I think Shoulder and a few others recognize the potential but also understood EMP was a threat. mixed feeling about a changeover. our choices are getting more limited.
Ken Shoulders ; The Man Who Made Black Holes
-
-
Another paper about electron's clusters from Chicea.
It seems to help deuterium to fuse by strong nuclei's acceleration .
-
Since things are a bit sleepy around here, let me stick my neck out a bit.
Perhaps heretical, but I am having difficulty accepting the idea of a massive localized charge imbalance that seems to be implicit in the description of EVs. It is so contrary to my experience and training that I naturally look for ways that these toroidal or spherical entities could retain charge balance. It brings me back even to Hotson theory.
But first, without resurrecting Hotson (which to me is an attractive theory, BTW): Why cannot some mega atom as an EV have a balanced positive charged component. If that were protonic, then given charge balance, there would be an 1836 fold mass differential. An electronic toroid, and given say very strongly magnetc EV, a much smaller and heavier protonic toroid counter rotating on or near the inner radius of the negatively charged big toroid? Or if the EV is not strongly magnetic, then have the inner protonic and outer electronic clouds co-rotating in the same direction, roughly cancelling their magnetic vectors.
Of course if there were to be such a charge-balancing protonic component, then it might well show up as great instability if an EV were centrifuged.
With Hotson, the substrate of the aether is neutral and may consist of positrons and electrons universally distributed. Thus a possibility of two toroids linked together and othogonal (perpendicular) to one another?? But that scheme might have a very characteristic magnetic signature, also likely to enable some peculiar magnetic manipulation and / or instability. Seems more likely that two toroids in that case would also share the same axis of rotation, and if in the same direction which would balance magnetic fields and make EVs less magnetically susceptible. But with opposing rotations would make them very strongly magnetic, since the positive and negative charge rotations would both add to the magnetic vector rather than cancel.
-
axil i am sorry but do you know that not everything on Wikipedia or YouTube and even web sites of universities is true?
Could you list specifics so I can improve my reference selection process? In fact, you should have provided a list of inaccurate references in the post that we are referencing now.
-
Could you list specifics so I can improve my reference selection process?
Well, when your algorithms are sufficiently developed, you will be able to supply US with that list, no?
-
Why cannot some mega atom as an EV have a balanced positive charged component.
I hope this leads to critical and perhaps to useful discussion, rather than an algorithm building program.
-
Another paper about electron's clusters from Chicea.
Cydonia : These fantasists always forget that there is not radial acceleration towards a charge center! -- due to the magnetic deflection of the center...
Why cannot some mega atom as an EV have a balanced positive charged component.
Longview : One option in higher dimensional space is to split the coulomb force in a radial and a tangential force, where as the tangential is average is non repulsive! Thus electrons living on a 4D sphere will not fly apart.
-
I think Shoulder and a few others recognize the potential but also understood EMP was a threat. mixed feeling about a changeover. our choices are getting more limited.
For what it's worth, a Faraday cage might be all that is needed to prevent harmful emissions to the outside, in the same way the microwave oven itself acts as a Faraday cage to prevent the 1-kilowatt GHz emission from the magnetron from causing harm to animate and inanimate objects nearby.
This being said I simply meant that if there indeed is a direct relationship between EMP-caused interference and EV production, then quantitatively and qualitatively measuring such production could be useful in determining what works best for EV formation.
For example, from personal tests I know that shorting two copper wires at a few hundred Hz at 5V DC (despite the rather low voltage, contact sparks are indeed generated) and a current of about 30A in air causes broadband electromagnetic noise which can be picked up quite well by a dynamic microphone recording at a high gain at 192 kHz on a computer, but it doesn't cause that much interference or disruption to nearby electronic equipment (e.g. I don't hear it on loudspeakers located about 1.5 meters away), despite the relatively significant average power going into the process (However it's not like I'm trying to broadcast this signal with a dedicated antenna into the atmosphere as if it was a spark gap radio transmitter).
I'm wondering if within the same testing conditions I would get more noise with a "real" spark gap and a proper high voltage supply, but running at much less average power. I'm confident that the answer to this question would be positive, but I don't know if there's a precise relationship with the involved factors (voltage, frequency, spark gap length, etc) and if formulas to calculate this precisely exist.
-
One could add an old B&W television with UHF dial for simultaneous confirmation of the AM radio signal.
-
One could add an old B&W television with UHF dial for simultaneous confirmation of the AM radio signal.
That would be a very old one in the UK! I think however that the 'squelch' circuits would possibly reject the audio- though you would get a raster 'bright line' image on screen'. A good way of determining pulse duration of you have nothing better.
-
I used a microphone and a PC recorder because I have been more concerned with trying to analyze the signal (or better, the noise) and when/how it shows the most rather than seeing if it affected actually EMI-sensitive equipment. However using an AM radio should be a good test to check if the EMI is actually powerful enough to interfere with radio communications and the like; I haven't checked with one yet.
With the microphone/PC combo I can see in real time the signal in various useful forms (e.g. spectrogram), have a sort of "visual buffer" on screen of the same, and of course easily recording it for later reference.
I checked out that blog post earlier today - I have notifications for new posts - some of what is covered I did stumble upon it earlier on while searching for more information about EMI produced by spark gaps (besides doing the opposite of what is usually done to mitigate it in ignition systems), which led me to spark gap transmitters (which were basically EMP generators, and as such they have been outlawed for radio communication) and also Tesla's resonant coil which was an improvement over them.
-
With the microphone/PC combo I can see in real time the signal in various useful forms (e.g. spectrogram), have a sort of "visual buffer" on screen of the same, and of course easily recording it for later reference.
That is a smart idea. Like it!
-
I think the spark is just the catalyst for another effect. what I'm looking for is the needed effect that can penetrate the ceramic case and bounce and disturb the trapped hematite within the mixed glass body, The added heat to the hematite should help the magnetics within the body encasement keeping the magnetic figure 8 contstant, Kinetic motion of the figure 8 from the single feed throughout the spark lower track. I'm leaving 2 exits.
To keep the magnetics flowing I'm going to use a spark plug. The other exit needs to help keep the reaction trapped and allow an additional discharges go through the molten mix if carbon and raw hematite and discharge in the upper area of the 1/2 tube encasement hoping the sparkplug spark gap can be changed and help regulate the discharge through the cluster...ect.
-
Ones in motion a primary coil is created from the primary lower track feed, adding the secondary coil feed from the hematite path to a cathode style tesla coil to penetrate the solid body as a ball lightning ,separate salt water bobble capacitor within the same casing.
time will tell.
-
If it helps, why I think it will permeate.
red as a negotiation substance.
-
It's useful. I've been able to make some obvious and less obvious observations with it:
- When using [pencil] graphite and copper electrodes at 12V, the brighter the [very bright] light produced, the more intense the impulse would be. This is in retrospect seems quite obvious.
- Short circuit discharge conditions that appear to produce lots of noise (in water) but very little light do not produce much EMI at all, contrarily to what I previously assumed.
- Water impurities seem to decrease the intensity of the impulse and the spark; it just produces a stronger signal in air (results by other researchers on "water explosion experiments" and wanting to reduce soot emission into the air/atmosphere motivated my initial choice of doing these tests in water).
- Copper on copper at 5V in air seems to produce less intense impulses than copper on graphite at 12V despite significantly higher currents being involved. However the higher currents allowed me to use a magnet trick to obtain a high repetition rate.
This isn't really serious experimentation, that's what I'm referring to these as "tests". Also, I haven't spent anything yet, using so far improvised material and equipment.
Actual EMP generators in general produce the best results (= strongest interference/pulse) when a large amount of energy is discharged in a very brief amount of time. This is similar to what is reported to be required by EV generation (square DC pulses of a preferably a nanosecond-level width or less, see quote below), minus perhaps concentrating the charge by using a sharp cathode. The momentary sparking produced by short circuits might be a good way to serendipitously obtain this, but a real spark gap with a HV supply should be more abrupt and more controllable, with less energy "wasted" conducting electricity non-abruptly (if that makes sense).
http://amasci.com/weird/evexp.html
Quote[...] Shoulders has shown that it is relatively easy to get ten times as much electrical energy out as input electrical energy. The trick is to provide an input pulse that is very short to make the charge cluster and to make the output pulse as wide as possible. This is not simple because one needs to produce clusters using nanosecond, high-voltage pulses.
Of course, with powerful very short pulses, in addition to EMP, the peril of measuring input power incorrectly also comes... but I haven't done nor been claiming anything on that regard yet.
-
Actual EMP generators in general produce the best results (= strongest interference/pulse) when a large amount of energy is discharged in a very brief amount of time. This is similar to what is reported to be required by EV generation (square DC pulses of a preferably a nanosecond-level width or less, see quote below), minus perhaps concentrating the charge by using a sharp cathode. The momentary sparking produced by short circuits might be a good way to serendipitously obtain this, but a real spark gap with a HV supply should be more abrupt and more controllable, with less energy "wasted" conducting electricity non-abruptly (if that makes sense).
To any or all who may be thinking of inexpensive and simple experiments in the nanosecond regime. Remember the "Blumlein" (after Alan Dower Blumlein, inventor of stereo) which has been described in the Amateur Scientist section of Scientific American perhaps 40 years back, reprised and reviewed here:
https://www.repairfaq.org/sam/lasercn2.htm#cn2hbl
and a bit of critique here:
http://sites.chem.colostate.ed…%20theory%20criticism.pdf
The usage there was to make a home-built UV laser. Simple, consists of the thinnest copper faced PC board material, a spark gap as a trigger, a power supply to charge the Blumlein and a gap along one face of the PC board. The discharge through the spark gap drains the charge on one side of the linear gap which causes the charge on the other side to cross the gap..... in that case creating an excited gas which on decay of excitation gives a "super-radiant" UV discharge along the optical axis created by the linear gap. The nanosecond time regime is defined by the discharge time of the capacitor, this in turn is defined by the dimensions of the PC board. There are many other configurations of a Blumlein that will work, and the discharging entity does not have to be flat, a coaxial arrangement will work. Further the energy wasted in the spark gap can be eliminated by making the discharge unify the spark trigger and the working linear gap.
-
Thanks for the references, I'll take a look at these circuits. I found a related page on Wikipedia too that describes them with the more general term Pulse Forming Network (PFN) circuit. The main disadvantages are that they need a proper HV power supply and careful tuning.
I originally planned to use an ignition coil because they're easy to come by, they're durable and they only need a 12V DC power supply (or even a standard battery) and some kind of switch to operate as intended. Although the lifetime of a spark as generated in internal combustion engines is often quoted to be in the 1-2 milliseconds range, the actual HV pulse duration should be in the few nanoseconds range, although it's not exactly a square pulse as it should preferably be as Shoulders and others recommend.
-
This is also a good read,
