Follow by Email

Monday, August 8, 2011

145 - thinking aloud

Dear Reader,

Here's what's exciting about this model that we're trying to prove. It depends on a particle that is capable of exceeding light speed. To be precise, it's been determined that, in a field condition, it moves at 2C. If anything is capable of exceeding light speed then it would, effectively, have the potential to communicate at a rate that - within our own rather clumsy and gross dimensions - would effectively be instantaneous. Which is HUGE. It's the first small opening of a potential that not only explains but would justifiably require telepathy, far viewing - all those magical concepts that are related to time itself. That's the first point

Then. IF indeed these little particles are there - then this is the source of energy itself. The model argues that one dimensional fields - that single 'binding' field - is responsible for 'gluing' atoms together into identifiable structures. Two dimensional fields hold the atom's nucleus locked in an interaction between its particles and the particle's quarks. It also holds the electron imprisoned between it's energy levels. And three dimensional fields would be the source or the gravitational field. I've tried to explain all this in the model. I'll give a link here when I've finished this post.

But the most exciting aspect of all is this. If the three dimensional field - proposed as the source of gravity - is also just our standard toroidal magnetic field - and if this is all that is required to determine the 'pull' of material towards certain positions in the field - then it's relatively easy to defeat this as well. I need to explain all this better than I've managed in the rendition of the model. But I'll work on it. I think I just need to take the trouble to draw the appropriate illustrations.

So. What I'm actually proposing is that we may yet be able to defeat ALL the physical barriers required by our classical and quantum theorists. That's got to be a good thing. lol

Why I'm prepared to tackle this again is that I see the enormous interest that is associated with this second paper of ours. It's gratifying. I'm beginning to feel less lonely here.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

this will take you back to the model

144 - I'm stopping that test today

Dear Reader,

I'm stopping that test today. I've organised it that the batteries will be moved to the study rather than here in the cottage. This place is beginning to feel as if I'm living in a laboratory and it's getting me down.

And that will ready me for the test to be run with a control. I can then set it to a higher wattage output and run two tests concurrently. But I'm not doing that either until I've sorted out the filming of this. And for that I need to get some small funding - or at least the expertise to do the necessary.

There's no point in reporting on the battery performance here because downloading the screen shots won't cut it without the video. I get it that everyone is looking for proof. That long slow draw down test is a mind killer. It's just way too boring and uneventful. And low wattage output is of very little interest to anyone. I'm also a bit concerned that I've under valued the potential output of those batteries. Therefore at high wattage and looking at the performance of two banks of batteries run concurrently will be more to the point, and more dramatically interesting.

But for the record - the batteries have now run for 10 days CONTINUOUSLY - with absolutely ZERO discharge. To be precise there's been a net 1.04 volt average increase in the voltage over that entire period measured across all 6 batteries. Or - about - 0.176 volts each.

Kind regards,
Rosemary

added