In reply to Andrew Meulenberg's message of Sat, 23 Jul 2022 09:50:22 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>Both classical and quantum physicists get fixed within their own framework.
>"To a hammer, everything looks like a nail."
If a hammer is all you have in your toolbox, then it's severely lacking. ;)
[snip]
If
In reply to Vibrator !'s message of Sat, 23 Jul 2022 13:55:04 +0100:
Hi,
[snip]
>The issue is that a graviton would be a spin-0 gauge boson, commuting only
>attractive force; a spin-1 mediator of both attractive and repulsive
>forces is obvs already fulfilled by photons or virtual photons.
>
Sean,
You asked "Is it meaningful to speak of "resonance" when something is
rotating in only one direction?"
Consider a car engine. Ignoring any internal resonances, it has a max-power
point at some frequency. If you add a muffler, you have modified the
external environment to the engine (most
Some incredible updates to report on:
• the list now includes many more examples of box-orbs linking up like this
You can watch as two box-orbs approach one another, touch and partially
merge, then extrude the tether out between them as they part. Then they
fly off together as a unit. There's
The issue is that a graviton would be a spin-0 gauge boson, commuting only
attractive force; a spin-1 mediator of both attractive and repulsive
forces is obvs already fulfilled by photons or virtual photons.
Qualitatively, 'gravity' reduces to a time-constant rate of exchange of
signed momentum,
I don't know.
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 8:46 PM Sean Logan wrote:
> Dear Andrew,
>
>Thank you for the information on Falaco Solitons. Is Cartan the one
> who introduced the idea of "rotating spacetime" into the theory of
> Relativity?
>
>>
Dear Andrew,
Thank you for the information on Falaco Solitons. Is Cartan the one who
introduced the idea of "rotating spacetime" into the theory of Relativity?
>
Sean,
You ask " Do you think we could make a macroscopic electron? I mean, one
that's a couple feet across?"
You have asked the right question. Sarfatti, at the end of his "update" (
https://www.academia.edu/s/18395c2bc3?source=ai_email ), includes his
equations for a macroscopic wormhole. He
Oh, excuse me :) That message was meant for "Vibrator !"
I like what you have to say about electrons. Do you think we could make a
macroscopic electron? I mean, one that's a couple feet across?
On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 9:10 PM Andrew Meulenberg
wrote:
> just an interested bystander
>
just an interested bystander
On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 10:00 PM Sean Logan wrote:
>
> Are you on the welcoming committee?
>
> Perhaps it's time you made liaison with the box orb pilots.
>
>
This sounds like an example of the whirling of shafts
"Whirling of shafts occurs due to *rotational imbalance of a shaft*, even
in the absence of external loads, which causes resonance to occur at
certain speeds, known as critical speeds."
Large electricity generating turbines have to be taken
Are you on the welcoming committee?
Perhaps it's time you made liaison with the box orb pilots.
I have a question about things that rotate: Is it meaningful to speak of
"resonance" when something is rotating in only one direction (Clockwise,
for example)? When I think of "resonance", I think of a guitar string
vibrating back and forth, or a parallel LC circuit, with the current
flowing
Did you check out https://www.academia.edu/s/18395c2bc3?source=ai_email ?
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 7:04 PM Vibrator ! wrote:
> I didn't put any on tick tok.
>
> I didn't 'put' any anywhere.
>
> Again, every day for the last few weeks i've come home from work and
> checked YouTube for the last 24
Dear Sean,
I like your derivation. It appears to be another indication of the
resonance giving stability to the electron at a specific "size". A similar
exercise gives its angular momentum to be 1/2 that of the photon
simultaneously forming it and the positron.
I think of a sphere of the
In reply to Sean Logan's message of Tue, 12 Jul 2022 16:09:28 -0700:
Hi Sean,
Frankly I'm not sure what it means myself, but it can't be a coincidence, and
is likely a clue to the nature of
space-time, or at least the nature of the electron. "mean something" was both
meant to be taken
Hello,
Are you suggesting that long ago, in the time of Classical Physics,
someone performed the same simple algebraic calculation I just did, and
looked with consternation upon the result? "Hmm, you guys, this number
seems to be off. Let's multiply it by a correction factor. We'll call it
In reply to Sean Logan's message of Tue, 12 Jul 2022 12:44:55 -0700:
Hi,
BTW I wonder if relativistic mass increase should be taken into account, if
it's spinning at the speed of light (or
close to it), and if the fine structure constant is related to that?
[snip]
If no one clicked on ads
In reply to Sean Logan's message of Tue, 12 Jul 2022 12:44:55 -0700:
Hi Sean,
If you multiply your value by the fine structure constant, you get the
classical electron radius. If you divide by the
fine structure constant, you get the Bohr radius. This has to "mean" something.
;)
>Dea Robin,
Dea Robin,
I ran the numbers, and the radius comes out even larger than the
"Classical Electron Radius". Here I wrote up my work in Latex so it's easy
to read:
https://spaz.org/~magi/appendix/electron-latex.html
I got an electron radius of:
r = 3.863395 x 10^-13 meters
Whereas the
In reply to Sean Logan's message of Mon, 11 Jul 2022 18:15:19 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>Hurricanes have cores too. Called the 'eye'. Would it be possible to make
>a macroscopic electron, by stirring the Natural Medium around fast enough?
>Don't electrons rotate at something like 790 times the speed of
>
>
> With a quasi solid core where the speed of rotation exceeds the
> information transmission speed of the fluid/field (FLEID).
>
> Bit like an apple really. :-)
>
Hurricanes have cores too. Called the 'eye'. Would it be possible to make
a macroscopic electron, by stirring the Natural
>
> I would be more inclined to say that electrons are eddies, rather than
> whole atoms. I think of the other particles in
> the zoo as composite eddies. (Wheels within wheels as it were.)
With a quasi solid core where the speed of rotation exceeds the information
transmission speed of the
In reply to Sean Logan's message of Mon, 11 Jul 2022 14:24:06 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>Ahh, so even atoms are made of this stuff? I like your description of them
>as ''eddies'' in the liquid. When you're paddling a canoe, as you pull the
>paddle out of the water, (after a stroke), there is sometimes
Ahh, so even atoms are made of this stuff? I like your description of them
as ''eddies'' in the liquid. When you're paddling a canoe, as you pull the
paddle out of the water, (after a stroke), there is sometimes a little
whirlpool flowing away. Didn't Rene Descartes propose the idea that atoms
In reply to Sean Logan's message of Mon, 11 Jul 2022 12:14:14 -0700:
Hi Sean,
[snip]
>Robin,
>
> Would you like to propose an experiment, to help us learn about the
>nature of this Ocean?
If you start with a uniform fluid, then the only way to introduce particles is
through rotations within
Robin,
Would you like to propose an experiment, to help us learn about the
nature of this Ocean?
My pet theory is that the medium, through which radio waves travel,
exists in more than three dimensions of space.
Sean
In reply to Frank Grimer's message of Sat, 9 Jul 2022 07:32:55 +0100:
Hi Frank,
I don't think these are just questions for philosophers. If we ever hope to
manipulate gravity, or inertia, then we need
to have a better understanding of the "ocean".
[snip]
If no one clicked on ads companies would
Thanks for your reply. Robin (my favorite garden bird :-)).
A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a
public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the
sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection
of stars called
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 1:51 PM Robin
wrote:
> In reply to Frank Grimer's message of Fri, 8 Jul 2022 10:21:32 +0100:
>
> >> why do like charges repel, and unlike charges attract?
> >Because one is a source, the other is a sink at the bottom of a deep
> ocean.
>
Yes, that's the way I think
In reply to Frank Grimer's message of Fri, 8 Jul 2022 10:21:32 +0100:
Hi Frank,
>>
>> why do like charges repel, and unlike charges attract?
>
>
>Because one is a source, the other is a sink at the bottom of a deep ocean.
That's certainly one possibility. However it raises even more questions.
>
> why do like charges repel, and unlike charges attract?
Because one is a source, the other is a sink at the bottom of a deep ocean.
Unlike charges have a Bernoulli flow between them.
One is a source - the other is a sink
This leads to their apparent attraction.
In reality they are being
In reply to Vibrator !'s message of Sat, 2 Jul 2022 01:41:55 +0100:
Hi,
>> Every moving thing on the planet does the same thing. However the net effect
>> is
>> zero..
>
>Reciprocity is obviously broken for effectively-reactionless
>accelerations however.
>Let me try restate the conundrum more
In reply to Vibrator !'s message of Mon, 4 Jul 2022 11:12:33 +0100:
Hi,
[snip]
>
>..if i may insist however, this thing below is not a fire lantern:
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiowRwpwVAQ=6s
Indeed, but it may be a box-kite with an essentially invisible nylon tether.
They come in a
1747 words - in the middle of the night.
One can't help but applaud your enthusiasm, Vibrator.
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 01:04, Vibrator ! wrote:
> I didn't put any on tick tok.
>
> I didn't 'put' any anywhere.
>
> Again, every day for the last few weeks i've come home from work and
> checked
I didn't put any on tick tok.
I didn't 'put' any anywhere.
Again, every day for the last few weeks i've come home from work and
checked YouTube for the last 24 hrs' UAP uploads.
I skip the dross, and categorise the rest. So, 'this one goes under this
header, this one belongs on that list, this
I did look at some, not all, of the ones you put on tick tock.
As for this one - blue skies - flashing like a semaphore - ergo - a
firelantern with reflecting panels tumbling around in the wind.
Not rocket science is it.
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 at 11:13, Vibrator ! wrote:
> > If you want to
> If you want to believe in little green men, be my guest.
..so you haven't looked at any of the evidence? Just wanted to say hello eh..
Well on the off-chance you ever get bored, or really want answers to these big
questions, maybe take a look in your own time.. I don't see anyone else making
If you want to believe in little green men, be my guest.
But don't look up to the sky while riding that motorbike.
You might finish up like the astronomer in Aesop's fable.
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 at 03:36, Vibrator ! wrote:
> Latest additions under "indistinct boxes / orbs / others" include this
>
Latest additions under "indistinct boxes / orbs / others" include this gem,
uploaded just now:
watch?v=QJkMBZq41Yo
..so, these are unambiguously your standard flying orbs; definitely not
drones, yet under intelligent control, and certainly not floating passively
like Chinese lanterns.
They
> Chinese fire lanterns. Which explains why they are seen all around the
> world. It wouldn't surprise me if you even have a small Chinese
community
> in W3.
Always appreciate your thoughts, but these things defy such easy dismissal.
I've specifically avoided listing most orange-orb sightings
Chinese fire lanterns. Which explains why they are seen all around the
world. It wouldn't surprise me if you even have a small Chinese community
in W3.
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 at 01:59, Vibrator ! wrote:
> If you check the 'box-orbs' list, i now have at least two that clearly
> show tethered pairs:
If you check the 'box-orbs' list, i now have at least two that clearly show
tethered pairs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZubVcEHtBlw
https://www.tiktok.com/@draw_my_town/video/7104013293471304965?lang=en
Same flight config too.. as if the lower one were perhaps siphoning some
fluid from the
> Every moving thing on the planet does the same thing. However the net effect
> is
> zero..
Reciprocity is obviously broken for effectively-reactionless
accelerations however. Let me try restate the conundrum more clearly:
• gravity's a mutual attraction between masses / inertias as observed
In reply to Vibrator !'s message of Thu, 30 Jun 2022 10:10:08 +0100:
Hi,
[snip]
>These things potentially have us on a leash.. basic physics tells us that
>what superficially _looks_ like 'anti-gravity' is, in practice, more akin
>to a tug applying a course-correction via a tractor-beam.
[snip]
> Obviously no one has heard of them, because you just invented the name.
I first saw that term in reference to the box-shaped object that flew
uncomfortably close between two military jets travelling in the opposite
direction - this particular incident often given as an example of why the
In reply to Vibrator !'s message of Mon, 27 Jun 2022 22:48:03 +0100:
Hi,
[snip]
>No one else seems to be talking about them, or even noticing the
>predominance of this particular UAP. You've got your basic saucers, your
>cigars and various 'foo-fighter' and 'ghost rockets' etc.. but who ever
47 matches
Mail list logo
