Re: Spiral helixes
--- Grimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is a rather nice polarization applet at: http://home3.netcarrier.com/~chan/EM/PROGRAMS/POLARIZATION/ From it one can get an immediate and clear conception of the nature of circular polarization and elliptical polarization as well for that matter. In effect the third component of light must be that which governs the phase angle. This ties is with Jones's insight in relation to three phase power transmission. It would appear that the third unrecognised phase must be one of the two components of mass referred to in a previous post. When googling [three phase theory] I was amused to come across the factor 1.732: This is the sq rt of 3. In the 3 phase system the delivery line, which is one of three can carry 1.732 A delivery current which then splits into two individually phased one amp currents. These phase delivery currents are themselves 120 degrees out of phase with each other, and obviously also out of phase with the delivery line itself. Because of this delta load phase splitting, Kirchoffs laws of junction currents is seemingly violated where what goes out has become greater then what went in at the node... This appaent contradiction does not consider the TIMING of each AC signal. The complication is resolved when we consider the total picture using all three phases. Suppose we had three different electrical co.s each selling a single phase of electricity, but that each one was operating 120 degrees out of phase with the other. In this case of single phase electricity sold by each Co. the delivery line current and the phase current of the load are one and the same thing. One AMP delivery yeilds One AMP phase current. But in actuality it cost the electric CO the line losses of TWO delivery lines, since there is an enter and exit line for the single phase of electricity. Thus we have six lines of sending and recieving currents for three loads. Now suppose the electric Co.s all merged so that they shared each others delivery lines. The sending line current of one Co.s current will be paired with the recieving line of its neighboring co. on each side. The vector combination(which is actually a vector subraction and not a vector addition, since these are sending and recieving currents from each phase) of both the sending and recieving currents on both lines shows that when the two one amp curents were combined in parallel lines, the two amps was reduced to 1.7. And perhaps more importantly the Co.s in unison merely made two lines in to one, reffered to as stator line currents on the example of a 3 phase alternator. This also means that now instead we have three loads having only three delivery lines, instead of six. Now if we carried forth this same argument for quadrature phasing, the shared 1 amp lines would enable 2 amps of phase currents to be delivered to the quature corner at an even lower l.4 Amps delivery line current. The question then becomes does adding more phases automatically guarantee further gains in efficiency? No it does not... As proof of this let us investigate a hypothetical 5 phase system. In the first case the three phase system delivered three one amp currents at a cost of(the square root of three)= 1.7A on the delivery lines. In the second case the quadrature system delivered four one amp phase currents at a cost of (the sq root of two)= 1.4 A on the four delivery lines. In the hypothetical five phase system we have the sq rt of 5 = Five 2.23 Amp delivery line currents to enable five individual phased one amp currents. So we here can see the superiority of the quadrature system in showing that no other polyphasing scheme can superceed its % of delivery line vs load line currents. This is also for a simple rule of vector addition vs vector subtraction. Only a 90 degree angle between equal vectors gives equal magnitude results for both addition or subtraction. == POWER = E x I x 1.732 x POWER FACTOR (FOR THREE PHASE) == which, as readers of my precious post may recall, is Vesica Pisces. 8^) Cheers Frank Grimer Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
Re: Spiral helixes
--- Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Harvey, Heres how that paradox works... [snip] This is very interesting and, over the years, you have said similar things in prior posts that lead one to believe that in 3-phase - symmetry in preserved - at least there is that tendency (which can somehow get back to ZPE). Furthermore, it seems that you have been trying to exploit this natural tendency in your experiments by presenting an interaction situation where one leg of 3-phase is energy deficient. Is that a fair appraisal? Yes, in certain respects... I didnt realize some aspects without later looking at the total picture. A good example is when I first started working with what I called the maximum energy transfer resonances. If we take just one phase of three from the alternator and apply the situation, we find that it does defy the way the laws are written. But here we are only working with a single phase and treating it by making obervations on that phase. Since we arent doing anything with the other phases, they are open circuit, at first we think that it should be irrevalent as to what occurs on those open circuits. Later on I found that the reason I was getting results that defy the maximum energy transfer laws, was that the phase in use was actually borrowing voltage from the adjacent phases, and a voltage monitoring of those empty phases shows that fact. Once we do the same thing for all three phases, the laws begin to comply, but still not completely. We cannot simply take one phase out of three and look what happens on that phase, without also analysing the total actions of the three phase WYE internally connected generator. In the large coil groupings that show an excess of phase angle freedom, the phase that isnt magnetically connected or coupled to the same degree as the other phases, also shows a great degree of inbalance, less current goes through that phase even though all three loads are ~ equal. Thus in a sense it is like you propose, it is energy deficient. In fact it is very common for one phase to have less voltage then another phase. I will have to stop speculating and just arrange all three coil goroups identically in mutual induction, and then see what happens. I began tearing evrything apart to accomplish this, but other work came up... Speaking of work, I have to go there before I am late just wanted to make a quick reply here. After the reconstruction is made, more authouritative comments on theis of what if scenario can be made. Sincerely HDN Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
Re: Spiral helixes
I was curious as to what would happen if I made a plait of three strings and drew one of them out. I used a fairly stiff plastic string, poly-something, and loosely plaited the three strands. The ends of each strand were marked so that I would know which one to pull and which two to hold. I was expecting the two which were left to be coiled around one another but to my surprise they were completely separate. Jones mentioned the structure of DNA. I wonder if there is some connection. Cheers Frank Grimer === et plectentes coronam de spinis ===
Re: Spiral helixes
At 09:40 am 02-05-05 +, Grimer wrote: I was curious as to what would happen if I made a plait of three strings and drew one of them out. I used a fairly stiff plastic string, poly-something, and loosely plaited the three strands. The ends of each strand were marked so that I would know which one to pull and which two to hold. I was expecting the two which were left to be coiled around one another but to my surprise they were completely separate. Jones mentioned the structure of DNA. I wonder if there is some connection. Cheers Frank Grimer === et plectentes coronam de spinis === To further my investigation into the three dimensional structure of a braid I loosely platted three stiff wires together. The plait was too stiff to draw one of the strands out so I cut a strand into sections with snips so that the short pieces fell away from the braid. Sure enough, two completely separate strands were left. These strands had the structure of a sine wave which rotated along its length. I remember reading once a complaint that the rotational polarization of light tended to be overlooked. I can now understand why. Presumably the speed of the 3 platted sine waves is differentially attenuated in the same way that the speed of blue, yellow and red light is differentially attenuated in refraction. Whilst on the subject of visible radiation it is worth noting that three separate colours are needed to make white light and that we have three sets of cones for the detection of visible light. === http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/rodcone.html The experimental evidence suggests that among the cones there are three different types of colour reception. Response curves for the three types of cones have been determined. Since the perception of colour depends on the firing of these three types of nerve cells, it follows that visible colour can be mapped in terms of three numbers called tristimulus values. Colour perception has been successfully modeled in terms of tristimulus values and mapped on the CIE chromaticity diagram. === A coincidence? I very much doubt it. Cheers Frank Grimer === dixitque Deus fiat lux et facta est lux ===
Re: Spiral helixes
Harvey, Heres how that paradox works... [snip] This is very interesting and, over the years, you have said similar things in prior posts that lead one to believe that in 3-phase - symmetry in preserved - at least there is that tendency (which can somehow get back to ZPE). Furthermore, it seems that you have been trying to exploit this natural tendency in your experiments by presenting an interaction situation where one leg of 3-phase is energy deficient. Is that a fair appraisal? There are many potential ways to pump or exploit ZPE, at least in theory, and letting nature try to preserve symmetry by supplying excess (rather than taking it away) is one potential way which I have not seen in any other experiments except Harvey's. I don't think that is giving away anything proprietary, but is an accurate synopsis of the situation? Jones
Re: Spiral helixes
The first lesson given in art is there are 3 primary colors. Interesting the ancient Americans used the same word for green and blue, mystified that learned white people would use two different words to describe what they considered to be the same color. On the disbursing of light an entire different focus ( pun intended) may be necessary. Studying the structure of light as a 3 braided component can give one a headache. BUT , again nature comes to the rescue of science in revealing the structural form of a chambered nautulus. Hmm.. lets consider the structure of the chamber that uses a spiral and a parabolic function as a clue. Is this chambered type structure similar to how light is disbursed? Light is absolutely fascinating in its ability to disburse yet be measured in length. One can wonder if the measurement therefore is truly linear in its math function or an abberation. I wonder how Duke University's FEL program is faring. Perhaps the next generation of visionaries have began mapping their strategies. For sure , the computer math software is lagging. Rice University had a great parallel computing work started and lost sight. Quadratic computing software for theoretical math computations is vital to explore the next generation of physics. Every opportunity I have to voice this need is received with a blank stare during my visits to Houston. - Original Message - From: Grimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 6:39 AM Subject: Re: Spiral helixes At 09:40 am 02-05-05 +, Grimer wrote: I was curious as to what would happen if I made a plait of three strings and drew one of them out. I used a fairly stiff plastic string, poly-something, and loosely plaited the three strands. The ends of each strand were marked so that I would know which one to pull and which two to hold. I was expecting the two which were left to be coiled around one another but to my surprise they were completely separate. Jones mentioned the structure of DNA. I wonder if there is some connection. Cheers Frank Grimer === et plectentes coronam de spinis === To further my investigation into the three dimensional structure of a braid I loosely platted three stiff wires together. The plait was too stiff to draw one of the strands out so I cut a strand into sections with snips so that the short pieces fell away from the braid. Sure enough, two completely separate strands were left. These strands had the structure of a sine wave which rotated along its length. I remember reading once a complaint that the rotational polarization of light tended to be overlooked. I can now understand why. Presumably the speed of the 3 platted sine waves is differentially attenuated in the same way that the speed of blue, yellow and red light is differentially attenuated in refraction. Whilst on the subject of visible radiation it is worth noting that three separate colours are needed to make white light and that we have three sets of cones for the detection of visible light. === http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/rodcone.html The experimental evidence suggests that among the cones there are three different types of colour reception. Response curves for the three types of cones have been determined. Since the perception of colour depends on the firing of these three types of nerve cells, it follows that visible colour can be mapped in terms of three numbers called tristimulus values. Colour perception has been successfully modeled in terms of tristimulus values and mapped on the CIE chromaticity diagram. === A coincidence? I very much doubt it. Cheers Frank Grimer === dixitque Deus fiat lux et facta est lux ===
Re: Spiral helixes
--- Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank and Richard,
Your a cord of three strands is not quickly
broken
quote is interesting. Could this have referred to
a
braid or plait I wonder.
With only two polarities,
one might ask
why have three-phase at all, or else... if there is
any advantage
to using multiple phases, why not have four or six,
etc? (which
actually you do have in transformers). There is
information on the
net about this, but none of it seems to have the
complete answer -
other than **cost** or should I say, duh, it all
gets back to
cost.
In fact, three-phase is more economical than any
other number of
phases, it seems, in that it uses less tonnage of a
conductor to
get the same amount of power from point A to point
B. But for
applications like rectifiers and synchronous
converters where DC
is produced, it is most efficient to use six-phase
AC input, which
is easily produced from three-phase in a
transformer.
The experts say that if you are transmitting a
certain amount of
power single-phase, adding one more conductor
operated at the same
line voltage and current and using three-phase will
increase the
power transmitted by 72% with only a 50% increase in
the amount of
copper and losses. That advantage is obvious, but is
there more to
the story than cost and why is that the case anyway
? Terry
probably knows the answer... or maybe it is part of
the mystery of
a spiral helix... ;-)
Jones
Lets go back to electrical definitions...
Here we can rehash what has been wrote concerning the
vector differences case for amperages on the stator
line; from HW Jackson; Introduction to Electric
Circuits; third edition (1970)
This was my sort of electrical learning bible, the
authour is very concise, and is often cited from other
sources... However the warning also applies here from
Prentice Hall;
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be
reproduced in any way, or by any means, without
permission in writing from the publisher...
Yeah this is the standard disclaimer... Yet in this
book a mistruth is promulgated, so I dont need any
permission to say it is a mistruth, because in a court
of law, if something can be shown to be inaccurate,
the truth reigns supreme... Ben Cartright said this in
context of defence of libel laws on a episode of
Bonanza where he bought his own newspaper, but he
wasnt referring to electricity back then...
HW Jackson...
Introduction to Electric Circuits...
The phase current of the source is defined as the
current flowing in a particular {stator} coil of the
source of emf, and the phase current of the load is
the current flowing in a particular arm of
the load. In the wye-connected system, the source
phase current, load phase current, and line current
are all one and the same. But careful inspection of
the delta system shows us that each line has to carry
current for TWO arms of the load. Closer inspection
shows us that the tracing direction for one of these
currents is AWAY from the source and the other is
TOWARD the source. Therefore, the line current to the
delta load must be the vector DIFFERENCE between the
two load phase currents flowing in that line. However,
if two vector quantities have an angle between them of
greater than ninety degrees, their vector difference
is greater than one by itself.
Then we go on to the OBJECTION to that last
statement which should actually be read as 60 degrees,
and not 90 degrees. This is because if the angle was
90 degrees, exactly as written in that electrical law
book: the vector difference would have a magnitude
greater then either vector magnitude alone, and so to
quantify this error we go back to find when and where
this error of knowledge first krept in and where that
angle first occurs... where those magnitudes would be
EQUAL; and in fact if each vector were one unit, the
vector difference would be 1.4 units at 90 degrees;
the vector addition would also be 1.4 at 90 degrees,
and it is that unique phase 4 angle that makes equal
magnitude results for either subtraction OR addition;
which no other phase angle is able to accomplish...
IF the phase angle were instead 60 degrees, THEN up to
a certain limit the phase angle subtraction above that
angle would be greater then either one vector unit
alone would establish as a solitary unit magnitude,
and what we have here as a published scientific
doctrine is a subtle form of brainwashing to guarantee
the subserviance of three phase electrical doctrine;
without carefully examining all the scientific facts,
and accepting something just because it is already
established as gospel because it is written in an
authoritative book governing these so called
electrical laws...
Here we have something quite unbelievable! The
virtual master of electrical teachings; HW Jackson has
made a (technical)mistake! He is saying something that
is not completely wrong, and yet is not technically
wrong, but it is
Re: Spiral helixes
At 08:13 am 30-04-05 -0700, you wrote: Frank and Richard, Your a cord of three strands is not quickly broken quote is interesting. Could this have referred to a braid or plait I wonder. Most likely. And an anthropologist might suspect that somewhere back in prehistory, women taught men that plaiting animal or plant fibers, like they did with their own hair, would make for a stronger rope... or is that sexist? Anyway, the thought occurred that perhaps there is also something special but not easy to quantify, along the lines of Frank's third component in three-phase AC, which makes it the standard over other possibilities. With only two polarities, one might ask why have three-phase at all, or else... if there is any advantage to using multiple phases, why not have four or six, etc? (which actually you do have in transformers). There is information on the net about this, but none of it seems to have the complete answer - other than **cost** or should I say, duh, it all gets back to cost. In fact, three-phase is more economical than any other number of phases, it seems, in that it uses less tonnage of a conductor to get the same amount of power from point A to point B. But for applications like rectifiers and synchronous converters where DC is produced, it is most efficient to use six-phase AC input, which is easily produced from three-phase in a transformer. The experts say that if you are transmitting a certain amount of power single-phase, adding one more conductor operated at the same line voltage and current and using three-phase will increase the power transmitted by 72% with only a 50% increase in the amount of copper and losses. That advantage is obvious, but is there more to the story than cost and why is that the case anyway ? Terry probably knows the answer... or maybe it is part of the mystery of a spiral helix... ;-) Jones Your comment about three phase, Jones, has sent me back to look at my Interactive Hierarchical Mechanics note, N103/87. When I got down to equations (28) and (29). u^2 + v^2= c^2 .(28) u[0]^2 + v[0]^2 = c^2 .(29) ...I realised where the third component comes from. The internal velocities, v and v[0] (reciprocal masses) are closed path velocities. The simplest close path is a circle and this has two components, the tangential velocity and the radial velocity towards the centre So we can write, v^2 = t^2 + w^2 .(30) v[0]^2 = t[0]^2 + w[0]^2 .(31) Substituting for v^2 and v[0]^2 in (28) and (29) gives, u^2 + t^2 + w^2 = c^2.(32) u[0]^2 + t[0]^2 + w[0]^2 = c^2.(33) so we can see that light indeed has a braided 3 phase structure. I remember once reading a complaint someone was making about the light being represented by two sine waves which were at right angles but in phase. He claimed that it should have been represented by two sine waves which were at right angles but 180 degrees out of phase. Of course if you think that only E and M are involved then these would seem to be the only two alternatives. It would appear that both are wrong and light should be represented by three sine waves which are at 120 degrees to each other and 120 degrees out of phase; in short by a braided structure. Wasn't it Tesla who first hit upon the three phase notion? I shall have to google. 8^) Cheers Frank Grimer
Re: Spiral helixes
--- Grimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wasn't it Tesla who first hit upon the three phase notion? A popular misconception indeed... I have combed through early Tesla writings contained in the somewhat unimpresssive Inventions, Researches, and Writings of Nikola Tesla by Thomas Commerford Martin and found absolutely NOT one reference to three phase. In fact EVERY reference concerning poly phasing schemes is couched in reference to quadrature or poly phase, but never once is three phase even mentioned... My only thought in the matter is that Tesla, being highly superstitious always avoided any reference to three It was bad luck for him. He in fact wrote about his own mental illness and mental breakdown in his own short autobiography. perhaps some references to three exist there, I havent read it for years, good idea to look at that again. Many folks have added things to what Tesla has said, to the point that they said/ he said ect... that become myths. I for one would be glad to hear about any context with Tesla and three phase. Undoubtably he was most familiar with the scheme, since thats how polyphasing developed, but why are there no direct references to that Even more mysterious was his infatuation with the no 3 and its derivatives. ( again from biographers) Again those are the reports from those aquaintances, those biographers, but not one word from the man himself. Tesla had nothing to do with three phase. I would be glad to see anything to indicate that to be otherwise or true, because I havent seen one iota of such references or evidence. Sincerely HDN Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
Re: Spiral helixes
At 10:40 pm 28-04-05 -0500, you wrote: Observing the vortex produced in a clear plexiglas tank of water by a high speed rotating member facing down with a clockwise rotation I notice the cone of the vortex is at the surface and counterclockwise due to the vortex curling 180 degrees from the face of the rotating member up to the surface. The diameter of the vortex remains near constant until it approaches the water surface when it expands to the familiar parabolic form. a measured amount of air can be induced at the member due to vacuum. The air allows the many shed vortices to become visible in the water that move in many directions. A water vortex is made up of many spirals some of which appear to be flowing opposite from the main bands. These spirals remind me of a model of a DNA molecule.. hmmm. Reading a recent research paper where light was frozen reminds me of what happens when a water vortex is disturbed.. it collapses. Thinking of the frozen light experiment, I try to imagine what is taking place. I have considered the event may be similar to impinging on a water vortex... IF light is actually in spiral helix form and interrupting ( impinging) the helix may be what causes the light to freeze. If light is actually composed of 3 components it could better explain why sunlight can heat a surface after traveling the distance through space at near absolute zero temperature. The water vortex may reveal one of the capacitor properties of water. If water and light have 3 components and are spiral helix in form there may be a way to interrupt or impinge on one of the bands to trigger the capacitor. Looking at Ecclesiastes 4;12 I read a sentence made by the Teacher.. a cord of three strands is not quickly broken. may offer a clue. Some of the most unseeming comments expressed in this group have led to stimulation of thought which is the real worth of the VortexL. Richard Hi Richard, I think your point about the third dimension is crucial. We have always to consider, not only A and B, but also the interaction term AB. In the real world 2 + 2 does not equal 4 since to the extent that adding represents something physical, there is always an interaction term which has some real value. Often, of course, this interaction is so small that it is below the threshold of measurable (though not intellectual) perception. To take a simple example of what I mean, if we have two gold coins and we bring them together then they have lost some gravitational potential energy and gained some internal energy (inverse inertia). Indeed, even in the symbolic representation of 2 + 2 = 4 one can see that there is a loss of information (negative interaction) in going from the LHS to the RHS of the equation. Your a cord of three strands is not quickly broken quote is interesting. Could this have referred to a braid or plait I wonder === Braiding of fiber yarn creates a strand or rope that is thicker and stronger than the strands would have been separately. Braided ropes are preferred by arborists and rock climbers because they do not twist under load, as does an ordinary twisted- strand rope. These ropes consist of one or more concentric tubular braided jackets surrounding a single untwisted yarn of straight fibers. === Here again, it is the interaction introduced by the bending of the individual strands which gives the AB, AC, BC and ABC interaction terms. Though tenuous in the extreme these interactions are truly physical just as much as the flavours of a well cooked meal or a vintage wine. I suppose it is this difficulty to pin down the physical nature of the interaction between magnetic and electric field which makes the identification of the third component so difficult. The right angles characteristic of E and M ensures their virtual independence from each other - and yet this independence cannot be complete or they could not interact at all. The angle must be pi/2 (+/-) delta. The situation is modelled by the flows in a closed vortex (e.g. smoke ring). In the case it is easy to see that the flow of material in the skin of the ring cannot be exactly at right angles to the flow along the axis of the ring. It seems to me that the reason the interface term is so difficult to get to grips with is that whereas the A and B terms are relatively voluminous and static, the interaction term AB is at the opposite boundary, spatially tending to zero and extremely dynamic. In short it is responsible for maintaining the enormous flows between A and B which maintain their separate identities. In symbols A B so the symbol represents the interaction term. I will resist the temptation to go OT by not pointing out the obvious analogy. Now since with Tom Flandern I am confident the speed of gravity is manifestly vastly greater than
Re: Spiral helixes
Indeed !! Frank. For the use of a better word we use component Watching video of some of the large forest fires over the recent past, I was fascinated with the video shots that captured the occasional fire storm or chimney vortexes created along the sharp inclines of mountain slopes as the fires intensify. The suuden updraft vortex of flame shoot skyward at something above mach 10 if my calculations are close. The amazing part is there appears to be NO inertia at the start of the event. The visible spiral flame appears to form the vortex and move without any hesitation caused by an enertia... hmmm .. gravity cancelled. There are recorded accounts of witnessing of these type events during WW2 bombing of London and the fire storms reported. Perhaps science must displace the terms light and gravity with something more descriptive. I am beginning to suspect gravity is merely a function of light or at least a manifestation thereof. The examples of 3 strand helix in nature may often be clues to deeper insight into the complex. The DNA spiral helix may actually be braided rather than twisted which could give the people in drug research an entire new focus. Consider the studies in bending light. If light were actually composed of 3 components then one or more component may pass through any mass, be it earth or whatever, while one or more component may be blocked. BUT.. and a very big BUT.. that component(s) blocked may reform at a point beyond the block and lend the appearance to an obligue observation as a bend. Assigning properties to a gravitational constant has been shot with danger way to long in theoretical physics. Light may indeed play an unseen role( pun intended). One must maintain a humor when discussing subjects of this nature or risk the tar brush. Only Vortexians are immune. Richard - Original Message - From: Grimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 8:20 AM Subject: Re: Spiral helixes At 10:40 pm 28-04-05 -0500, you wrote: Observing the vortex produced in a clear plexiglas tank of water by a high speed rotating member facing down with a clockwise rotation I notice the cone of the vortex is at the surface and counterclockwise due to the vortex curling 180 degrees from the face of the rotating member up to the surface. The diameter of the vortex remains near constant until it approaches the water surface when it expands to the familiar parabolic form. a measured amount of air can be induced at the member due to vacuum. The air allows the many shed vortices to become visible in the water that move in many directions. A water vortex is made up of many spirals some of which appear to be flowing opposite from the main bands. These spirals remind me of a model of a DNA molecule.. hmmm. Reading a recent research paper where light was frozen reminds me of what happens when a water vortex is disturbed.. it collapses. Thinking of the frozen light experiment, I try to imagine what is taking place. I have considered the event may be similar to impinging on a water vortex... IF light is actually in spiral helix form and interrupting ( impinging) the helix may be what causes the light to freeze. If light is actually composed of 3 components it could better explain why sunlight can heat a surface after traveling the distance through space at near absolute zero temperature. The water vortex may reveal one of the capacitor properties of water. If water and light have 3 components and are spiral helix in form there may be a way to interrupt or impinge on one of the bands to trigger the capacitor. Looking at Ecclesiastes 4;12 I read a sentence made by the Teacher.. a cord of three strands is not quickly broken. may offer a clue. Some of the most unseeming comments expressed in this group have led to stimulation of thought which is the real worth of the VortexL. Richard Hi Richard, I think your point about the third dimension is crucial. We have always to consider, not only A and B, but also the interaction term AB. In the real world 2 + 2 does not equal 4 since to the extent that adding represents something physical, there is always an interaction term which has some real value. Often, of course, this interaction is so small that it is below the threshold of measurable (though not intellectual) perception. To take a simple example of what I mean, if we have two gold coins and we bring them together then they have lost some gravitational potential energy and gained some internal energy (inverse inertia). Indeed, even in the symbolic representation of 2 + 2 = 4 one can see that there is a loss of information (negative interaction) in going from the LHS to the RHS of the equation. Your a cord of three strands is not quickly broken quote is interesting. Could this have referred to a braid or plait I wonder === Braiding of fiber yarn creates a strand
Re: Spiral helixes
Frank and Richard, Your a cord of three strands is not quickly broken quote is interesting. Could this have referred to a braid or plait I wonder. Most likely. And an anthropologist might suspect that somewhere back in prehistory, women taught men that plaiting animal or plant fibers, like they did with their own hair, would make for a stronger rope... or is that sexist? Anyway, the thought occurred that perhaps there is also something special but not easy to quantify, along the lines of Frank's third component in three-phase AC, which makes it the standard over other possibilities. With only two polarities, one might ask why have three-phase at all, or else... if there is any advantage to using multiple phases, why not have four or six, etc? (which actually you do have in transformers). There is information on the net about this, but none of it seems to have the complete answer - other than **cost** or should I say, duh, it all gets back to cost. In fact, three-phase is more economical than any other number of phases, it seems, in that it uses less tonnage of a conductor to get the same amount of power from point A to point B. But for applications like rectifiers and synchronous converters where DC is produced, it is most efficient to use six-phase AC input, which is easily produced from three-phase in a transformer. The experts say that if you are transmitting a certain amount of power single-phase, adding one more conductor operated at the same line voltage and current and using three-phase will increase the power transmitted by 72% with only a 50% increase in the amount of copper and losses. That advantage is obvious, but is there more to the story than cost and why is that the case anyway ? Terry probably knows the answer... or maybe it is part of the mystery of a spiral helix... ;-) Jones
Re: Spiral helixes
Jones Beene wrote: Terry probably knows the answer... or maybe it is part of the mystery of a spiral helix... ;-) It's nice to have friends. Euclid: Three points determine a plane.
Re: Spiral helixes
In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911 The most common industrial means of obtaining motive power from electricity is the induction motor; these can be built very simply and cheaply if powered by three-phase AC, since an array of 3 (or 6, 9, etc.) stator coils produces the necessary rotating magnetic field (which turns the unpowered -- thus simple and cheap -- rotor). Single-phase induction motors require a whole extra starter system, including relays, capacitors, and additional stator coils, or (on smaller motors) pole-shading rings, etc., all of which produce a weaker starting magnetic field than the simple stator coils on the three-phase motors, which also produce their running field. On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 08:13:56AM -0700, Jones Beene wrote: ... Anyway, the thought occurred that perhaps there is also something special but not easy to quantify, along the lines of Frank's third component in three-phase AC, which makes it the standard over other possibilities. With only two polarities, one might ask why have three-phase at all, or else... if there is any advantage to using multiple phases, why not have four or six, etc? (which actually you do have in transformers). There is information on the net about this, but none of it seems to have the complete answer - other than **cost** or should I say, duh, it all gets back to cost. In fact, three-phase is more economical than any other number of phases, it seems, in that it uses less tonnage of a conductor to get the same amount of power from point A to point B. But for applications like rectifiers and synchronous converters where DC is produced, it is most efficient to use six-phase AC input, which is easily produced from three-phase in a transformer. The experts say that if you are transmitting a certain amount of power single-phase, adding one more conductor operated at the same line voltage and current and using three-phase will increase the power transmitted by 72% with only a 50% increase in the amount of copper and losses. That advantage is obvious, but is there more to the story than cost and why is that the case anyway ? Terry probably knows the answer... or maybe it is part of the mystery of a spiral helix... ;-) Jones
Spiral helixes
Observing the vortex produced in a clear plexiglas tank of water by a high speed rotating member facing down with a clockwise rotation I notice the cone of the vortex is at the surface and counterclockwise due to the vortex curling 180 degrees from the face of the rotating member up to the surface. The diameter of the vortex remains near constant until it approaches the water surface when it expands to the familar parabolic form. a measured amount of air can be induced at the member due to vacuum. The air allows the many shed vortices to become visible in the water that move in many directions. A watervortexis made up of many spirals some of which appear to be flowing opposite from the main bands. These spirals remind me of amodel of a DNA molecule.. hmmm. Readinga recent research paperwhere light was " frozen"reminds me of what happens when a water vortex is disturbed.. it collapses. Thinking of the frozen light experiment, I try to imagine what is taking place. I have considered the eventmay besimilar to impinging on a water vortex... " IF" light is actually in spiral helix form and interrupting( impinging) the helixmay bewhat causes the light to freeze. If light is actually composed of 3 components it could better explain why sunlight can heat a surface after traveling the distance through space at near absolute zero temperature. The water vortex may reveal one of the " capacitor" properties of water. If water and light have 3 components and are spiral helix informthere may be a way to " interrupt or impinge onone of the bands to " trigger" the capacitor. Looking at Ecclesiastes 4;12 I read asentence made by the Teacher.. " a cord of three strands is not quickly broken". may offer a clue. Some of the most unseemingcomments expressed in this group have led to stimulation of thought which is the real worth of the VortexL. Richard Blank Bkgrd.gif
