Jones Beene wrote: > > Is 2.5 Hz a "natural" energy frequency? > Of Course. That should be the Natural Cosmic Frequency. All other frequencies (even the Bohr Orbit frequencies > 6E15 Hz are contained in low frequencies.
It IS NOT Electromagnetic, the electromagnetic frequencies are due to it's jiggling of charge. No? Frederick > [Original Message] > From: Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: vortex <[email protected]> > Date: 7/12/05 8:48:18 AM > Subject: Is 2.5 Hz a "natural" energy frequency? > > More rambling speculation... > > The earth's "natural" frequency has been stated to be ~7.8 Hertz > (cycles per second) also known as the Schumann Resonance (actually > 7.83 Hz ). All prior attempts to tap into it have failed. One > wonders if 2.5 Hz is also natural to some (presumably larger) > system like our sun or a nearby neutron star or black hole) - and > if there is a coupling mechanism to smaller geometric scale? > > Googling "2.5 Hz " turns up lots of things relating to > brain-waves, deep-sleep and clock escapements, but very little in > the way of anything energy-related, other than gravity waves and a > certain low-frequency artifact associated with black holes called > QPOs. Lower-frequency QPOs are typically 1 to 10 hertz, and > they're common in binary star systems with black holes or at least > objects denser than a neutron star - the QPO could be the > frequency of a *spacetime warp.* > > This part is real, folks: it is decidedly NOT Sci-Fi (but it would > make > a great sub-plot) ! However, the impossible part (seemingly) would > be a coupling mechanism for low frequency cosmic gravity wave to a > small earthbound device - unless it too is a function of the > Hydrogen 21 cm resonance line. > > The low-frequency flickering coming from a dense stellar object > could be caused by the fabric of space itself churning around in > a wave. This is known as Lense-Thirring precession, which evolves > out of Einstein's theory of general relativity. There are three > other known objects in our galaxy, seemingly as dense as black > holes but smaller, which have earned the "micro-quasar" name. One > lies just 1,600 light-years from Earth on the way to the center of > the Milky Way in the direction of the constellation Sagittarius. > > These are "exotic" but nevertheless potential energy sources - > which probably have a strong 4-spatial component - but if they > could be taped on earth, it would take a very serendipitous > discovery.... probably involving the proton at a coherent > frequency. > > ...perhaps a large vacuum tube, of a "lucky" size and just the > right hydrogen fill ;-) > > Anyway, it is unclear if a 51 Hz base frequency and a 4.9-5 % duty > factor really works out to an "effective" 2.5 Hz frequency, using > this > particular signal generator - but if it does, there does not seem > to be any obvious "non-exotic" significance (other than pink noise > from the 50 Hz mains)...? Will you settle for exotic? > > Didn't think so. Electronic "noise", in general, is related > indirectly to 2.5 Hz - i.e. random fluctuations in voltage (or > current) the "hiss" we > hear between stations on an FM tuner, the "snow" we see when we > tune a TV to an unused channel. The "whiteness" or the "pinkness" > of noise describes how the energy is distributed in frequency. > White noise is noise whose distribution is constant per cycle of > bandwidth. Pink noise is noise whose energy distribution is > constant per > percentage bandwidth. In other words, a 5% band at 50 Hz > (which is 2.5 Hz wide) will have the same amount of energy as a 5% > bandwidth at other frequency. That is not really saying much as to > why 2.5 Hz could be important here other than being pink noise > from the local mains (unlikely). I like the exotic gravity wave, > very "remote" possibility... or better yet - just straight-forward > direct coupling to the CMB (cosmic microwave background). > > If anyone happens to be lucky enough to the right stuff laying > around(i.e. a tube of 21 cm length by 5.24 cm dia) - I'm sure that > Fred could give you the correct fill pressure for the parameters > ;-)... the problem being that it probably must be actively cooled > and heated at the same time to reach an internal coherency level! > > One thing is apparent from looking at the testing... JLN has > played around with these frequency and duty factor details quite a > lot in fine-tuning, presumably trying to get the highest > efficiency. And this 2.5 Hz > could be the result, for whatever reason. > > Jones > > BTW if there is a coupling mechanism between some exotic gravity > wave and hydrogen gas at ~80 torr, is there any place where one > might expect to see large scale evidence of such an effect - in > terms of > energy being "coupled" but in a place where it shouldn't be? > > Well, there is the aurora borealis but not much hydrogen in it - > however both Jupiter and Saturn have a blue corona "aureole" > around them.... and it is mostly hydrogen, and with no obvious > power source for the blue light emission other than our sun, which > seems too far away. Our sun's corona anomaly is a harder to > speculate on - as it could be powered by radiation from the > stellar core plus something else, such as by hydrinos as Mills > says, and who know that there could be other energy components as > well.
