Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
You've got a hypothesis: A specific configuration, presented as treatment of experimental subjects, produces an effect -- even if only an enhancement of the placebo effect. The null hypothesis upon which to base the control experiment: Even though a placebo effect may be present and in fact much larger than the amplification of it by the hypothesized treatment, there should be a lower level of the observed effect when the configuration presented is not the one specified by the aetheric theory. 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? On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 9:07 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? 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
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.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?
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?
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: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
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 The best way to make images that look identical but aren't is if I use colour manipulation, these can be very hard to see differences. But it requires that the right values get to the monitor, if the image is changed by the videocard or the monitor due to colour settings, brightness, gamma, vivid setting etc, or some white balance issue the effect will be reduced or destroyed. (some colour effects have survived printing, but I suspect many won't) Meanwhile circuits can be made dramatically ineffective by making bad connections, but this will be visible but maybe not obvious. Another option is to not have any image presented to the person, while some people feel the energy in their head/eyes/brain by looking at the images, many can feel it in their palm or other body parts. This can be done by putting (if images are to be used) a monitor in a cardboard box. Or by putting a light and a printed image in a box. Or a sheet could hide it. However guidance as to precisely where to feel is critical for all but the most sensitive, so if they can't see an image there should be some visual cues and some direction. Most people that have felt this 'energy' under my direction have not had anything to took at, rather a small metal cylinder has contained various unpowered coils. Additionally a couple of people have actually felt it incidentally (no introduction and in public), when walking by or sitting in a waiting room with a device in a pocket that happened to 'hit' the person. John On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 9:07 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
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
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?
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: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
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: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
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?
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?
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.
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
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?
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 into
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
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
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
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? 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
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Any experimenters, aether theorists here?
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: 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.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) that
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.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: 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.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.
