have since made many more coils and had about 200+ people feel a
 sensation (over 90%, often about 97%, occasionally a lower percentage 
 feel
 it, but always a majority).

 I have made audio files that use some of the principles I found to
 get computer speakers to make the energy (sometimes it is not the sound 
 but
 the EM from the speakers that effects the aether).

 And I have done a lot of work with images since they can effect the
 aether just fine, but have many many advantages.

 So if it was just an effect with the mind, then these same principles
 would not work when in coil form hidden from sight in a tube, but it 
 works
 fine.

 So before you write this off as some bio-sensory trick, give it a try.
 Why wouldn't light effect the medium in which it has it's existence?
 Really by definition it must. Well, it does.


 John

 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:14 AM, John Berry 
 berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 This is not made to effect the eye or brain.
 It works with eyes closed.
 As do images that look like a solid colour to the eyes, they still
 work (due to subtle colour variation the eye can't make out).

 If you put the  'shooter' image on screen and feel the right side of
 the screen from the back or not looking at the screen, the energy can 
 still
 be felt.
 Having said that, it depends on the persons sensitivity.

 Some people can't feel it in their palms, but enough can.

 If you don't believe me, here is a radical idea, try it.
 Stick the image on screen and feel at the 'output' of the shooter
 image and see if you can feel something (likely subtle, a breeze, a 
 cool, a
 warmth, a tingle, something), then try without being able to see the 
 image.


 John


 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
 francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  John,

 Eye candy, vertigo and mood alteration are certainly examples of
 light patterns affecting the brain through optical stimulation but I 
 would
 not qualify this as engineering the ether. It is an interesting 
 subject but
 I disagree with you titling this subject as based on ether theory.*
 ***

 Regards

 Fran

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:05 AM

 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists
 here?

  ** **

 Harry, thanks for your appreciation.

 ** **

 But it isn't about drawings.

 Sure, that is the option I have selected to share since it is sooo
 easy to replicate.

  

 I can also make sound files that create energy that can be felt.***
 *

 ** **

 And programs

 ** **

 And videos, but the easiest to share is images.

 ** **

 I can share coils, I can share electrical circuits.

 ** **

 It is about breaking into a new realm of physics that makes much
 more extraordinary technology possible.

 ** **

 So who is interested?
 So far no one new has apparently tried to feel the energy.

 ** **

 I thought the only reason to be here was interests in breakthrough
 discoveries in science that change what is possible, it seems however 
 that
 there are very very few even willing to dip their toe in the water.
 

 ** **

 ** **

 John

 ** **

 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Thanks for positing this.
 It is about drawing the world into existence.

  

 Newton drew a clock-work universe into existence using geometry
 and the tools of a mechanical draftsmen.

 ...geometry is founded in mechanical practice, and is nothing but
 that part of universal mechanics which accurately proposes and 
 demonstrates
 the art of measuring. --from the preface to Principia  



 Today, we don't have to confine ourselves to mechanical practices
 when drawing geometry so we can draw different worlds into existence.
 

  

  

  

 Harry


  

  

  

 ** **

 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:56 AM, John Berry

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-19 Thread Alexander Hollins
I apologize, I just started reading these posts.

That is an interesting idea, but I continue to have a difficult time
accepting the concept that there is one special velocity to use as a
reference.

Really? I'm going to have to delve into this, because my primary issue with
relativity and physics in general as I've learned more and more about the
relations between time, mass, and velocity is the statement that there is
not. To my mind, I cannot conceive of a universe in which there is not a
single center point, either stationary or moving, but by moving causing
everything to move in relation to it, so appearing to be stationary that
we can relate too. A specific velocity that matches that ground state that,
once reached, mass should approach zero and the effects caused by
increasing mass (time dilation) vanish.

Thank you for another interesting line of discussion VO!


On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:30 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 John, Fran,

  I see that you two believe in some form of ether that modifies the space
 around us.  That is an interesting idea, but I continue to have a difficult
 time accepting the concept that there is one special velocity to use as a
 reference.  Just about everything in the universe is moving relative to
 everything else that is not directly, and physically attached to it.  It
 makes more sense to me to just accept the fact that there is no absolute
 reference frame about which everything develops.

  On many occasions I find it quite advantageous to visualize myself
 residing within a certain chosen frame to understand what is taking place
 during collisions, etc.  When chosen carefully, the observations that can
 be made reveal behavior that is hidden by the complexity normally
 encountered when a convenient one is randomly picked.  The same laws of
 physics must be followed for each observer so one that chooses wisely can
 obtain a great advantage.

  When you speak of time variations that each observer encounters you are
 getting into a truly exciting subject that is endlessly interesting.  Of
 course, each observer detects nothing unusual about the way time unfolds in
 his constant velocity world.  It is only when he observes others living in
 other reference frames that are moving relative to him that he notices
 strange behavior.  I suspect that taking this aspect into consideration
 might unlock some of the mysteries that keep us asking questions about
 nature.  For instance, I have mentally adjusted my frame of reference on
 occasions to include moving at nearly the speed of light relative to some
 experimental setups to see if it can be used to explain what occurs.  So
 far I have hit difficult barriers but I hope to one day gain information
 that clarifies these events.

  I suppose that our main task is to continue to ask questions and not
 accept the current descriptions of physics without adequate proof.  It is
 safe to assume that there is much left to be learned in the sciences and
 that new understanding begins with good questions.  We should encourage
 discussions about the behavior of time, ethers, and whatever else comes
 into focus even if they do not agree with our current understanding.

  Dave



 -Original Message-
 From: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Tue, Apr 16, 2013 10:57 am
 Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

  John,
 I think Ed Storm coined the NAE as a Nuclear Active
 environment.. not really defining how the lattice geometry does what it
 does but rather just defining the area where it occurs.. these hot spots do
 sometimes produce trace amounts of nuclear ash but not enough to account
 for the anomalous energy claimed… I am a neo Lorentzian theorist, IMHO the
 ether is moving through our 3D plane at a rate that defines our basic unit
 of time and is why we will always experience C as 300 million m/s –if the
 ether were to vary we would be blissfully unaware of it as our “awareness”
 will always match the rate of the ether passing through our plane..in
 effect it is our time base and is why we have the odd time dilation effects
 where the paradox twins are unaware of each others differences in inertial
 frames until they get back together and realize they were living at
 different rates.
 Fran


  *From:* John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.comberry.joh...@gmail.com?]

 *Sent:* Tuesday, April 16, 2013 9:42 AM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

 NAE is not an acronym I am familiar with.
  I see it can mean nuclear active environment.

  Have you tried the image?

  On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
 francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:
  John, I never left the path..perhaps this makes me a nutty troll but
 didn’t Tesla already treat this like an electrical science, He proposed
 that super high voltages could stiffen or “solidify

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-19 Thread Harry Veeder
You do a double blind trial by automating the process and covering the
screen.

Program a computer to randomly display one of your images or a blank
screen every minute of so. The computer will keep a record of what was
displayed during each time interval.
During the interval test subjects will report  if they sensed anything.

You can then look for correlations in the data.

Harry


On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 10:07 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

 First off, thank you for at least considering this.

 Yes I a bit frustrated that no one new has reported even trying these
 images, but I did not mean to show any disrespect.

 There is an issue I didn't really want to get to yet, but I think it must
 be considered if we are going to get into the area of blind tests.

 You are likely aware of the small but positive results that tiny steel
 balls falling one side or another in a contraption showed an influence of
 the mind on the results.
 You may or may not be aware that certain experiments with subatomic
 particles and SQUID's show a very strong influence of the mind.

 There is of course other 'fringe' evidence of various non-physical
 energies being effected by the mind, additionally there is a field called
 energy psychology where energy structured with emotions is released.

 Rupert Shaldrake's research, links between identical twins and mother and
 her children are sometime inexplicable without some degree of thoughts
 being things.

 Indeed the placebo effect can not only be more effective than many
 treatments, it is becoming more effective than it used to be, about double!

 So the problem is that devices that manipulate the aether act to increase
 the energy available to the Placebo effect (available to the mind).

 Now you see why I didn't want to get into this, I am already asking you to
 feel a something I can only poorly define which most people can experience
 but in different ways, and now I have to add the additional detail, your
 beliefs and thoughts can effect the aetheric energy to a degree.

 That doesn't mean a placebo controlled test can't work, but it does make
 for a possibility of some confusing results.

 I know it is real, I feel it as a physical sensation on my palms and
 sometimes other places on my body and it is very very strong and real.
 But I know you can't take it on faith.

 You could just humor me.
 Or you could try to feel it yourself, hopefully enough to be convinced of
 it.

 Of course you could ignore it as being too far out.

 But consider that the rules of scientific evidence may actually stop us
 from  recognizing a part of reality.

 My interest does not lie in how this interacts with the mind, or various
 other distractions.
 My interest does lie in creating physical effects.

 Physics has been ignoring a rather significant (albeit seldom reliable or
 clear) portion of reality, and this does open up the possibility of
 understanding these areas for those interested, just not my prime area of
 interest.

 I am not sure how to run a blind test well when the aether can be effected
 by thoughts. It might be possible but real consideration would have to be
 given.


  John


 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:10 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 You know, John, if I were an amazing Randi type, aside from the fact that
 I wouldn't be caught dead posting to vortex-l, I would propose my own
 control experiment rather than asking you what you considered to be an
 acceptable control experiment.

 If I were the Amazing Randi, my control experiment would be something
 like show a bunch of people random images and ask them if they felt
 anything.  I would then proceed to lead a monkey beat upon you satisfying
 the egos of a bunch of skeptics that they had the strength of numbers on
 their side.

 So how about showing me the respect that I showed you by asking you what
 YOU would consider to be an acceptable control experiment?






Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-19 Thread Harry Veeder
I think you should also do a version where passive images are printed
paper and kept in sealed envelopes.
A video image is an active image in the sense that it requires an
electrical power source to be present. As a result a video image might
channel or focus EM fields and radiation in such a way that they may become
sensible by a hand.


Harry


On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:


 You do a double blind trial by automating the process and covering the
 screen.

 Program a computer to randomly display one of your images or a blank
 screen every minute of so. The computer will keep a record of what was
 displayed during each time interval.
 During the interval test subjects will report  if they sensed anything.

 You can then look for correlations in the data.

 Harry


 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 10:07 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 First off, thank you for at least considering this.

 Yes I a bit frustrated that no one new has reported even trying these
 images, but I did not mean to show any disrespect.

 There is an issue I didn't really want to get to yet, but I think it must
 be considered if we are going to get into the area of blind tests.

 You are likely aware of the small but positive results that tiny steel
 balls falling one side or another in a contraption showed an influence of
 the mind on the results.
 You may or may not be aware that certain experiments with subatomic
 particles and SQUID's show a very strong influence of the mind.

 There is of course other 'fringe' evidence of various non-physical
 energies being effected by the mind, additionally there is a field called
 energy psychology where energy structured with emotions is released.

 Rupert Shaldrake's research, links between identical twins and mother and
 her children are sometime inexplicable without some degree of thoughts
 being things.

 Indeed the placebo effect can not only be more effective than many
 treatments, it is becoming more effective than it used to be, about double!

 So the problem is that devices that manipulate the aether act to increase
 the energy available to the Placebo effect (available to the mind).

 Now you see why I didn't want to get into this, I am already asking you
 to feel a something I can only poorly define which most people can
 experience but in different ways, and now I have to add the additional
 detail, your beliefs and thoughts can effect the aetheric energy to a
 degree.

 That doesn't mean a placebo controlled test can't work, but it does make
 for a possibility of some confusing results.

 I know it is real, I feel it as a physical sensation on my palms and
 sometimes other places on my body and it is very very strong and real.
 But I know you can't take it on faith.

 You could just humor me.
 Or you could try to feel it yourself, hopefully enough to be convinced of
 it.

 Of course you could ignore it as being too far out.

 But consider that the rules of scientific evidence may actually stop us
 from  recognizing a part of reality.

 My interest does not lie in how this interacts with the mind, or various
 other distractions.
 My interest does lie in creating physical effects.

 Physics has been ignoring a rather significant (albeit seldom reliable or
 clear) portion of reality, and this does open up the possibility of
 understanding these areas for those interested, just not my prime area of
 interest.

 I am not sure how to run a blind test well when the aether can be
 effected by thoughts. It might be possible but real consideration would
 have to be given.


  John


 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:10 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.comwrote:

 You know, John, if I were an amazing Randi type, aside from the fact
 that I wouldn't be caught dead posting to vortex-l, I would propose my own
 control experiment rather than asking you what you considered to be an
 acceptable control experiment.

 If I were the Amazing Randi, my control experiment would be something
 like show a bunch of people random images and ask them if they felt
 anything.  I would then proceed to lead a monkey beat upon you satisfying
 the egos of a bunch of skeptics that they had the strength of numbers on
 their side.

 So how about showing me the respect that I showed you by asking you what
 YOU would consider to be an acceptable control experiment?






Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-19 Thread Roarty, Francis X
On Fri 4/19 Alex said [snip] I continue to have a difficult time accepting the 
concept that there is one special velocity to use as a reference.[/snip].

Alex,
That is not what I am saying, in fact the velocities are so 
different below the Planck scale we have wormholes forming to relieve the 
differentials throughout the quantum foam..but by the time we reach the 
physical scale all this turbulence has averaged out to an isotropic value that 
can only vary slowly with gravitational changes. The point I was trying to make 
is that we are never aware of the variations because out time quantum is based 
on our local value..the twin Paradox being the extreme case but it indicates 2 
things, first-- that we are obviously unaware of  our local vector angle 
between time and space [always perceiving our selves at 0 degrees in the 
spatial plane], and second-- that this 4th dimension is still physical space 
regardless of dilation factor [matter doesn't suddenly come unglued]. It makes 
a case for catalytic action and gas loading based on accessing this additional 
volume of space and is what ZPE proponents are seeking to exploit. In the macro 
world it would equate to exploiting Lorentzian contraction which is difficult 
from practical considerations of both  velocity and only ONE  spatial 
direction/dimension being contracted..it is a spatial vector in a trig 
relationship with C where the ether is moving through our plane at the rate we 
always perceive of as C. [compressing the raindrops against the windshield 
from the Haisch Rueda analogy]...BUT in suppression via geometry you don't 
need velocity and the effect suppresses the ether on all 3 spatial axis.. My 
posit is that virtual particles grow into and shrink out of existence via 
symmetrical Lorentzian- like contraction on all 3 axis. I say Lorentzian Like 
because there are 3 key differences, One-- the velocity is equivalent like 
an alternative Paradox where the Twin stands at the bottom of a deep gravity 
well instead of accelerating to near luminal velocities. Two-- The equivalent 
velocity is negative from our perspective because we are still experiencing the 
full average rate of ether passing through our plane [we experience the 
isotropic average at the macro scale] while inside the Casimir geometry the 
rate is suppressed ... so from the perspective inside the cavity we outside in 
the macro world are equivalent to that twin standing at the bottom of a gravity 
well and we slow down in time [age slowly] while from our perspective the 
observers in the cavity appear to accelerate [age rapidly]. Three-the occupants 
of the cavity appear to shrink in all 3 dimensions allowing us to load much 
more into them than would seem plausible for their available volume... they use 
pressure and temperature to try and explain gas loading but my posit remains 
that this is due to a relativistic interpretation of Casimir effect and 
likewise the hydrino is actually relativistic hydrogen exactly as Jan Naudts 
wrote in 2005. There really is more room inside these cavities than we perceive 
from the outside and as more hydrogen poors into the cavities they see the 
walls shrink away as they migrate out onto the temporal axis.
Fran

From: itsat...@gmail.com [mailto:itsat...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Alexander 
Hollins
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 12:44 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

I apologize, I just started reading these posts.

That is an interesting idea, but I continue to have a difficult time accepting 
the concept that there is one special velocity to use as a reference.

Really? I'm going to have to delve into this, because my primary issue with 
relativity and physics in general as I've learned more and more about the 
relations between time, mass, and velocity is the statement that there is not. 
To my mind, I cannot conceive of a universe in which there is not a single 
center point, either stationary or moving, but by moving causing everything 
to move in relation to it, so appearing to be stationary that we can relate 
too. A specific velocity that matches that ground state that, once reached, 
mass should approach zero and the effects caused by increasing mass (time 
dilation) vanish.

Thank you for another interesting line of discussion VO!

On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:30 AM, David Roberson 
dlrober...@aol.commailto:dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
John, Fran,

I see that you two believe in some form of ether that modifies the space around 
us.  That is an interesting idea, but I continue to have a difficult time 
accepting the concept that there is one special velocity to use as a reference. 
 Just about everything in the universe is moving relative to everything else 
that is not directly, and physically attached to it.  It makes more sense to me 
to just accept the fact that there is no absolute reference frame about which 
everything develops.

On many occasions I find it quite

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-19 Thread John Berry
 were an amazing Randi type, aside from the fact
 that I wouldn't be caught dead posting to vortex-l, I would propose my own
 control experiment rather than asking you what you considered to be an
 acceptable control experiment.

 If I were the Amazing Randi, my control experiment would be something
 like show a bunch of people random images and ask them if they felt
 anything.  I would then proceed to lead a monkey beat upon you satisfying
 the egos of a bunch of skeptics that they had the strength of numbers on
 their side.

 So how about showing me the respect that I showed you by asking you what
 YOU would consider to be an acceptable control experiment?



 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:09 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.comwrote:

 Running a control experiment is debunking?


 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 5:57 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 It is funny that not a single new person has reported even testing the
 images.
 Both Jones Bennee and Gibson Elliot had tested and reported back with
 positive results before I posted this to Vortex.

 So before everyone tries to debunk it, find fault.
 How about actually testing it and reporting back what if anything you
 got from it?

 For me the intensity of the energy is far far beyond anything that my
 imagination alone can conjure up.
 But I accept that may not be the case for most.

 John

 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:44 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.comwrote:

 What would be an acceptable control experiment that could distinguish
 between placebo and real effect?  What about double blind?


 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 5:13 PM, John Berry 
 berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 Let me add that I also know that this has nothing to do with visual
 effects because this is only one form I have used to effect the aether.

 It started when I made a coil a bit over a year ago, I could very
 very faintly at first feel something in my hand.
 It was near the level of imagination at first, but it became more
 apparent as the energy gathered in my hand until it was undeniable.

 I thought it might have had a conventional explanation until I found
 it worked for a few minutes after turning the power off.

 I learnt more and made one that needed no power and was stronger, I
 tested it on people and found a majority could feel it.

 I have since made many more coils and had about 200+ people feel a
 sensation (over 90%, often about 97%, occasionally a lower percentage 
 feel
 it, but always a majority).

 I have made audio files that use some of the principles I found to
 get computer speakers to make the energy (sometimes it is not the sound 
 but
 the EM from the speakers that effects the aether).

 And I have done a lot of work with images since they can effect the
 aether just fine, but have many many advantages.

 So if it was just an effect with the mind, then these same
 principles would not work when in coil form hidden from sight in a tube,
 but it works fine.

 So before you write this off as some bio-sensory trick, give it a
 try.
 Why wouldn't light effect the medium in which it has it's existence?
 Really by definition it must. Well, it does.


 John

 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:14 AM, John Berry 
 berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 This is not made to effect the eye or brain.
 It works with eyes closed.
 As do images that look like a solid colour to the eyes, they still
 work (due to subtle colour variation the eye can't make out).

 If you put the  'shooter' image on screen and feel the right side
 of the screen from the back or not looking at the screen, the energy 
 can
 still be felt.
 Having said that, it depends on the persons sensitivity.

 Some people can't feel it in their palms, but enough can.

 If you don't believe me, here is a radical idea, try it.
 Stick the image on screen and feel at the 'output' of the shooter
 image and see if you can feel something (likely subtle, a breeze, a 
 cool, a
 warmth, a tingle, something), then try without being able to see the 
 image.


 John


 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
 francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  John,

 Eye candy, vertigo and mood alteration are certainly examples of
 light patterns affecting the brain through optical stimulation but I 
 would
 not qualify this as engineering the ether. It is an interesting 
 subject but
 I disagree with you titling this subject as based on ether theory.
 

 Regards

 Fran

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:05 AM

 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists
 here?

  ** **

 Harry, thanks for your appreciation.

 ** **

 But it isn't about drawings.

 Sure, that is the option I have selected to share since it is sooo
 easy to replicate.

  

 I can also make sound files that create energy that can be felt.**
 **

 ** **

 And programs

 ** **

 And videos, but the easiest to share is images

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-19 Thread James Bowery
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 6:02 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:



 On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 2:57 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 So, let me ask you again for an acceptable control experiment but in
 different terms:

 What sort of picture does your theory predict will be very similar to the
 experimental treatment picture, but lack the essential aspects that produce
 the amplification of the placebo, or other hypothesized effect?


 Well I did already post an image that has 2 very similar 'devices', one
 which works well and another that is almost lifeless, just split them up.

 http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/9209/activeandinactive.png


Thanks!

That's a good start.

Do you have any idea whether the inactive one would frequently be made
active by variations in display setttings?


Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-19 Thread John Berry

 Do you have any idea whether the inactive one would frequently be made
 active by variations in display setttings?


Not very likely.

There are various difficulties, not that it should stop you but you should
be aware of them.

Aetheric energy can couple over large distances, additionally it can remain
in an area or an object once disturbed.

Coupling over large distances can occur sometimes when there is resonance
between 2 similar things, much like radio's tuned to resonance, or
the aforementioned twin effect.
So even if one image is inactive, if it is too close it may 'couple' and
take energy from the active one.

Not that it can't be studied in such ways successfully, but ignoring the
way it functions serves the likes of Randi, but it does not serve genuine
interest in reclaiming extraordinary science from the fringe.

John


On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 12:08 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:




 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 6:02 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:



 On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 2:57 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 So, let me ask you again for an acceptable control experiment but in
 different terms:

 What sort of picture does your theory predict will be very similar to
 the experimental treatment picture, but lack the essential aspects that
 produce the amplification of the placebo, or other hypothesized effect?


 Well I did already post an image that has 2 very similar 'devices', one
 which works well and another that is almost lifeless, just split them up.

 http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/9209/activeandinactive.png


 Thanks!

 That's a good start.

 Do you have any idea whether the inactive one would frequently be made
 active by variations in display setttings?





Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-18 Thread Harry Veeder
Thanks for positing this.
It is about drawing the world into existence.

Newton drew a clock-work universe into existence using geometry and the
tools of a mechanical draftsmen.
...geometry is founded in mechanical practice, and is nothing but that
part of universal mechanics which accurately proposes and demonstrates the
art of measuring. --from the preface to Principia


Today, we don't have to confine ourselves to mechanical practices when
drawing geometry so we can draw different worlds into existence.



Harry






On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:56 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

 And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development with
 some previous ones.
 http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png

 All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people report they don't
 feel anything.

 Again, best in a dark room (but not required).

 Feel for any sensations.


 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:43 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 A worthwhile improvement for both images:

 http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png

 http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png


 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:32 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 I sent the wrong image by mistake, the first link should have been this
 one:
 http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4411/thelateststrongest2.png






Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-18 Thread John Berry
Harry, thanks for your appreciation.

But it isn't about drawings.
Sure, that is the option I have selected to share since it is sooo easy to
replicate.

I can also make sound files that create energy that can be felt.

And programs

And videos, but the easiest to share is images.

I can share coils, I can share electrical circuits.

It is about breaking into a new realm of physics that makes much more
extraordinary technology possible.

So who is interested?
So far no one new has apparently tried to feel the energy.

I thought the only reason to be here was interests in breakthrough
discoveries in science that change what is possible, it seems however that
there are very very few even willing to dip their toe in the water.


John

On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thanks for positing this.
 It is about drawing the world into existence.

 Newton drew a clock-work universe into existence using geometry and the
 tools of a mechanical draftsmen.
 ...geometry is founded in mechanical practice, and is nothing but that
 part of universal mechanics which accurately proposes and demonstrates the
 art of measuring. --from the preface to Principia


 Today, we don't have to confine ourselves to mechanical practices when
 drawing geometry so we can draw different worlds into existence.



 Harry






 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:56 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development with
 some previous ones.
 http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png

 All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people report they don't
 feel anything.

 Again, best in a dark room (but not required).

 Feel for any sensations.


 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:43 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 A worthwhile improvement for both images:

 http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png

 http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png


 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:32 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 I sent the wrong image by mistake, the first link should have been this
 one:
 http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4411/thelateststrongest2.png







RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-18 Thread Roarty, Francis X
John,
Eye candy, vertigo and mood alteration are certainly examples of light patterns 
affecting the brain through optical stimulation but I would not qualify this as 
engineering the ether. It is an interesting subject but I disagree with you 
titling this subject as based on ether theory.
Regards
Fran


From: John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:05 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

Harry, thanks for your appreciation.

But it isn't about drawings.
Sure, that is the option I have selected to share since it is sooo easy to 
replicate.

I can also make sound files that create energy that can be felt.

And programs

And videos, but the easiest to share is images.

I can share coils, I can share electrical circuits.

It is about breaking into a new realm of physics that makes much more 
extraordinary technology possible.

So who is interested?
So far no one new has apparently tried to feel the energy.

I thought the only reason to be here was interests in breakthrough discoveries 
in science that change what is possible, it seems however that there are very 
very few even willing to dip their toe in the water.


John

On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Harry Veeder 
hveeder...@gmail.commailto:hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for positing this.
It is about drawing the world into existence.

Newton drew a clock-work universe into existence using geometry and the tools 
of a mechanical draftsmen.
...geometry is founded in mechanical practice, and is nothing but that part of 
universal mechanics which accurately proposes and demonstrates the art of 
measuring. --from the preface to Principia


Today, we don't have to confine ourselves to mechanical practices when drawing 
geometry so we can draw different worlds into existence.



Harry





On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:56 AM, John Berry 
berry.joh...@gmail.commailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development with some 
previous ones.
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png

All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people report they don't feel 
anything.

Again, best in a dark room (but not required).

Feel for any sensations.


On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:43 PM, John Berry 
berry.joh...@gmail.commailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
A worthwhile improvement for both images:

http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png

http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png


On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:32 PM, John Berry 
berry.joh...@gmail.commailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
I sent the wrong image by mistake, the first link should have been this one:
http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4411/thelateststrongest2.png






Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-18 Thread Axil Axil
how about this?

http://singularityhub.com/2013/03/11/brains-of-two-rats-linked-half-way-across-the-world/



On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:04 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

 Harry, thanks for your appreciation.

 But it isn't about drawings.
 Sure, that is the option I have selected to share since it is sooo easy to
 replicate.

 I can also make sound files that create energy that can be felt.

 And programs

 And videos, but the easiest to share is images.

 I can share coils, I can share electrical circuits.

 It is about breaking into a new realm of physics that makes much more
 extraordinary technology possible.

 So who is interested?
 So far no one new has apparently tried to feel the energy.

 I thought the only reason to be here was interests in breakthrough
 discoveries in science that change what is possible, it seems however that
 there are very very few even willing to dip their toe in the water.


 John

 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.comwrote:

 Thanks for positing this.
 It is about drawing the world into existence.

 Newton drew a clock-work universe into existence using geometry and the
 tools of a mechanical draftsmen.
 ...geometry is founded in mechanical practice, and is nothing but that
 part of universal mechanics which accurately proposes and demonstrates the
 art of measuring. --from the preface to Principia


 Today, we don't have to confine ourselves to mechanical practices when
 drawing geometry so we can draw different worlds into existence.



 Harry






 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:56 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development with
 some previous ones.
 http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png

 All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people report they don't
 feel anything.

 Again, best in a dark room (but not required).

 Feel for any sensations.


 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:43 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 A worthwhile improvement for both images:

 http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png

 http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png


 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:32 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 I sent the wrong image by mistake, the first link should have been
 this one:
 http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4411/thelateststrongest2.png








Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-18 Thread John Berry
This is not made to effect the eye or brain.
It works with eyes closed.
As do images that look like a solid colour to the eyes, they still work
(due to subtle colour variation the eye can't make out).

If you put the  'shooter' image on screen and feel the right side of the
screen from the back or not looking at the screen, the energy can still be
felt.
Having said that, it depends on the persons sensitivity.

Some people can't feel it in their palms, but enough can.

If you don't believe me, here is a radical idea, try it.
Stick the image on screen and feel at the 'output' of the shooter image and
see if you can feel something (likely subtle, a breeze, a cool, a warmth, a
tingle, something), then try without being able to see the image.


John


On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  John,

 Eye candy, vertigo and mood alteration are certainly examples of light
 patterns affecting the brain through optical stimulation but I would not
 qualify this as engineering the ether. It is an interesting subject but I
 disagree with you titling this subject as based on ether theory.

 Regards

 Fran

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:05 AM

 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?***
 *

  ** **

 Harry, thanks for your appreciation.

 ** **

 But it isn't about drawings.

 Sure, that is the option I have selected to share since it is sooo easy to
 replicate.

  

 I can also make sound files that create energy that can be felt.

 ** **

 And programs

 ** **

 And videos, but the easiest to share is images.

 ** **

 I can share coils, I can share electrical circuits.

 ** **

 It is about breaking into a new realm of physics that makes much more
 extraordinary technology possible.

 ** **

 So who is interested?
 So far no one new has apparently tried to feel the energy.

 ** **

 I thought the only reason to be here was interests in breakthrough
 discoveries in science that change what is possible, it seems however that
 there are very very few even willing to dip their toe in the water.

 ** **

 ** **

 John

 ** **

 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Thanks for positing this.
 It is about drawing the world into existence.

  

 Newton drew a clock-work universe into existence using geometry and the
 tools of a mechanical draftsmen.

 ...geometry is founded in mechanical practice, and is nothing but that
 part of universal mechanics which accurately proposes and demonstrates the
 art of measuring. --from the preface to Principia  



 Today, we don't have to confine ourselves to mechanical practices when
 drawing geometry so we can draw different worlds into existence.

  

  

  

 Harry


  

  

  

 ** **

 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:56 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development with
 some previous ones.

 http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png

 ** **

 All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people report they don't
 feel anything.

 ** **

 Again, best in a dark room (but not required).

 ** **

 Feel for any sensations.

 ** **

 ** **

 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:43 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 A worthwhile improvement for both images:

 ** **

 http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png

 ** **

 http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png

 ** **

 ** **

 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:32 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 I sent the wrong image by mistake, the first link should have been this
 one:

 http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4411/thelateststrongest2.png

 ** **

 ** **

 ** **

 ** **



Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-18 Thread John Berry
Let me add that I also know that this has nothing to do with visual effects
because this is only one form I have used to effect the aether.

It started when I made a coil a bit over a year ago, I could very very
faintly at first feel something in my hand.
It was near the level of imagination at first, but it became more apparent
as the energy gathered in my hand until it was undeniable.

I thought it might have had a conventional explanation until I found it
worked for a few minutes after turning the power off.

I learnt more and made one that needed no power and was stronger, I tested
it on people and found a majority could feel it.

I have since made many more coils and had about 200+ people feel a
sensation (over 90%, often about 97%, occasionally a lower percentage feel
it, but always a majority).

I have made audio files that use some of the principles I found to get
computer speakers to make the energy (sometimes it is not the sound but the
EM from the speakers that effects the aether).

And I have done a lot of work with images since they can effect the aether
just fine, but have many many advantages.

So if it was just an effect with the mind, then these same principles would
not work when in coil form hidden from sight in a tube, but it works fine.

So before you write this off as some bio-sensory trick, give it a try.
Why wouldn't light effect the medium in which it has it's existence? Really
by definition it must. Well, it does.


John

On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:14 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

 This is not made to effect the eye or brain.
 It works with eyes closed.
 As do images that look like a solid colour to the eyes, they still work
 (due to subtle colour variation the eye can't make out).

 If you put the  'shooter' image on screen and feel the right side of the
 screen from the back or not looking at the screen, the energy can still be
 felt.
 Having said that, it depends on the persons sensitivity.

 Some people can't feel it in their palms, but enough can.

 If you don't believe me, here is a radical idea, try it.
 Stick the image on screen and feel at the 'output' of the shooter image
 and see if you can feel something (likely subtle, a breeze, a cool, a
 warmth, a tingle, something), then try without being able to see the image.


 John


 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
 francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  John,

 Eye candy, vertigo and mood alteration are certainly examples of light
 patterns affecting the brain through optical stimulation but I would not
 qualify this as engineering the ether. It is an interesting subject but I
 disagree with you titling this subject as based on ether theory.

 Regards

 Fran

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:05 AM

 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?**
 **

  ** **

 Harry, thanks for your appreciation.

 ** **

 But it isn't about drawings.

 Sure, that is the option I have selected to share since it is sooo easy
 to replicate.

  

 I can also make sound files that create energy that can be felt.

 ** **

 And programs

 ** **

 And videos, but the easiest to share is images.

 ** **

 I can share coils, I can share electrical circuits.

 ** **

 It is about breaking into a new realm of physics that makes much more
 extraordinary technology possible.

 ** **

 So who is interested?
 So far no one new has apparently tried to feel the energy.

 ** **

 I thought the only reason to be here was interests in breakthrough
 discoveries in science that change what is possible, it seems however that
 there are very very few even willing to dip their toe in the water.

 ** **

 ** **

 John

 ** **

 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Thanks for positing this.
 It is about drawing the world into existence.

  

 Newton drew a clock-work universe into existence using geometry and the
 tools of a mechanical draftsmen.

 ...geometry is founded in mechanical practice, and is nothing but that
 part of universal mechanics which accurately proposes and demonstrates the
 art of measuring. --from the preface to Principia  



 Today, we don't have to confine ourselves to mechanical practices when
 drawing geometry so we can draw different worlds into existence.

  

  

  

 Harry


  

  

  

 ** **

 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:56 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development with
 some previous ones.

 http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png

 ** **

 All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people report they don't
 feel anything.

 ** **

 Again, best in a dark room (but not required).

 ** **

 Feel for any sensations

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-18 Thread James Bowery
What would be an acceptable control experiment that could distinguish
between placebo and real effect?  What about double blind?


On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 5:13 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

 Let me add that I also know that this has nothing to do with visual
 effects because this is only one form I have used to effect the aether.

 It started when I made a coil a bit over a year ago, I could very very
 faintly at first feel something in my hand.
 It was near the level of imagination at first, but it became more apparent
 as the energy gathered in my hand until it was undeniable.

 I thought it might have had a conventional explanation until I found it
 worked for a few minutes after turning the power off.

 I learnt more and made one that needed no power and was stronger, I tested
 it on people and found a majority could feel it.

 I have since made many more coils and had about 200+ people feel a
 sensation (over 90%, often about 97%, occasionally a lower percentage feel
 it, but always a majority).

 I have made audio files that use some of the principles I found to get
 computer speakers to make the energy (sometimes it is not the sound but the
 EM from the speakers that effects the aether).

 And I have done a lot of work with images since they can effect the aether
 just fine, but have many many advantages.

 So if it was just an effect with the mind, then these same principles
 would not work when in coil form hidden from sight in a tube, but it works
 fine.

 So before you write this off as some bio-sensory trick, give it a try.
 Why wouldn't light effect the medium in which it has it's existence?
 Really by definition it must. Well, it does.


 John

 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:14 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 This is not made to effect the eye or brain.
 It works with eyes closed.
 As do images that look like a solid colour to the eyes, they still work
 (due to subtle colour variation the eye can't make out).

 If you put the  'shooter' image on screen and feel the right side of the
 screen from the back or not looking at the screen, the energy can still be
 felt.
 Having said that, it depends on the persons sensitivity.

 Some people can't feel it in their palms, but enough can.

 If you don't believe me, here is a radical idea, try it.
 Stick the image on screen and feel at the 'output' of the shooter image
 and see if you can feel something (likely subtle, a breeze, a cool, a
 warmth, a tingle, something), then try without being able to see the image.


 John


 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
 francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  John,

 Eye candy, vertigo and mood alteration are certainly examples of light
 patterns affecting the brain through optical stimulation but I would not
 qualify this as engineering the ether. It is an interesting subject but I
 disagree with you titling this subject as based on ether theory.

 Regards

 Fran

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:05 AM

 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?*
 ***

  ** **

 Harry, thanks for your appreciation.

 ** **

 But it isn't about drawings.

 Sure, that is the option I have selected to share since it is sooo easy
 to replicate.

  

 I can also make sound files that create energy that can be felt.

 ** **

 And programs

 ** **

 And videos, but the easiest to share is images.

 ** **

 I can share coils, I can share electrical circuits.

 ** **

 It is about breaking into a new realm of physics that makes much more
 extraordinary technology possible.

 ** **

 So who is interested?
 So far no one new has apparently tried to feel the energy.

 ** **

 I thought the only reason to be here was interests in breakthrough
 discoveries in science that change what is possible, it seems however that
 there are very very few even willing to dip their toe in the water.

 ** **

 ** **

 John

 ** **

 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Thanks for positing this.
 It is about drawing the world into existence.

  

 Newton drew a clock-work universe into existence using geometry and the
 tools of a mechanical draftsmen.

 ...geometry is founded in mechanical practice, and is nothing but that
 part of universal mechanics which accurately proposes and demonstrates the
 art of measuring. --from the preface to Principia  



 Today, we don't have to confine ourselves to mechanical practices when
 drawing geometry so we can draw different worlds into existence.

  

  

  

 Harry


  

  

  

 ** **

 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:56 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development with
 some previous ones.

 http://img339.imageshack.us/img339

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-18 Thread John Berry
It is funny that not a single new person has reported even testing the
images.
Both Jones Bennee and Gibson Elliot had tested and reported back with
positive results before I posted this to Vortex.

So before everyone tries to debunk it, find fault.
How about actually testing it and reporting back what if anything you got
from it?

For me the intensity of the energy is far far beyond anything that my
imagination alone can conjure up.
But I accept that may not be the case for most.

John

On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:44 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 What would be an acceptable control experiment that could distinguish
 between placebo and real effect?  What about double blind?


 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 5:13 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 Let me add that I also know that this has nothing to do with visual
 effects because this is only one form I have used to effect the aether.

 It started when I made a coil a bit over a year ago, I could very very
 faintly at first feel something in my hand.
 It was near the level of imagination at first, but it became more
 apparent as the energy gathered in my hand until it was undeniable.

 I thought it might have had a conventional explanation until I found it
 worked for a few minutes after turning the power off.

 I learnt more and made one that needed no power and was stronger, I
 tested it on people and found a majority could feel it.

 I have since made many more coils and had about 200+ people feel a
 sensation (over 90%, often about 97%, occasionally a lower percentage feel
 it, but always a majority).

 I have made audio files that use some of the principles I found to get
 computer speakers to make the energy (sometimes it is not the sound but the
 EM from the speakers that effects the aether).

 And I have done a lot of work with images since they can effect the
 aether just fine, but have many many advantages.

 So if it was just an effect with the mind, then these same principles
 would not work when in coil form hidden from sight in a tube, but it works
 fine.

 So before you write this off as some bio-sensory trick, give it a try.
 Why wouldn't light effect the medium in which it has it's existence?
 Really by definition it must. Well, it does.


 John

 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:14 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 This is not made to effect the eye or brain.
 It works with eyes closed.
 As do images that look like a solid colour to the eyes, they still work
 (due to subtle colour variation the eye can't make out).

 If you put the  'shooter' image on screen and feel the right side of the
 screen from the back or not looking at the screen, the energy can still be
 felt.
 Having said that, it depends on the persons sensitivity.

 Some people can't feel it in their palms, but enough can.

 If you don't believe me, here is a radical idea, try it.
 Stick the image on screen and feel at the 'output' of the shooter image
 and see if you can feel something (likely subtle, a breeze, a cool, a
 warmth, a tingle, something), then try without being able to see the image.


 John


 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
 francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  John,

 Eye candy, vertigo and mood alteration are certainly examples of light
 patterns affecting the brain through optical stimulation but I would not
 qualify this as engineering the ether. It is an interesting subject but I
 disagree with you titling this subject as based on ether theory.

 Regards

 Fran

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:05 AM

 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
 

  ** **

 Harry, thanks for your appreciation.

 ** **

 But it isn't about drawings.

 Sure, that is the option I have selected to share since it is sooo easy
 to replicate.

  

 I can also make sound files that create energy that can be felt.

 ** **

 And programs

 ** **

 And videos, but the easiest to share is images.

 ** **

 I can share coils, I can share electrical circuits.

 ** **

 It is about breaking into a new realm of physics that makes much more
 extraordinary technology possible.

 ** **

 So who is interested?
 So far no one new has apparently tried to feel the energy.

 ** **

 I thought the only reason to be here was interests in breakthrough
 discoveries in science that change what is possible, it seems however that
 there are very very few even willing to dip their toe in the water.

 ** **

 ** **

 John

 ** **

 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Thanks for positing this.
 It is about drawing the world into existence.

  

 Newton drew a clock-work universe into existence using geometry and the
 tools of a mechanical draftsmen.

 ...geometry is founded in mechanical practice, and is nothing

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-18 Thread James Bowery
Running a control experiment is debunking?


On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 5:57 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

 It is funny that not a single new person has reported even testing the
 images.
 Both Jones Bennee and Gibson Elliot had tested and reported back with
 positive results before I posted this to Vortex.

 So before everyone tries to debunk it, find fault.
 How about actually testing it and reporting back what if anything you got
 from it?

 For me the intensity of the energy is far far beyond anything that my
 imagination alone can conjure up.
 But I accept that may not be the case for most.

 John

 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:44 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 What would be an acceptable control experiment that could distinguish
 between placebo and real effect?  What about double blind?


 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 5:13 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 Let me add that I also know that this has nothing to do with visual
 effects because this is only one form I have used to effect the aether.

 It started when I made a coil a bit over a year ago, I could very very
 faintly at first feel something in my hand.
 It was near the level of imagination at first, but it became more
 apparent as the energy gathered in my hand until it was undeniable.

 I thought it might have had a conventional explanation until I found it
 worked for a few minutes after turning the power off.

 I learnt more and made one that needed no power and was stronger, I
 tested it on people and found a majority could feel it.

 I have since made many more coils and had about 200+ people feel a
 sensation (over 90%, often about 97%, occasionally a lower percentage feel
 it, but always a majority).

 I have made audio files that use some of the principles I found to get
 computer speakers to make the energy (sometimes it is not the sound but the
 EM from the speakers that effects the aether).

 And I have done a lot of work with images since they can effect the
 aether just fine, but have many many advantages.

 So if it was just an effect with the mind, then these same principles
 would not work when in coil form hidden from sight in a tube, but it works
 fine.

 So before you write this off as some bio-sensory trick, give it a try.
 Why wouldn't light effect the medium in which it has it's existence?
 Really by definition it must. Well, it does.


 John

 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:14 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 This is not made to effect the eye or brain.
 It works with eyes closed.
 As do images that look like a solid colour to the eyes, they still work
 (due to subtle colour variation the eye can't make out).

 If you put the  'shooter' image on screen and feel the right side of
 the screen from the back or not looking at the screen, the energy can still
 be felt.
 Having said that, it depends on the persons sensitivity.

 Some people can't feel it in their palms, but enough can.

 If you don't believe me, here is a radical idea, try it.
 Stick the image on screen and feel at the 'output' of the shooter image
 and see if you can feel something (likely subtle, a breeze, a cool, a
 warmth, a tingle, something), then try without being able to see the image.


 John


 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
 francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  John,

 Eye candy, vertigo and mood alteration are certainly examples of light
 patterns affecting the brain through optical stimulation but I would not
 qualify this as engineering the ether. It is an interesting subject but I
 disagree with you titling this subject as based on ether theory.

 Regards

 Fran

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:05 AM

 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists
 here?

  ** **

 Harry, thanks for your appreciation.

 ** **

 But it isn't about drawings.

 Sure, that is the option I have selected to share since it is sooo
 easy to replicate.

  

 I can also make sound files that create energy that can be felt.

 ** **

 And programs

 ** **

 And videos, but the easiest to share is images.

 ** **

 I can share coils, I can share electrical circuits.

 ** **

 It is about breaking into a new realm of physics that makes much more
 extraordinary technology possible.

 ** **

 So who is interested?
 So far no one new has apparently tried to feel the energy.

 ** **

 I thought the only reason to be here was interests in breakthrough
 discoveries in science that change what is possible, it seems however that
 there are very very few even willing to dip their toe in the water.***
 *

 ** **

 ** **

 John

 ** **

 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Thanks for positing this.
 It is about drawing the world into existence.

  

 Newton drew a clock-work universe

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-18 Thread James Bowery
You know, John, if I were an amazing Randi type, aside from the fact that I
wouldn't be caught dead posting to vortex-l, I would propose my own control
experiment rather than asking you what you considered to be an acceptable
control experiment.

If I were the Amazing Randi, my control experiment would be something like
show a bunch of people random images and ask them if they felt anything.
I would then proceed to lead a monkey beat upon you satisfying the egos of
a bunch of skeptics that they had the strength of numbers on their side.

So how about showing me the respect that I showed you by asking you what
YOU would consider to be an acceptable control experiment?



On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:09 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Running a control experiment is debunking?


 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 5:57 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 It is funny that not a single new person has reported even testing the
 images.
 Both Jones Bennee and Gibson Elliot had tested and reported back with
 positive results before I posted this to Vortex.

 So before everyone tries to debunk it, find fault.
 How about actually testing it and reporting back what if anything you got
 from it?

 For me the intensity of the energy is far far beyond anything that my
 imagination alone can conjure up.
 But I accept that may not be the case for most.

 John

 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:44 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.comwrote:

 What would be an acceptable control experiment that could distinguish
 between placebo and real effect?  What about double blind?


 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 5:13 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 Let me add that I also know that this has nothing to do with visual
 effects because this is only one form I have used to effect the aether.

 It started when I made a coil a bit over a year ago, I could very very
 faintly at first feel something in my hand.
 It was near the level of imagination at first, but it became more
 apparent as the energy gathered in my hand until it was undeniable.

 I thought it might have had a conventional explanation until I found it
 worked for a few minutes after turning the power off.

 I learnt more and made one that needed no power and was stronger, I
 tested it on people and found a majority could feel it.

 I have since made many more coils and had about 200+ people feel a
 sensation (over 90%, often about 97%, occasionally a lower percentage feel
 it, but always a majority).

 I have made audio files that use some of the principles I found to get
 computer speakers to make the energy (sometimes it is not the sound but the
 EM from the speakers that effects the aether).

 And I have done a lot of work with images since they can effect the
 aether just fine, but have many many advantages.

 So if it was just an effect with the mind, then these same principles
 would not work when in coil form hidden from sight in a tube, but it works
 fine.

 So before you write this off as some bio-sensory trick, give it a try.
 Why wouldn't light effect the medium in which it has it's existence?
 Really by definition it must. Well, it does.


 John

 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:14 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 This is not made to effect the eye or brain.
 It works with eyes closed.
 As do images that look like a solid colour to the eyes, they still
 work (due to subtle colour variation the eye can't make out).

 If you put the  'shooter' image on screen and feel the right side of
 the screen from the back or not looking at the screen, the energy can 
 still
 be felt.
 Having said that, it depends on the persons sensitivity.

 Some people can't feel it in their palms, but enough can.

 If you don't believe me, here is a radical idea, try it.
 Stick the image on screen and feel at the 'output' of the shooter
 image and see if you can feel something (likely subtle, a breeze, a cool, 
 a
 warmth, a tingle, something), then try without being able to see the 
 image.


 John


 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
 francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  John,

 Eye candy, vertigo and mood alteration are certainly examples of
 light patterns affecting the brain through optical stimulation but I 
 would
 not qualify this as engineering the ether. It is an interesting subject 
 but
 I disagree with you titling this subject as based on ether theory.***
 *

 Regards

 Fran

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:05 AM

 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists
 here?

  ** **

 Harry, thanks for your appreciation.

 ** **

 But it isn't about drawings.

 Sure, that is the option I have selected to share since it is sooo
 easy to replicate.

  

 I can also make sound files that create energy that can be felt.

 ** **

 And programs

 ** **

 And videos, but the easiest to share is images

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-18 Thread John Berry
 and was stronger, I
 tested it on people and found a majority could feel it.

 I have since made many more coils and had about 200+ people feel a
 sensation (over 90%, often about 97%, occasionally a lower percentage feel
 it, but always a majority).

 I have made audio files that use some of the principles I found to get
 computer speakers to make the energy (sometimes it is not the sound but 
 the
 EM from the speakers that effects the aether).

 And I have done a lot of work with images since they can effect the
 aether just fine, but have many many advantages.

 So if it was just an effect with the mind, then these same principles
 would not work when in coil form hidden from sight in a tube, but it works
 fine.

 So before you write this off as some bio-sensory trick, give it a try.
 Why wouldn't light effect the medium in which it has it's existence?
 Really by definition it must. Well, it does.


 John

 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:14 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 This is not made to effect the eye or brain.
 It works with eyes closed.
 As do images that look like a solid colour to the eyes, they still
 work (due to subtle colour variation the eye can't make out).

 If you put the  'shooter' image on screen and feel the right side of
 the screen from the back or not looking at the screen, the energy can 
 still
 be felt.
 Having said that, it depends on the persons sensitivity.

 Some people can't feel it in their palms, but enough can.

 If you don't believe me, here is a radical idea, try it.
 Stick the image on screen and feel at the 'output' of the shooter
 image and see if you can feel something (likely subtle, a breeze, a 
 cool, a
 warmth, a tingle, something), then try without being able to see the 
 image.


 John


 On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
 francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  John,

 Eye candy, vertigo and mood alteration are certainly examples of
 light patterns affecting the brain through optical stimulation but I 
 would
 not qualify this as engineering the ether. It is an interesting subject 
 but
 I disagree with you titling this subject as based on ether theory.**
 **

 Regards

 Fran

 ** **

 ** **

 *From:* John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:05 AM

 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists
 here?

  ** **

 Harry, thanks for your appreciation.

 ** **

 But it isn't about drawings.

 Sure, that is the option I have selected to share since it is sooo
 easy to replicate.

  

 I can also make sound files that create energy that can be felt.

 ** **

 And programs

 ** **

 And videos, but the easiest to share is images.

 ** **

 I can share coils, I can share electrical circuits.

 ** **

 It is about breaking into a new realm of physics that makes much
 more extraordinary technology possible.

 ** **

 So who is interested?
 So far no one new has apparently tried to feel the energy.

 ** **

 I thought the only reason to be here was interests in breakthrough
 discoveries in science that change what is possible, it seems however 
 that
 there are very very few even willing to dip their toe in the water.*
 ***

 ** **

 ** **

 John

 ** **

 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Thanks for positing this.
 It is about drawing the world into existence.

  

 Newton drew a clock-work universe into existence using geometry
 and the tools of a mechanical draftsmen.

 ...geometry is founded in mechanical practice, and is nothing but
 that part of universal mechanics which accurately proposes and 
 demonstrates
 the art of measuring. --from the preface to Principia  



 Today, we don't have to confine ourselves to mechanical practices
 when drawing geometry so we can draw different worlds into existence.
 

  

  

  

 Harry


  

  

  

 ** **

 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:56 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development
 with some previous ones.

 http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png

 ** **

 All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people report they
 don't feel anything.

 ** **

 Again, best in a dark room (but not required).

 ** **

 Feel for any sensations.

 ** **

 ** **

 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:43 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 A worthwhile improvement for both images:

 ** **

 http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png

 ** **

 http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png

 ** **

 ** **

 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:32 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 I sent the wrong image by mistake, the first link should have been
 this one:

 http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4411/thelateststrongest2.png

 ** **

 ** **

 ** **

 ** **










Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread John Berry
Ok, well here we go.

Now this may require suspending some disbelief, but here goes.
I have found that I can actually engineer the aether, and that while some
dynamics of the aether make up matter and EM, other dynamics, speeds etc..
Make up chi, orgone, scalar, dark energy and dark matter.
Note: That movements in the aether makes up matter is a case very
powerfully made by Nobel prize winning physicist Frank Wilczek, from his
research with parcile accelerators and supercomputers.

Light is a Terrahertz frequency Electric and Magnetic wave/particle that
transmits through the aether.
That means that light structures the aether since light is structured
aether.

This allows for the creation of circuits and 'machines' to be made of mere
images!

So before you conclude I'm off my rocker, please try  to feel some
generally subtle sensation from either of these:

http://img803.imageshack.us/img803/7294/thelateststrongest.png
Feel this one directly over the screen, works better in a darkened room
where there aren't interfering light patterns. (energy may also be felt
around the image)

http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/1438/shooterv53.png
Feel the energy coming from the right side of the monitor.

The sensations can take time to build up as the device gains energy, and as
your palm fills with energy.

Some people can only feel the energy occasionally.

Now my aim is to get this to a physically detectable energy, or better yet
to actually put it to use to create an effect.

I would like suggestions, if you accept that there is a fluid/gas aether
(primarily entrained by the earth) then what kind of energy would use use
to effect it?
How would you create an aetheric disturbance that might manifest physically?

So please, have a good feel and see if you can detect something (generally
subtle, but not always) , a cool, a warmth, a tingle, a pressure, a buzzy
feeling, a flow.

John


On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:08 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 Fran,

  Sorry that I missed your explanation.  I am not sure that I understand
 how one would detect your ether, but perhaps one day it will become clear.

  The twin paradox always blows my mind since from my perspective both
 twins would age the same.  Choose a frame of reference that is moving at a
 speed that is exactly half the relative speed between them.  In this frame
 one twin moves to the right at a certain speed and the other moves to the
 left at the same speed.   To me, both age at the same relatively slow rate.
  There is no difference except for the acceleration that one twin undergoes
 if only his ship is powered.  The bottom line is that there would be no
 difference in age between them unless it is due to the effect of
 acceleration.

  This is an example of how the choice of an observation frame can reveal
 interesting results.

  Have you ever asked yourself when a certain event actually occurs?  You
 know no more about what will happen in the next moment to an object that is
 many light years away as you know about one that is next door.  Until
 energy can find its way to your sensors, there is no information available.
  Of course we know how long it takes that energy to reach us from the far
 reaches of space and we thus subtract that travel time from the present
 observations.   Observers there can just as easily look this way and see
 the Sun, Earth, and other parts of our solar system being formed and wonder
 if one day intelligent life will hail from the mess.  If only they could
 read the future to which they have little knowledge.

  So, how do you define the present from our perspective?  Is it what we
 observe happening at this very moment?  Why is our observation point any
 better than that of the guys across the universe?

  Dave
 (with his heretic hat on)


 -Original Message-
 From: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Tue, Apr 16, 2013 2:15 pm
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

  Dave,
 I didn’t say  there is one special velocity of ether… only
 that the “ambient” / average pressure or rate of ether displacement will
 always appear to be 300 million m/s no matter what velocity/ inertial frame
 you are in,  which is a simple expansion on the Paradox Twin phenomena
 where we as 3D observers can never be aware of variations in this rate.. In
 the macro world we know that only the  square law of gravity wells will
  slowly vary the isotropy. Far below the plank scale we know we have
 wormholes and broken isotropy occurring all around us in what is termed the
 quantum foam but this normally averages out to the macroscopic average we
 consider isotropic by the time we get to any real building blocks of
 physical matter… IMHO, the Casimir effect, or NAE are examples of geometry
 and conductive metals segregating these sub plank levels of gravity
 variations between the outside and inside of their plate areas to
 concentrate a deficit

Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread William Beaty
On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 19:20:59, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
 I can probably prove the reality of this to anyone interested with the
 investment of only 2-3 minutes and no materials needed.

OK.

No materials, so this sounds like a subjective-perception 'psychic
phenomenon' demo?  Much more convincing is to discover an effect which
lacks any human component.  Fire aether-balls at a microphone membrane?

Also:
On Tue, 16 Apr 2013, David Roberson wrote:
 That is an interesting idea, but I continue to have a difficult time
 accepting the concept that there is one special velocity...

The old Luminiferous Aether implied absolute position and velocity, as
if space was filled with water.  The Luminiferous Aether was debunked.

Beware of semantic problems, since Luminiferous Aether does not equal
aether in general.  I think Einstein said something like this: of
course aether exists, did you think that the vacuum possesses no
characteristics at all?  In that case, Alcubierre space warp is Einstein
Aether starship propulsion.  And perhaps we can build a cutting tool
which shoots out little blobs of cosmic inflation?  :)





(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci



Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread John Berry
William, please read my previous emails and give feeling the energy a try.

Anyway, as to the reference frame debate, if there were an aether that was
not entrained by the earth, then a drift should have been detected by now.

But the model I am using is of an aether, a substance to space that is
dragged by the earth.
And additionally it might be possible to effect an aether condensate (as
Frank Wilczek calls it in his book: The lightness of being) that may not
actually be suitable to overcome the background reference frames for light.

Having said that, there are indications that this can be done, but I have
no interest in debating this topic.

With frame dragging, ZPE, Driac sea, a seething frothy foam of virtual
particles, the fine structure constant, bending of the fabric of space, the
idea that some parts of the universe may be moving away from us faster than
the speed of light which is not meant to break SR since the very fabric of
space is moving.

So really, there is tons of evidence for an aether by various different
names accepted in physics.

John

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:07 PM, William Beaty bi...@eskimo.com wrote:

 On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 19:20:59, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
  I can probably prove the reality of this to anyone interested with the
  investment of only 2-3 minutes and no materials needed.

 OK.

 No materials, so this sounds like a subjective-perception 'psychic
 phenomenon' demo?  Much more convincing is to discover an effect which
 lacks any human component.  Fire aether-balls at a microphone membrane?

 Also:
 On Tue, 16 Apr 2013, David Roberson wrote:
  That is an interesting idea, but I continue to have a difficult time
  accepting the concept that there is one special velocity...

 The old Luminiferous Aether implied absolute position and velocity, as
 if space was filled with water.  The Luminiferous Aether was debunked.

 Beware of semantic problems, since Luminiferous Aether does not equal
 aether in general.  I think Einstein said something like this: of
 course aether exists, did you think that the vacuum possesses no
 characteristics at all?  In that case, Alcubierre space warp is Einstein
 Aether starship propulsion.  And perhaps we can build a cutting tool
 which shoots out little blobs of cosmic inflation?  :)





 (( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
 William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
 billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
 EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
 Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci




Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread John Berry
I sent the wrong image by mistake, the first link should have been this one:
http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4411/thelateststrongest2.png


Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread John Berry
A worthwhile improvement for both images:

http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png

http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png


On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:32 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

 I sent the wrong image by mistake, the first link should have been this
 one:
 http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4411/thelateststrongest2.png



Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread John Berry
And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development with some
previous ones.
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png

All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people report they don't feel
anything.

Again, best in a dark room (but not required).

Feel for any sensations.


On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:43 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

 A worthwhile improvement for both images:

 http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png

 http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png


 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:32 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 I sent the wrong image by mistake, the first link should have been this
 one:
 http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4411/thelateststrongest2.png





RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread Roarty, Francis X
Eric,
I am not sure why Michaelson and Morely expected to find any 
drift in a “spatial” direction.. all the relativistic evidence shows that 
acceleration only results in a temporal displacement..that is to say that time 
and ether share the same axis at 90 degrees to all 3 spatial axis and have a 
Pythagorean relationship with space..they should have been testing for time 
dilation not spatial drift.. This also results in syntax error when it is 
encountered because time and space are exchanging metrics from our 3d 
perspective trapped within a single inertial frame. Limiting ether to a spatial 
axis is naïve and disagrees with how we see a gravity well always pointing 
“down” regardless of which side of a planet you stand on..it again suggests an 
orientation of a flow 90 degrees to all 3 spatial directions. The Wave 
Structure of Matter suggests to me a canoe stuck in a waterfall where only 
certain vacuum wavelengths have the correct characteristics to get stuck in the 
waterfall [our physical 3d plane] and get swept along in our spatial plane 
while other “virtual particles” keep migrating across our plane between future 
and past, pushing their way through gas atoms to whom they impart HUP [jitter] 
energy to that accounts for ZPE or the inability of some gases to freeze at 0 
kelvin… the nonphysical axis only becoming momentarily solid as it passes 
through the waterfall we call the Present in the form of virtual particles.

John says he wants to engineer the ether but the isotropy is very difficult to 
break..Just segregating it a little bit with Casimir geometry or other quantum 
application of London forces seems to be the best science has managed so far.. 
I think his suggestion of shapes and patterns to form “circuits” should be 
considered “effect” not “cause” by a very wide margin. I do like his idea of 
engineering the ether but totally disagree with this suggested implementation. 
Hopefully he has other alternative suggestions.
Fran

From: Eric Walker [mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 9:33 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

It seems to me that the idea of an ether is a useful one, albeit not in the 
form people were anticipating early last century.  I believe they expected to 
find experimental evidence of a general movement in a specific direction if an 
ether existed.  I see no reason to think that an either needs to be like a wind 
blowing through our part of the cosmos at a speed relative to ours.  Assuming 
for a moment that it exists in a useful sense, it could be stationary in 
relation to spacetime (i.e., any possible frame of reference allowed by 
relativity).

I like the concept of an ether because it provides something for waves to 
propagate through.  It seems to me that we've already adopted something vaguely 
along these lines in a practical sense by positing zero point energy; i.e., the 
void is not really a void.

Eric

On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:30 AM, David Roberson 
dlrober...@aol.commailto:dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

I see that you two believe in some form of ether that modifies the space around 
us.  That is an interesting idea, but I continue to have a difficult time 
accepting the concept that there is one special velocity to use as a reference.



Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread John Berry
Has no one tried it yet?


On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:56 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

 And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development with
 some previous ones.
 http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png

 All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people report they don't
 feel anything.

 Again, best in a dark room (but not required).

 Feel for any sensations.


 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:43 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 A worthwhile improvement for both images:

 http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png

 http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png


 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:32 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 I sent the wrong image by mistake, the first link should have been this
 one:
 http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4411/thelateststrongest2.png






Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread John Berry
No replies, hmmm.

I have sent this to 5 people on this list privately.
2 have repoted back, they both felt something. (one of those took a while
before I made one he could feel)

And 3 failed to reply all together, ignoring me outright.

So I can image some peoples minds might be too limited to try this.

But I'd like to encourage everyone to give it a try.
It isn't unscientific, although it is prone to being subjective.
But the idea that a tangible energy might come from a pattern of light is
merely 'exotic' and not actually implausible.

Light is a thing, as is space even according to modern physics.

So if it isn't even contracting any tenets of physics, then it is merely
'New'.
And extraordinary.

Is that any reason to ignore it?

John


Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread Gibson Elliot
John 

I examined your images in series from your last post, and I have to say at the 
very least I could feel sensations in my head as I gazed upon them. 

Mind you, as I initially just skimmed your emails, I didn't see the part about 
your expectations before I wrote the following, and it appears I felt what you 
had indicated, unprompted no less!

The first seemed to affect my auditory center in the right brain, the second, 
seemed to give me the feeling of a flow left to right cross hemispheric, and 
the final (most recent) a slight twisting sensation.

It would be interesting to see what might be revealed in a P.E.T. scan. I tend 
to be hyper-sensitive so to feel something in my head does not entirely 
surprise me . I will say I have not tried them in a dark room yet. Just so I 
know, should these be viewed from the screen or from a printed paper. Big 
difference there. Screen = emitted columnar light flowing at a right angle to 
the earths gravity/aether flow, whereas printed is reflected/absorbed 
wavelengths and diffuse light in line with the aether flow. 

Each would have differing effects on local aether.  I would expect that, if 
printed, the best application would be to place a hand below the page to allow 
gravity flow to pass through and modify aether flow like a filter, the hand or 
head even, located below the image would feel something as a result. 

I think you should read this http://www.rexresearch.com/grebenn/grebenn.htm, I 
believe you'll see as I did that the authors story suggests creating 
aether/gravity circuitry, a bit like what you're doing. I have a feeling this 
stuff is related somehow. His would be more of a 3D circuit made of matter 
voids akin to microwave circuitry, whereas yours seems to be a bit more on the 
end of the relationship between aether and photon in a 2D sort of way. 

All very intriguing John!

Gibson


 From: John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
 


Has no one tried it yet?



On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:56 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development with some 
previous ones.
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png


All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people report they don't feel 
anything.


Again, best in a dark room (but not required).


Feel for any sensations.




On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:43 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

A worthwhile improvement for both images:


http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png


http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png




On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:32 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

I sent the wrong image by mistake, the first link should have been this one:
http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4411/thelateststrongest2.png



RE: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread Jones Beene
These are very unusual images. They do elicit emotion. 

 

Some of that could be based on similarities to known symbolism as opposed to
an aether effect, but then again, that symbolism itself may derive from some
kind of primitive understanding of the way that optical images interact with
brain neutrons. The shooter is reminiscent of Navaho art and the
latest/strongest to Egyptian imagery.

 

I shrunk the second one down to get 9 on a page, then printed cut and
stacked the images to see if there was anything which showed up on a gram
scale (comparing face up to face down). There was nothing objective, but I
am using a laser printer so the color did not contribute.

 

Jones

 

From: John Berry 

 

Has no one tried it yet?

 

 

And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development with some
previous ones.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png

 

All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people report they don't feel
anything.

 

Again, best in a dark room (but not required).

 

Feel for any sensations.

 

http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png

 

http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png

 

 

 



RE: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread Jones Beene

From: Gibson Elliot 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

John  I think you should read this
http://www.rexresearch.com/grebenn/grebenn.htm, I believe you'll see as I
did that the authors story suggests creating aether/gravity circuitry, a bit
like what you're doing. I have a feeling this stuff is related somehow. 

I see what you mean. Check out the honeycomb pain killer. I bet it works
for most everyone but Bob Park and Randi ...

The native American dream catcher has a strong placebo effect on many
natives and non-natives alike. Look for this to be an Obama-Care option on
the new budget.

Most doctors will tell you that the cure of a placebo is no less real than
the cure from some of the newest medications ... which are now pushing $1000
for a 30 day supply. 

Heck, I think I will re-weigh John's images under the dream catcher... g
attachment: winmail.dat

Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread John Berry
Subtle changes in the image and it would be very different.

Ok, here, I made 2 images, I wanted them to look almost identical, one is
active and one isn't, I just went ahead and labeled them, so if you wanted
a blind test no luck.

http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/9209/activeandinactive.png

I was limited as to what I could do to keep the images similar in  form,
but make one strong and the other off.

If the effects was simply due to seeing some vague representation of an
Ahnk then both images have that.

Now this is not the best image to start with, and not the best if your
ability to feel any effect is marginal, but worth a shot.

The image is very sensitive to any manipulation of colours, so if your
monitor or videocard is set to vivid, or has a gamma correction, brightness
or contrast or other manipulation so the exact colour values aren't
delivered, this entire image could be quite relatively inactive.

I will work on an image suitable for scale testing, face up and face down
might be imperfect especially because once energized it can retain some
activity despite reduced lighting. but a boost is observed from turning a
light on.

John

On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

  These are very unusual images. They do elicit emotion. 

 ** **

 Some of that could be based on similarities to known symbolism as opposed
 to an aether effect, but then again, that symbolism itself may derive from
 some kind of primitive understanding of the way that optical images
 interact with brain neutrons. The “shooter” is reminiscent of Navaho art
 and the latest/strongest to Egyptian imagery.

 ** **

 I shrunk the second one down to get 9 on a page, then printed cut and
 stacked the images to see if there was anything which showed up on a gram
 scale (comparing face up to face down). There was nothing objective, but I
 am using a laser printer so the color did not contribute.

 ** **

 Jones

 ** **

 *From:* John Berry 

 ** **

 Has no one tried it yet?

 ** **

 ** **

 And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development with
 some previous ones.

 http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png

 ** **

 All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people report they don't
 feel anything.

 ** **

 Again, best in a dark room (but not required).

 ** **

 Feel for any sensations.

 ** **

 http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png

 ** **

 http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png

 ** **

 ** **

 ** **



Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread Gibson Elliot
John

My big HP monitor is too hot at even 4 inches for me to feel anything with my 
palm but the heat coming off the thing. Part of it may in fact be that I have 
to force my hand at an odd angle to do this and that causes stresses in the 
hand, ligaments, vessels blood flow etc...

Are you using a CRT or  flat display? Keep in mind what allows people to feel 
a sensation from these is going to differ from person to person as you have 
observed. In my case, visually, and what I feel inside my head is I suppose my 
sensitivity. I have felt CSE effects from various structures when nobody with 
me could. Those I could feel with my palm. So some people will likely be 
attuned to different effects.

Gibson

 From: John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
 


Subtle changes in the image and it would be very different.

Ok, here, I made 2 images, I wanted them to look almost identical, one is 
active and one isn't, I just went ahead and labeled them, so if you wanted a 
blind test no luck.

http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/9209/activeandinactive.png

I was limited as to what I could do to keep the images similar in  form, but 
make one strong and the other off.

If the effects was simply due to seeing some vague representation of an Ahnk 
then both images have that.

Now this is not the best image to start with, and not the best if your ability 
to feel any effect is marginal, but worth a shot.

The image is very sensitive to any manipulation of colours, so if your monitor 
or videocard is set to vivid, or has a gamma correction, brightness or contrast 
or other manipulation so the exact colour values aren't delivered, this entire 
image could be quite relatively inactive.

I will work on an image suitable for scale testing, face up and face down might 
be imperfect especially because once energized it can retain some activity 
despite reduced lighting. but a boost is observed from turning a light on.

John


On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

These are very unusual
images. They do elicit emotion. 
 
Some of that could be
based on similarities to known symbolism as opposed to an aether effect, but
then again, that symbolism itself may derive from some kind of primitive
understanding of the way that optical images interact with brain neutrons. The 
“shooter”
is reminiscent of Navaho art and the latest/strongest to Egyptian imagery.
 
I shrunk the second one
down to get 9 on a page, then printed cut and stacked the images to see if
there was anything which showed up on a gram scale (comparing face up to face
down). There was nothing objective, but I am using a laser printer so the color
did not contribute.
 
Jones
 
From:John Berry 
 
Has no one tried it yet?
 
 
And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains
recent development with some previous ones.
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png
 
All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people
report they don't feel anything.
 
Again, best in a dark room (but not required).
 
Feel for any sensations.
 
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png
 
http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png
 
 
 

Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread Gibson Elliot
John

You may want to start collecting information from those that do respond to you. 
Blue sky, but If you could get Genetic information you might be able to 
identify certain correlations between images/structures and the people who feel 
them. Or focus on those with strong reactions. I suspect that you have 
developed quite a few images, could you send me all you have available? No 
indications of active or inactive, just numbered. I'll set things up at my lab 
to do a blind study. If you could give pantone numbers for the colors you use, 
I could have them printed by a local printer to exact specification, and 
checked blind across as many people as I can expose to them.

Do you have any data regarding how far away a person can feel effects of 
various images? Any that can be felt further away? My thinking here is that 
piling them one on top of the other might affect each other. Aether does 
permeate everything and so shielding or isolating them could be an issue. Hence 
the questions about distance. I may have to bring cards into range one at a 
time.

Gibson


 From: John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
 


Subtle changes in the image and it would be very different.

Ok, here, I made 2 images, I wanted them to look almost identical, one is 
active and one isn't, I just went ahead and labeled them, so if you wanted a 
blind test no luck.

http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/9209/activeandinactive.png

I was limited as to what I could do to keep the images similar in  form, but 
make one strong and the other off.

If the effects was simply due to seeing some vague representation of an Ahnk 
then both images have that.

Now this is not the best image to start with, and not the best if your ability 
to feel any effect is marginal, but worth a shot.

The image is very sensitive to any manipulation of colours, so if your monitor 
or videocard is set to vivid, or has a gamma correction, brightness or contrast 
or other manipulation so the exact colour values aren't delivered, this entire 
image could be quite relatively inactive.

I will work on an image suitable for scale testing, face up and face down might 
be imperfect especially because once energized it can retain some activity 
despite reduced lighting. but a boost is observed from turning a light on.

John


On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

These are very unusual
images. They do elicit emotion. 
 
Some of that could be
based on similarities to known symbolism as opposed to an aether effect, but
then again, that symbolism itself may derive from some kind of primitive
understanding of the way that optical images interact with brain neutrons. The 
“shooter”
is reminiscent of Navaho art and the latest/strongest to Egyptian imagery.
 
I shrunk the second one
down to get 9 on a page, then printed cut and stacked the images to see if
there was anything which showed up on a gram scale (comparing face up to face
down). There was nothing objective, but I am using a laser printer so the color
did not contribute.
 
Jones
 
From:John Berry 
 
Has no one tried it yet?
 
 
And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains
recent development with some previous ones.
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png
 
All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people
report they don't feel anything.
 
Again, best in a dark room (but not required).
 
Feel for any sensations.
 
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png
 
http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6029/shooterv54.png
 
 
 

Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-17 Thread John Berry
I replied to Gibson in private with various details, but wrote this part
for the group:

For me more interesting is to work out what is required to make this
interact with matter.
Consider that dark matter and mirror matter and dark energy is considered
to exist by conventional science and all effectively undetectable.
Neutrinos and virtual particles are only vaguely detectable by very
specialized equipment (nothing I have access to obviously)

This means that there can be a lot of very real stuff that just doesn't
exist in the right form to interact with matter.
Charge is quantanized, so what if a particle could be made with a charge
that was not 1, what if such a particle can and does exist, but we can't
interact with it?

So there might be many ways to make something that can't be detected
readily by most most instrumentation.

But there will also be ways to ensure that the energy converges on the
physical, and as such it may produce a host of anomalies, or useful effects.

I am sharing this with Vo in order to get some suggestions on how to turn
this into a hard science.

John

On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Gibson Elliot gibsonell...@yahoo.comwrote:

 John

 You may want to start collecting information from those that do respond to
 you. Blue sky, but If you could get Genetic information you might be able
 to identify certain correlations between images/structures and the people
 who feel them. Or focus on those with strong reactions. I suspect that you
 have developed quite a few images, could you send me all you have
 available? No indications of active or inactive, just numbered. I'll set
 things up at my lab to do a blind study. If you could give pantone numbers
 for the colors you use, I could have them printed by a local printer to
 exact specification, and checked blind across as many people as I can
 expose to them.

 Do you have any data regarding how far away a person can feel effects of
 various images? Any that can be felt further away? My thinking here is that
 piling them one on top of the other might affect each other. Aether
 does permeate everything and so shielding or isolating them could be an
 issue. Hence the questions about distance. I may have to bring cards into
 range one at a time.

 Gibson
   --
  *From:* John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Sent:* Wednesday, April 17, 2013 4:09 PM
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

 Subtle changes in the image and it would be very different.

 Ok, here, I made 2 images, I wanted them to look almost identical, one is
 active and one isn't, I just went ahead and labeled them, so if you wanted
 a blind test no luck.

 http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/9209/activeandinactive.png

 I was limited as to what I could do to keep the images similar in  form,
 but make one strong and the other off.

 If the effects was simply due to seeing some vague representation of an
 Ahnk then both images have that.

 Now this is not the best image to start with, and not the best if your
 ability to feel any effect is marginal, but worth a shot.

 The image is very sensitive to any manipulation of colours, so if your
 monitor or videocard is set to vivid, or has a gamma correction, brightness
 or contrast or other manipulation so the exact colour values aren't
 delivered, this entire image could be quite relatively inactive.

 I will work on an image suitable for scale testing, face up and face down
 might be imperfect especially because once energized it can retain some
 activity despite reduced lighting. but a boost is observed from turning a
 light on.

 John

 On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

  These are very unusual images. They do elicit emotion. 
 ** **
 Some of that could be based on similarities to known symbolism as opposed
 to an aether effect, but then again, that symbolism itself may derive from
 some kind of primitive understanding of the way that optical images
 interact with brain neutrons. The “shooter” is reminiscent of Navaho art
 and the latest/strongest to Egyptian imagery.
 ** **
 I shrunk the second one down to get 9 on a page, then printed cut and
 stacked the images to see if there was anything which showed up on a gram
 scale (comparing face up to face down). There was nothing objective, but I
 am using a laser printer so the color did not contribute.
 ** **
 Jones
 ** **
 *From:* John Berry 
 ** **
 Has no one tried it yet?
  ** **
 ** **
 And a 3rd  image to try to feel, this contains recent development with
 some previous ones.
  http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6251/rotational.png
  ** **
  All in an effort to reduce the odds of having people report they don't
 feel anything.
  ** **
  Again, best in a dark room (but not required).
  ** **
  Feel for any sensations.
** **
  http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/1139/lateststrongest4.png
  ** **
  http

[Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-16 Thread John Berry
I have been in Vo's ugly nest of believers for a very long time.

I think in general a more accurate sentence might be a nest of skeptics and
jaded ex-believers (oh, and some nuts and trolls, and nutty trolls).

Anyway I have some developments in the direction of influencing the aether
sufficient to make it felt by most people.

My goal is to make this into a science, not dissimilar too electrical
engineering.
And I am hoping to gain suggestions and other intput, and since this is
very easy to experiment with some may wish to collaborate.

I can probably prove the reality of this to anyone interested with the
investment of only 2-3 minutes and no materials needed.

This is the science of the future (and perhaps the past) that will provide
Free Energy, Antigravity and a Star Trek level technology in general.

Anyone want to take the path less traveled?

John


[Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-16 Thread Roarty, Francis X
John, I never left the path..perhaps this makes me a nutty troll but didn't 
Tesla already treat this like an electrical science, He proposed that super 
high voltages could stiffen or solidify the ether. If I recall the story 
correctly Lorentzian theory was never proven wrong only less elegant than 
Einstein's but  with equivalent results and later in life Einstein did embrace 
ether theory. Casimir theory is an example of this where the results can be 
adequately explained from either perspective and when it comes down to brass 
tacks ..does it really matter which theory you choose?  I choose ether theory 
because it is easy to visualize and requires less math skill to make a point.  
I like the Haisch - Rueda example of a car accelerating into a rainstorm 
increasing the pressure and resistance to forward motion with acceleration as 
being equivalent to acceleration through the ether..approach C and the pressure 
increases at a Pythagorean rate between time and space pushing the vector up 
from zero toward 90 degrees on the time axis [time dilation occurs in positive 
direction -slows from our perspective].. What IMHO is occurring in these NAE 
-and it agrees with the Naudt's paper which redefines the hydrino as 
relativistic hydrogen, is that the rain in the Haisch-Rueda experiment 
which defines the baseline of rainfall- ether at zero velocity is actually 
capable of being shielded at the nano scale.. Casimir plates like all macro 
world matter experience ether intersecting our plane at 90 degrees from all 
spatial directions but can take advantage of conduction and geometry to shield 
a tiny cavity where the pressure as Puthoff would call it is reduced.. 
putting the passengers in that car at a lower pressure than what we consider 
the baseline in the macro world.. the hydrogen atoms are those passengers and 
do not need to accelerate to achieve relativistic effects..instead of 
compressing the rainfall by accelerating the NAE is simply suppressing the 
rainfall  - much easier to do without any energy requirements other than to 
build the geometry in opposition to stiction forces. Of course any hydrogen 
migrating in and out of these NAE cavities will translate back and forth 
through different inertial frames and gain nothing without some asymmetrical 
process that opposes the migration in one direction vs the other..allowing us 
to tap the translation for energy as if the car was changing velocities... also 
note that the vector for occupants of this NAE - car  is now toward negative 90 
degrees and it is we who appear to slow down from dilation from the perspective 
of the occupants in this lower pressure environment..
Regards
Fran

From: John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 3:21 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

I have been in Vo's ugly nest of believers for a very long time.

I think in general a more accurate sentence might be a nest of skeptics and 
jaded ex-believers (oh, and some nuts and trolls, and nutty trolls).

Anyway I have some developments in the direction of influencing the aether 
sufficient to make it felt by most people.

My goal is to make this into a science, not dissimilar too electrical 
engineering.
And I am hoping to gain suggestions and other intput, and since this is very 
easy to experiment with some may wish to collaborate.

I can probably prove the reality of this to anyone interested with the 
investment of only 2-3 minutes and no materials needed.

This is the science of the future (and perhaps the past) that will provide Free 
Energy, Antigravity and a Star Trek level technology in general.

Anyone want to take the path less traveled?

John



Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-16 Thread John Berry
NAE is not an acronym I am familiar with.
I see it can mean nuclear active environment.

Have you tried the image?

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  John, I never left the path..perhaps this makes me a nutty troll but
 didn’t Tesla already treat this like an electrical science, He proposed
 that super high voltages could stiffen or “solidify” the ether. If I recall
 the story correctly Lorentzian theory was never proven wrong only less
 elegant than Einstein’s but  with equivalent results and later in life
 Einstein did embrace ether theory. Casimir theory is an example of this
 where the results can be adequately explained from either perspective and
 when it comes down to brass tacks ..does it really matter which theory you
 choose?  I choose ether theory because it is easy to visualize and requires
 less math skill to make a point.  I like the Haisch - Rueda example of a
 car accelerating into a rainstorm increasing the pressure and resistance to
 forward motion with acceleration as being equivalent to acceleration
 through the ether..approach C and the pressure increases at a Pythagorean
 rate between time and space pushing the vector up from zero toward 90
 degrees on the time axis [time dilation occurs in positive direction –slows
 from our perspective].. What IMHO is occurring in these NAE –and it agrees
 with the Naudt’s paper which redefines the hydrino as “relativistic”
 hydrogen, is that the “rain” in the Haisch-Rueda experiment which defines
 the “baseline” of rainfall- ether at zero velocity is actually capable of
 being “shielded” at the nano scale.. Casimir plates like all macro world
 matter experience ether intersecting our plane at 90 degrees from all
 spatial directions but can take advantage of conduction and geometry to
 shield a tiny cavity where the “pressure” as Puthoff would call it is
 reduced.. putting the passengers in that car at a lower pressure than what
 we consider the baseline in the macro world.. the hydrogen atoms are those
 passengers and do not need to accelerate to achieve relativistic
 effects..instead of compressing the rainfall by accelerating the NAE is
 simply suppressing the rainfall  – much easier to do without any energy
 requirements other than to build the geometry in opposition to stiction
 forces. Of course any hydrogen migrating in and out of these NAE cavities
 will translate back and forth through different inertial frames and gain
 nothing without some asymmetrical process that opposes the migration in one
 direction vs the other..allowing us to tap the translation for energy as if
 the car was changing velocities… also note that the vector for occupants of
 this NAE – car  is now toward negative 90 degrees and it is we who appear
 to slow down from dilation from the perspective of the occupants in this
 lower pressure environment..

 Regards

 Fran

 ** **

 *From:* John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Tuesday, April 16, 2013 3:21 AM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

 ** **

 I have been in Vo's ugly nest of believers for a very long time.

 ** **

 I think in general a more accurate sentence might be a nest
 of skeptics and jaded ex-believers (oh, and some nuts and trolls, and nutty
 trolls).

 ** **

 Anyway I have some developments in the direction of influencing the aether
 sufficient to make it felt by most people.

 ** **

 My goal is to make this into a science, not dissimilar too electrical
 engineering.

 And I am hoping to gain suggestions and other intput, and since this is
 very easy to experiment with some may wish to collaborate.

 ** **

 I can probably prove the reality of this to anyone interested with the
 investment of only 2-3 minutes and no materials needed.

 ** **

 This is the science of the future (and perhaps the past) that will provide
 Free Energy, Antigravity and a Star Trek level technology in general.

 ** **

 Anyone want to take the path less traveled?

 ** **

 John

 ** **



RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-16 Thread Roarty, Francis X
John,
I think Ed Storm coined the NAE as a Nuclear Active 
environment.. not really defining how the lattice geometry does what it does 
but rather just defining the area where it occurs.. these hot spots do 
sometimes produce trace amounts of nuclear ash but not enough to account for 
the anomalous energy claimed... I am a neo Lorentzian theorist, IMHO the ether 
is moving through our 3D plane at a rate that defines our basic unit of time 
and is why we will always experience C as 300 million m/s -if the ether were to 
vary we would be blissfully unaware of it as our awareness will always match 
the rate of the ether passing through our plane..in effect it is our time base 
and is why we have the odd time dilation effects where the paradox twins are 
unaware of each others differences in inertial frames until they get back 
together and realize they were living at different rates.
Fran


From: John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 9:42 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

NAE is not an acronym I am familiar with.
I see it can mean nuclear active environment.

Have you tried the image?

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
francis.x.roa...@lmco.commailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:
John, I never left the path..perhaps this makes me a nutty troll but didn't 
Tesla already treat this like an electrical science, He proposed that super 
high voltages could stiffen or solidify the ether. If I recall the story 
correctly Lorentzian theory was never proven wrong only less elegant than 
Einstein's but  with equivalent results and later in life Einstein did embrace 
ether theory. Casimir theory is an example of this where the results can be 
adequately explained from either perspective and when it comes down to brass 
tacks ..does it really matter which theory you choose?  I choose ether theory 
because it is easy to visualize and requires less math skill to make a point.  
I like the Haisch - Rueda example of a car accelerating into a rainstorm 
increasing the pressure and resistance to forward motion with acceleration as 
being equivalent to acceleration through the ether..approach C and the pressure 
increases at a Pythagorean rate between time and space pushing the vector up 
from zero toward 90 degrees on the time axis [time dilation occurs in positive 
direction -slows from our perspective].. What IMHO is occurring in these NAE 
-and it agrees with the Naudt's paper which redefines the hydrino as 
relativistic hydrogen, is that the rain in the Haisch-Rueda experiment 
which defines the baseline of rainfall- ether at zero velocity is actually 
capable of being shielded at the nano scale.. Casimir plates like all macro 
world matter experience ether intersecting our plane at 90 degrees from all 
spatial directions but can take advantage of conduction and geometry to shield 
a tiny cavity where the pressure as Puthoff would call it is reduced.. 
putting the passengers in that car at a lower pressure than what we consider 
the baseline in the macro world.. the hydrogen atoms are those passengers and 
do not need to accelerate to achieve relativistic effects..instead of 
compressing the rainfall by accelerating the NAE is simply suppressing the 
rainfall  - much easier to do without any energy requirements other than to 
build the geometry in opposition to stiction forces. Of course any hydrogen 
migrating in and out of these NAE cavities will translate back and forth 
through different inertial frames and gain nothing without some asymmetrical 
process that opposes the migration in one direction vs the other..allowing us 
to tap the translation for energy as if the car was changing velocities... also 
note that the vector for occupants of this NAE - car  is now toward negative 90 
degrees and it is we who appear to slow down from dilation from the perspective 
of the occupants in this lower pressure environment..
Regards
Fran

From: John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.commailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 3:21 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

I have been in Vo's ugly nest of believers for a very long time.

I think in general a more accurate sentence might be a nest of skeptics and 
jaded ex-believers (oh, and some nuts and trolls, and nutty trolls).

Anyway I have some developments in the direction of influencing the aether 
sufficient to make it felt by most people.

My goal is to make this into a science, not dissimilar too electrical 
engineering.
And I am hoping to gain suggestions and other intput, and since this is very 
easy to experiment with some may wish to collaborate.

I can probably prove the reality of this to anyone interested with the 
investment of only 2-3 minutes and no materials needed.

This is the science of the future (and perhaps the past

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-16 Thread David Roberson
John, Fran,


I see that you two believe in some form of ether that modifies the space around 
us.  That is an interesting idea, but I continue to have a difficult time 
accepting the concept that there is one special velocity to use as a reference. 
 Just about everything in the universe is moving relative to everything else 
that is not directly, and physically attached to it.  It makes more sense to me 
to just accept the fact that there is no absolute reference frame about which 
everything develops.


On many occasions I find it quite advantageous to visualize myself residing 
within a certain chosen frame to understand what is taking place during 
collisions, etc.  When chosen carefully, the observations that can be made 
reveal behavior that is hidden by the complexity normally encountered when a 
convenient one is randomly picked.  The same laws of physics must be followed 
for each observer so one that chooses wisely can obtain a great advantage.


When you speak of time variations that each observer encounters you are getting 
into a truly exciting subject that is endlessly interesting.  Of course, each 
observer detects nothing unusual about the way time unfolds in his constant 
velocity world.  It is only when he observes others living in other reference 
frames that are moving relative to him that he notices strange behavior.  I 
suspect that taking this aspect into consideration might unlock some of the 
mysteries that keep us asking questions about nature.  For instance, I have 
mentally adjusted my frame of reference on occasions to include moving at 
nearly the speed of light relative to some experimental setups to see if it can 
be used to explain what occurs.  So far I have hit difficult barriers but I 
hope to one day gain information that clarifies these events.


I suppose that our main task is to continue to ask questions and not accept the 
current descriptions of physics without adequate proof.  It is safe to assume 
that there is much left to be learned in the sciences and that new 
understanding begins with good questions.  We should encourage discussions 
about the behavior of time, ethers, and whatever else comes into focus even if 
they do not agree with our current understanding.


Dave



-Original Message-
From: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, Apr 16, 2013 10:57 am
Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?



John,
I think Ed Storm coined the NAE as a Nuclear Active 
environment.. not really defining how the lattice geometry does what it does 
but rather just defining the area where it occurs.. these hot spots do 
sometimes produce trace amounts of nuclear ash but not enough to account for 
the anomalous energy claimed… I am a neo Lorentzian theorist, IMHO the ether is 
moving through our 3D plane at a rate that defines our basic unit of time and 
is why we will always experience C as 300 million m/s –if the ether were to 
vary we would be blissfully unaware of it as our “awareness” will always match 
the rate of the ether passing through our plane..in effect it is our time base 
and is why we have the odd time dilation effects where the paradox twins are 
unaware of each others differences in inertial frames until they get back 
together and realize they were living at different rates.
Fran
   
 

From: John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 9:42 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

 
NAE is not an acronym I am familiar with.

I see it can mean nuclear active environment.

 

Have you tried the image?

 

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com 
wrote:

John, I never left the path..perhaps this makes me a nutty troll but didn’t 
Tesla already treat this like an electrical science, He proposed that super 
high voltages could stiffen or “solidify” the ether. If I recall the story 
correctly Lorentzian theory was never proven wrong only less elegant than 
Einstein’s but  with equivalent results and later in life Einstein did embrace 
ether theory. Casimir theory is an example of this where the results can be 
adequately explained from either perspective and when it comes down to brass 
tacks ..does it really matter which theory you choose?  I choose ether theory 
because it is easy to visualize and requires less math skill to make a point.  
I like the Haisch - Rueda example of a car accelerating into a rainstorm 
increasing the pressure and resistance to forward motion with acceleration as 
being equivalent to acceleration through the ether..approach C and the pressure 
increases at a Pythagorean rate between time and space pushing the vector up 
from zero toward 90 degrees on the time axis [time dilation occurs in positive 
direction –slows from our perspective].. What IMHO is occurring in these NAE 
–and it agrees

Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-16 Thread Roarty, Francis X
Dave,
I didn’t say  there is one special velocity of ether… only that 
the “ambient” / average pressure or rate of ether displacement will always 
appear to be 300 million m/s no matter what velocity/ inertial frame you are 
in,  which is a simple expansion on the Paradox Twin phenomena where we as 3D 
observers can never be aware of variations in this rate.. In the macro world we 
know that only the  square law of gravity wells will  slowly vary the isotropy. 
Far below the plank scale we know we have wormholes and broken isotropy 
occurring all around us in what is termed the quantum foam but this normally 
averages out to the macroscopic average we consider isotropic by the time we 
get to any real building blocks of physical matter… IMHO, the Casimir effect, 
or NAE are examples of geometry and conductive metals segregating these sub 
plank levels of gravity variations between the outside and inside of their 
plate areas to concentrate a deficit in the cavity while a surplus is spread 
over the external plates… vacuum engineering as Puthoff coins it.  Instead of 
expending enormous energies to accelerate something near the speed of light to 
reach relativistic effects..you simply segregate the pressure into compressed 
and suppressed regions using Casimir geometry and then send  the “tiny time 
travelling observer”  to spend most of its time in only one region vs the 
other. I think this is why you have claims of anomalous radioactive decays in 
certain nanopowders where the geometry of the radioactive gas has a natural 
bias based on size and shape to spend more time migrating through one region vs 
the other. And there are anomalous decays in both directions being advanced or 
retarded based on the type of gas and material selected.
Fran

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 1:30 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

John, Fran,

I see that you two believe in some form of ether that modifies the space around 
us.  That is an interesting idea, but I continue to have a difficult time 
accepting the concept that there is one special velocity to use as a reference. 
 Just about everything in the universe is moving relative to everything else 
that is not directly, and physically attached to it.  It makes more sense to me 
to just accept the fact that there is no absolute reference frame about which 
everything develops.

On many occasions I find it quite advantageous to visualize myself residing 
within a certain chosen frame to understand what is taking place during 
collisions, etc.  When chosen carefully, the observations that can be made 
reveal behavior that is hidden by the complexity normally encountered when a 
convenient one is randomly picked.  The same laws of physics must be followed 
for each observer so one that chooses wisely can obtain a great advantage.

When you speak of time variations that each observer encounters you are getting 
into a truly exciting subject that is endlessly interesting.  Of course, each 
observer detects nothing unusual about the way time unfolds in his constant 
velocity world.  It is only when he observes others living in other reference 
frames that are moving relative to him that he notices strange behavior.  I 
suspect that taking this aspect into consideration might unlock some of the 
mysteries that keep us asking questions about nature.  For instance, I have 
mentally adjusted my frame of reference on occasions to include moving at 
nearly the speed of light relative to some experimental setups to see if it can 
be used to explain what occurs.  So far I have hit difficult barriers but I 
hope to one day gain information that clarifies these events.

I suppose that our main task is to continue to ask questions and not accept the 
current descriptions of physics without adequate proof.  It is safe to assume 
that there is much left to be learned in the sciences and that new 
understanding begins with good questions.  We should encourage discussions 
about the behavior of time, ethers, and whatever else comes into focus even if 
they do not agree with our current understanding.

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Roarty, Francis X 
francis.x.roa...@lmco.commailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, Apr 16, 2013 10:57 am
Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
John,
I think Ed Storm coined the NAE as a Nuclear Active 
environment.. not really defining how the lattice geometry does what it does 
but rather just defining the area where it occurs.. these hot spots do 
sometimes produce trace amounts of nuclear ash but not enough to account for 
the anomalous energy claimed… I am a neo Lorentzian theorist, IMHO the ether is 
moving through our 3D plane at a rate that defines our basic unit of time and 
is why we will always

Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-16 Thread David Roberson
Fran,


Sorry that I missed your explanation.  I am not sure that I understand how one 
would detect your ether, but perhaps one day it will become clear.


The twin paradox always blows my mind since from my perspective both twins 
would age the same.  Choose a frame of reference that is moving at a speed that 
is exactly half the relative speed between them.  In this frame one twin moves 
to the right at a certain speed and the other moves to the left at the same 
speed.   To me, both age at the same relatively slow rate.  There is no 
difference except for the acceleration that one twin undergoes if only his ship 
is powered.  The bottom line is that there would be no difference in age 
between them unless it is due to the effect of acceleration.


This is an example of how the choice of an observation frame can reveal 
interesting results.


Have you ever asked yourself when a certain event actually occurs?  You know no 
more about what will happen in the next moment to an object that is many light 
years away as you know about one that is next door.  Until energy can find its 
way to your sensors, there is no information available.  Of course we know how 
long it takes that energy to reach us from the far reaches of space and we thus 
subtract that travel time from the present observations.   Observers there can 
just as easily look this way and see the Sun, Earth, and other parts of our 
solar system being formed and wonder if one day intelligent life will hail from 
the mess.  If only they could read the future to which they have little 
knowledge.


So, how do you define the present from our perspective?  Is it what we observe 
happening at this very moment?  Why is our observation point any better than 
that of the guys across the universe?


Dave
(with his heretic hat on)



-Original Message-
From: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, Apr 16, 2013 2:15 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?



Dave,
I didn’t say  there is one special velocity of ether… only that 
the “ambient” / average pressure or rate of ether displacement will always 
appear to be 300 million m/s no matter what velocity/ inertial frame you are 
in,  which is a simple expansion on the Paradox Twin phenomena where we as 3D 
observers can never be aware of variations in this rate.. In the macro world we 
know that only the  square law of gravity wells will  slowly vary the isotropy. 
Far below the plank scale we know we have wormholes and broken isotropy 
occurring all around us in what is termed the quantum foam but this normally 
averages out to the macroscopic average we consider isotropic by the time we 
get to any real building blocks of physical matter… IMHO, the Casimir effect, 
or NAE are examples of geometry and conductive metals segregating these sub 
plank levels of gravity variations between the outside and inside of their 
plate areas to concentrate a deficit in the cavity while a surplus is spread 
over the external plates… vacuum engineering as Puthoff coins it.  Instead of 
expending enormous energies to accelerate something near the speed of light to 
reach relativistic effects..you simply segregate the pressure into compressed 
and suppressed regions using Casimir geometry and then send  the “tiny time 
travelling observer”  to spend most of its time in only one region vs the 
other. I think this is why you have claims of anomalous radioactive decays in 
certain nanopowders where the geometry of the radioactive gas has a natural 
bias based on size and shape to spend more time migrating through one region vs 
the other. And there are anomalous decays in both directions being advanced or 
retarded based on the type of gas and material selected.
Fran
 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 1:30 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

 
John, Fran,

 

I see that you two believe in some form of ether that modifies the space around 
us.  That is an interesting idea, but I continue to have a difficult time 
accepting the concept that there is one special velocity to use as a reference. 
 Just about everything in the universe is moving relative to everything else 
that is not directly, and physically attached to it.  It makes more sense to me 
to just accept the fact that there is no absolute reference frame about which 
everything develops.

 

On many occasions I find it quite advantageous to visualize myself residing 
within a certain chosen frame to understand what is taking place during 
collisions, etc.  When chosen carefully, the observations that can be made 
reveal behavior that is hidden by the complexity normally encountered when a 
convenient one is randomly picked.  The same laws of physics must be followed 
for each observer so one that chooses wisely can obtain a great advantage.

 

When you speak

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?

2013-04-16 Thread Eric Walker
It seems to me that the idea of an ether is a useful one, albeit not in the
form people were anticipating early last century.  I believe they expected
to find experimental evidence of a general movement in a specific direction
if an ether existed.  I see no reason to think that an either needs to be
like a wind blowing through our part of the cosmos at a speed relative to
ours.  Assuming for a moment that it exists in a useful sense, it could be
stationary in relation to spacetime (i.e., any possible frame of reference
allowed by relativity).

I like the concept of an ether because it provides something for waves to
propagate through.  It seems to me that we've already adopted something
vaguely along these lines in a practical sense by positing zero point
energy; i.e., the void is not really a void.

Eric


On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:30 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

I see that you two believe in some form of ether that modifies the space
 around us.  That is an interesting idea, but I continue to have a difficult
 time accepting the concept that there is one special velocity to use as a
 reference.