Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Lord Kelvin's works

Expand Messages
  • c.h.thompson
    Thanks Neil ... The original inspiration for this work came from a book called EINSTEIN DOESN T WORK HERE ANYMORE written by Maurice B. Cooke, and published
    Message 1 of 9 , Jan 31, 2002
      Thanks Neil

      > Here's something you and Caroline might like -
      > http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/dmboss1021/NEWPH/Index.html
      >
      > The important concept here is a 4D aether.

      "The original inspiration for this work came from a book called EINSTEIN
      DOESN'T WORK HERE ANYMORE written by Maurice B. Cooke, and published in the
      early 80's by Marcus Books, P.O. Box 327, Queensville, Ontario, Canada,
      L0G1R0."

      It looks pretty similar to my phi-wave aether. He doesn't seem to make much
      use of the 4-d idea that is not consistent with my simpler concept, in which
      "phi" is a scalar value associated with ordinary 3-d locations. However, I
      think I'll stick to mine. It has advantages, and in any case I'm too busy
      trying to find out more facts to delve into other people's speculations.

      Cheers
      Caroline

      c.h.thompson@...
      http://users.aber.ac.uk/cat/
    • c.h.thompson
      Hi Bill ... These rings would presumably both be travelling in the same direction, and both rotating in the same sense? ... Why antiparallel ? I can t
      Message 2 of 9 , Feb 1, 2002
        Hi Bill

        > " ... A good demonstration is provided by creating two vortex
        > rings one right after the other going in the same direction. They
        > can trap each other, each going through the other in succession.
        > This is probably what Tait showed Thomson, and it gave
        > Thomson the idea that atoms might somehow be vortices in
        > the ether."

        These rings would presumably both be travelling in the same direction, and
        both rotating in the same sense?

        > Note that each can pass through the other in succession.
        > The old Scientific American article on proton-proton collision
        > experiments on the Alternating Gradient Synchrotron indicate that
        > antiparallel-spinning protons can pass through each other

        Why "antiparallel"? I can't imagine how this could work.

        > just like vortices, one expands and the other contracts, speeds
        > up, and goes through the expanded vortex. From this and other
        > studies I did I surmised that charge polarity is related to spin
        > and magnetic moment.

        This does not fit with anything else I've been told about charge. Isn't
        charge a scalar quantity? And wouldn't you expect an "electron" to have the
        same charge whether you looked at it from top or bottom?

        Cheers
        Caroline

        c.h.thompson@...
        http://users.aber.ac.uk/cat/
      • Bill Hamilton
        ... Look at two vortices spinning in antiparrallel senses - the vortices mesh like gears and reduce the pressure between them whereas parallel spinning
        Message 3 of 9 , Feb 1, 2002
          >From: "c.h.thompson" <c.h.thompson@...>
          >Reply-To: forcefieldpropulsionphysics@yahoogroups.com
          >To: <forcefieldpropulsionphysics@yahoogroups.com>
          >Subject: Re: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Lord Kelvin's works
          >Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 22:47:28 -0000
          >
          >Hi Bill
          >
          > > " ... A good demonstration is provided by creating two vortex
          > > rings one right after the other going in the same direction. They
          > > can trap each other, each going through the other in succession.
          > > This is probably what Tait showed Thomson, and it gave
          > > Thomson the idea that atoms might somehow be vortices in
          > > the ether."
          >
          >These rings would presumably both be travelling in the same direction, and
          >both rotating in the same sense?
          >
          > > Note that each can pass through the other in succession.
          > > The old Scientific American article on proton-proton collision
          > > experiments on the Alternating Gradient Synchrotron indicate that
          > > antiparallel-spinning protons can pass through each other
          >
          >Why "antiparallel"? I can't imagine how this could work.

          Look at two vortices spinning in antiparrallel senses - the
          vortices mesh like gears and reduce the pressure between
          them whereas parallel spinning vortices clash and repel.

          >
          > > just like vortices, one expands and the other contracts, speeds
          > > up, and goes through the expanded vortex. From this and other
          > > studies I did I surmised that charge polarity is related to spin
          > > and magnetic moment.
          >
          >This does not fit with anything else I've been told about charge. Isn't
          >charge a scalar quantity? And wouldn't you expect an "electron" to have
          >the
          >same charge whether you looked at it from top or bottom?

          I will have to write this up from my study notes, but my amazing
          conclusion was that charge is simply the dynamic pressure exerted
          in the ether by the fast spin of the electron vortex. We arbitrarily
          assigned it negative polarity, but there are instances in
          molecular dynamics where two electrons will not repel each other
          similar to the case of the antiparallel spinning protons.

          I am not being exact here because it has been a few years since
          I did this research and I need to find my notes. My idea
          was to study particle dynamics in order to invent an engine
          that would mimic a particle's methods of movement.

          Bill
          >
          >Cheers
          >Caroline
          >
          >c.h.thompson@...
          >http://users.aber.ac.uk/cat/
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >To Post a message, send it to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics@...
          >
          >To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
          >forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@...
          >
          >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
          >




          Bill Hamilton
          Executive Director
          Skywatch International, Inc.
          websites:
          http://home.earthlink.net/~skywatcher22
          http://home.earthlink.net/~skywatcher12
          http://home.earthlink.net/~xplorerx
          http://home.earthlink.net/~xplorerx2



          _________________________________________________________________
          Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
        • Anthony
          After reading this, I came up with an idea for charge. As Bill states in his post, charge is, perhaps, related to spin and magnetic moment, perhaps as
          Message 4 of 9 , Feb 1, 2002
            After reading this, I came up with an idea for charge.  As Bill states in his post, charge is, perhaps, related to spin and magnetic moment, perhaps as circular acceleration is to velocity, or as magnetic force to a magnetic field, that is, the related vectors are perpendicular to each other, and thus the charge of an electron is perpendicular to spin and magnetic moment, and also to the ether, along with the 3 dimensions we perceive.  If charge were a vector perpendicular to the ether, this could explain why oppositely charged particles have vortices that spin in opposite directions.  The "forces" on the ether are in opposite directions. 
             
            Just a thought.
             
            Anthony
            ----- Original Message -----
            Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 5:28 PM
            Subject: Re: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Lord Kelvin's works


            >From: "c.h.thompson" <c.h.thompson@...>
            >Reply-To: forcefieldpropulsionphysics@yahoogroups.com
            >To: <forcefieldpropulsionphysics@yahoogroups.com>
            >Subject: Re: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Lord Kelvin's works
            >Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 22:47:28 -0000
            >
            >Hi Bill
            >
            > > " ... A good demonstration is provided by creating two vortex
            > > rings one right after the other going in the same direction. They
            > > can trap each other, each going through the other in succession.
            > > This is probably what Tait showed Thomson, and it gave
            > > Thomson the idea that atoms might somehow be vortices in
            > > the ether."
            >
            >These rings would presumably both be travelling in the same direction, and
            >both rotating in the same sense?
            >
            > > Note that each can pass through the other in succession.
            > > The old Scientific American article on proton-proton collision
            > > experiments on the Alternating Gradient Synchrotron indicate that
            > > antiparallel-spinning protons can pass through each other
            >
            >Why "antiparallel"?  I can't imagine how this could work.

            Look at two vortices spinning in antiparrallel senses - the
            vortices mesh like gears and reduce the pressure between
            them whereas parallel spinning vortices clash and repel.

            >
            > > just like vortices, one expands and the other contracts, speeds
            > > up, and goes through the expanded vortex.  From this and other
            > > studies I did I surmised that charge polarity is related to spin
            > > and magnetic moment.
            >
            >This does not fit with anything else I've been told about charge.  Isn't
            >charge a scalar quantity?  And wouldn't you expect an "electron" to have
            >the
            >same charge whether you looked at it from top or bottom?

            I will have to write this up from my study notes, but my amazing
            conclusion was that charge is simply the dynamic pressure exerted
            in the ether by the fast spin of the electron vortex.  We arbitrarily
            assigned it negative polarity, but there are instances in
            molecular dynamics where two electrons will not repel each other
            similar to the case of the antiparallel spinning protons.

            I am not being exact here because it has been a few years since
            I did this research and I need to find my notes.  My idea
            was to study particle dynamics in order to invent an engine
            that would mimic a particle's methods of movement.

            Bill
            >
            >Cheers
            >Caroline
            >
            >c.h.thompson@...
            >http://users.aber.ac.uk/cat/
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >To Post a message, send it to:   forcefieldpropulsionphysics@...
            >
            >To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
            >forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@...
            >
            >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
            >




            Bill Hamilton
            Executive Director
            Skywatch International, Inc.
            websites:
            http://home.earthlink.net/~skywatcher22
            http://home.earthlink.net/~skywatcher12
            http://home.earthlink.net/~xplorerx
            http://home.earthlink.net/~xplorerx2



            _________________________________________________________________
            Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com



            To Post a message, send it to:   forcefieldpropulsionphysics@...

            To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@...


            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
          • Robert Neil Boyd
            My idea was to study particle dynamics in order to invent an engine that would mimic a particle s methods of movement. Good idea Bill! The Rodin coil mimicks
            Message 5 of 9 , Feb 4, 2002
              "My idea was to study particle dynamics in order to
              invent an engine that would mimic a particle's methods
              of movement."

              Good idea Bill!

              The Rodin coil mimicks the Compton Radius Vortex
              model of the electron, so it seems a likely candidate.

              Neil
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.