--- Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There is an interesting website, a first stab at a > unified theory and a little "green" yet, but still > innovative and useful, maintained by a Belgian > engineer and free-energy researcher named Saviour. > Despite the appellation he is not an eccentric > nut-case - perhaps closer to genius. > http://www.blazelabs.com/f-u-const.asp > > He first treats time and space as interrelated > "volumes" In such a theory, a "volume" of time T3 > with respect to S (one dimensional space), has the > same properties of a volume of space S3 with respect > to T. As opposed to the SI standard, these units > are based on the natural constants : G > (gravitational constant), Planck's constant (h), > speed of light c, Boltzmann constant and > permittivity. They are based on universal constants > and thus known as Planck's natural units. The two > basic Planck units are "natural length" and "natural > time." Hi Jones, I cant follow everthing here, but several comments can be made. On the subject of non-euclidean space time geometry, think about the following analogy. If we draw a triangle on flat space, ( 2 dimensions), the sum of the interior angles will sum to 180 degrees. If we take that same triangle and superimpose it on a sphere, the sum of the inner angles can then become greater then 180 degrees. We might say that adding a (third) dimension changes the two dimensional geometrical laws. In electrical theory we also have a similar fact. There are 360 degrees of possible action in electrical phasings. If we have an alternator supplying three phases at 120 degree phase angles with resect to each other, we supposedly can go around the three phase circle and obtain 360 degrees of phase difference on that circle. Suppose we have three phases each containing 100 volts internally, as a resonant rise of voltage factor. Say 10 volts goes in from the source of voltage, but we read 100 volts inside the circuit. The 100 volts is made by series resonance, which by definition means that the current is in phase with the imposed voltage, so no time lag exists, and the q factor of 10 is evident because the voltage has risen 10 times with respect to its source. Now the actual source is three phases of ten volts, each spaced at 120 degree phase angles with respect to each other. IT IS THE TIMING DIFFERENCE OF WHEN THE VOLTAGE PEAKS OCCUR BETWEEN THE PHASES, SO WHEN 100 VOLTS IS MEASURED ON ONE PHASE, WITH RESPECT TO THE NEXT PHASE ALSO SHOWING 100 VOLTS, WHEN WE MEASURE THE VOLTAGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE RESONANT PHASES, WE KNOW THAT IF 170 VOLTS IS THEN RECORDED, THE PHASES ARE 120 DEGREES OUT OF PHASE. The inner voltage rises should follow the same pattern of phasing differences that are initially created on the outside of the circuit, which in this case is 120 degrees. In this analogy then the highest possible voltage difference that should be attainable between two phases, each recording 100 volts internal, would be the case when each voltage rise were occuring oppositely in time. In that case we could only record a maximum of 200 volts between the phases, where that information then tells us by logic, that the timing differences between the waveforms peaks are then 180 degrees, and this is the maximum voltage difference that should be attainable between those phases. Now in doing my alternator research, I found that by placing two sets of coil groups adjacent to each other, even though the mutual inductance readings showed that no mutual inductance existed between the air core coil groups of 10 coils of 14 gauge wire spools of 500 ft wired in series lengthways: where each coil grouping was placed lengthways next to each other, when they were resonated, a mutual inductance factor DID come into play. The net result of those observations were that now, even though the source of voltage came from a 120 degree phasing difference, the ACTUAL measured voltage difference between each groups inner voltage rise was close to 180 degrees, simply because the registered voltage diffence BETWEEN those phases became almost double that found on each phase. So logically it is not hard to accept that a 120 degree phase angle is now acting as if it were close to a 180 degree phase angle. Both the amperage lines leading into the phases, (the stator lines), and the voltage meters on the phases themselves and between the phases bear this fact out, so it is hard to argue against those simple facts, and there really isnt anything amazing about any of this so far. Now a third phase of 10 coils was added, but this phase was made so that hardly any mutual inductance with the other phases could enter the picture, those 10 coils were split into groups of 5 and also wired in series, so that now we have two groups of 15 coils placed lengthwise in two columns of 15 coils. So now we have three phases. It would stand to reason then that since only 360 degrees of phasing voltage differences can exist between all three phasings, and that we have already used up almost 180 degrees in the first two phasings being measured, that the voltage differences between the remaining phasings should only have slightly more then 180 degree left, and if this were evenly split, the remaining phase angles should be slightly higher then 90 degrees, for everything to add up to 360 degrees in total. What baffled me in this reagrd was the fact that when all three phase angles were measured by respective voltage difference between phasings, IT ADDED UP TO WELL PAST 360 DEGREES! The only possible explanation in my mind is that some how, just like a triangle can have more then 180 degrees on the internal angles when going from two dimensions to three when subtended on a sphere, the same thing analogy wise is happening here, and that space-time is being altered by magnetic fields in resonance, being spatially reacted with each other by mutual inductance. You may wish to use the following for reference for the things I am talking about; 13 meter reading of 3 DSR�s/ showing interphasal voltage differences between phasings. (DSR = Delta Series Resonance) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/files/IRC/Dsc00509.jpg
Here both methods for determining phase angles are supplied, the relative difference between the stator line amperage, and the individual phase amperages: and also the relative difference between the phases voltage rise, compared to the interphasal voltage rises. Later it was found that the second method may be the preffered method, because if the phases themselves were to experience resonant rise of amperage, this makes the first method invalid. However the circuits ARE NOT set up for resonant rise of amperage, they are instead set up for resonant rise of amperage, so for the purposes here both methods of analysis show the same paradox. For brevity I will only deal with the voltage measurements here. As should be obvious however, if the other side of the coin were desired to be looked at, Phase 1 is between stator lines 1 and 2, phase 2 is between stator lines 2 and 3, and so on... Here are the individual voltage rises on each phase.. Phase 1- 372 volts Phase 2- 388 volts Phase 3- 188 volts The highest possible voltage difference between phases 1 and 2 would be 372 + 388 = 760 volts The actual interphasal difference is 722 volts, which is 95% of the possible highest voltage difference, also meaning the phase angle is almost 180 degrees. The highest possible voltage difference between phases 2 and 3 would be 388 + 188 = 576 volts The actual interphasal voltage difference is 381 volts, 66% of the highest possible reading The highest possible voltage difference between phases 3 and 1 would be 188 + 372 = 560 volts The actual interphasal difference between these phases is 561 volts! This of course is 100 % of the possible voltage differences between those phases. What this then implies is that since we have two phase angles at and near 180 degrees phasing differences, there should hardly be ANY phase angle difference between phases 2 and 3! Now I have not employed actual trigonometry here to determine the phases angles, but the overall picture to me does present a paradox. If we tried to draw out the phase angle vectors on a flat sheet of paper, they wouldnt fit. Even if we made the provision that the vectors could be placed in three dimensional space, it is my opinion that even that wouldnt work. In fact the only way to do it would be the unimaginable problem of drawing out the vectors in four dimensional space! We are already starting the problem from 3 dimensional space, and to make its solution again requires going up one more dimension. Here is a primitive attempt to draw those vectors out on the flat plane Drawing of Triple DSR Phase Angles http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/files/IRC/3D.jpg I apolize to vortex group for giving restricted access URL's, but at present this is the tool I use, and anyone can see them if the subject interests them enough. Now back to the triangle problem in geometry. If we expanded the triangle across the globe, I think that at a certain point of expansion we could procure three 90 degree angles. This is 50% greater then what an equilateral traingle can make at 60 degrees per angle. Using the same analogy with the spatial interelationships made with resonances, I think then if ALL THREE coil groups were aligned side by side, where in this example only two of them are made that way, then it might be possible to create a situation where the greatest possible phase angles brought about by timing differences of voltage rise, this also might be brought up to the point where that could be made where it exceeds by 50% the normal possible phase angle difference between three phases in time, which is normally 120 degrees phase separation. Then we could measure near 180 degrees phase separation on three phases! This stuff almost seems Einsteinian with all the possible ramifications of relatively in time. Not real easy to think about at all. Perhaps "Stargate" isnt really that far away after all. > He has derived all physical parameters getting the > exact known natural values by using only the > constants k (for kg unit) and j (for Amp unit). Now > for the tricky part: The free space constants. > > In the SI system of units we note a few units like > permittivity, permeability, impedance, conductance, > etc... that for some weird reason have the Kg as > part of their unit. I also have a comment about this Kg issue, and how it gets into the description, but for now I have ranted and raved long enough, so I will try replying to this thread in a day or so to again to focus on that issue, and of course anyone can make mistakes, and the above elaborated relativity of resonant voltages issue could be wrong. Of course I would like to know "why" it could be wrong, as the whole thing simply baffles me! Sincerely Harvey D Norris ===== Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
