The EM Universe

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby seasmith » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:45 am

Gary,

Transmittance would imply a less than 100% output vs. input, would it not?


Over what duration?
As capacitor/condenser charge is concentrated, or as transformer charge is differentiated,
over time.

The energy for dissipation in my model is from a release of magneto-dielectric energies stored in a 'torqued' Aether. The tension in the flux tube (the Universe is a Tensegrity structure in my book)


I agree with the B. Fuller Tensegrity model, and of course
the Aetheric Circuit structure.

Now what exactly "torqued" the aether ?


:?:
seasmith
 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Thu Sep 09, 2010 12:42 pm

Now what exactly "torqued" the aether ?


You got me there, Seasmith. Maybe microwaves? I have just had something nagging at me for a while now that is suggesting this twisting or torque is important, somehow.
So, way out of my depth, I am trying to track down some real world observations that might apply somehow, at the Aether scale, to what I am feeling. I'm not even sure what I am looking for, but think I'll know it when I see it. Some of it is leading back to Poynting in 1909, right now I'm looking at phase-locked spin-torque oscillators. Maybe I should get a life instead? :?
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:40 pm

At a special meeting of the Sooke Speculation Society today, all 4 attendees were in agreement (a first, and a bit of a disappointment really) that the announced dusty rings detected around a young star, were most likely produced by the star itself. Opinion was divided as to whether nice, spherical planets could form from the attraction of bits of dust randomly sticking together. 2 members thought the speculation highly unlikely, and 2 thought it absolute *&^#ing nonsense.

Image

http://www.eso.org/public/announcements/ann1058/
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Tue Sep 14, 2010 10:58 am

In this post, viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3363#p40439, Lloyd linked to StefanRs post about this image:

Image

“This system is really crazy because where we’re seeing the star formation is well away from any galaxy,” Donahue said. “Star formation happens primarily in the disks of galaxies. What we’re seeing here is very unexpected.”


This is a classic case of mis-interpretation of an image, based on obsolete presumptions.
I'd like to offer an alternative explanation:
What we are seeing here is a flux tube, tensed and torqued, with a region that has become internally energetic enough that it is visible, at some wavelengths. We can not see double layers, but we can sometimes see what is inside them. A flux tube will accelerate and pinch the contents, just as a torus does, (why stars are normally found in 'disks', which are tori) producing the spark-gap and plasmoid, leading to the formation of 'stars'.
We are seeing, from a particular perspective, a portion of a flux tube. Outside of that portion, the energies are not sufficient for the contents to be producing photons.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Thu Sep 16, 2010 12:32 pm

UFOs, or 'beads on a string?

This image, and the video, were taken in Mexico, shortly before an earthquake. A mothership spitting out UFOs it is thought, but to me it looks more like a beautiful example of E/M phenomena. There will be a flux tube associated with it, not in visible mode, and that flux tube will be twisting and kinking and flailing around.

Image

Within the first 2 minutes of the video, you can see the ejection of the UAPs. (I'd call them MAPs, mis-identified aerial phenomena). So on a much larger and slower scale, might we be seeing similar phenomena in the Heavens?

http://dalje.com/tv/en/index.php?id=20687mecf4747dc352
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Fri Sep 24, 2010 4:04 pm

ScienceDaily (Sep. 24, 2010) — Science is literally in the dark when it comes to the birth of stars, which occurs deep inside clouds of gas and dust. These clouds are completely opaque to ordinary light. Now, a group of astronomers has discovered a new astronomical phenomenon that appears to be common in such clouds, and promises a new window onto the earliest phases of star formation. The phenomenon -- infra red light that is scattered by unexpectedly large grains of dust, which the astronomers have termed "coreshine" -- probes the dense cores where stars are born.


Image

More backwards nonsense. It's easy (for me anyway ;-)) to see the outline of the stressed, convoluted flux tubes, and the dust producing 'beads-on-a-string' energetic regions. Once you accept that the Universe is full of EM machines, they become easy to identify. In fact, I think I have added another to the list, the Trigatron, or something similar. Even an Earthly version is good for 10 TW or more.

Image
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Sun Sep 26, 2010 1:37 pm

While looking into the crossed-field antenna I came upon Bibhas De, who I was not familiar with.
He was a student of Hans Alfven, and has been mentioned once before on TB.
http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/v ... ?f=4&t=696

This is the page I first accessed. New insights, or mad ideas?
http://www.bibhasde.com/radiocomm.html

The index page for his physics essays:
http://www.bibhasde.com/physicsindex.html?

Just wondered if anyone on TB is familiar with his work?
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby seasmith » Sun Sep 26, 2010 5:50 pm

GN,

http://www.bibhasde.com/radiocomm.html#compsupport

Of course, misamigos, there is "companion wave", and to his point yes, we are still beginning to understand that "wave" ; and its measured fluxations.

s
seasmith
 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby Jarvamundo » Sun Sep 26, 2010 7:59 pm

Fascinating site there seasmith/garyN on Bibhas De (http://www.bibhasde.com/cv.html).

http://www.bibhasde.com/radiocomm.html#compsupport
Letter from l.Gilstrap wrote:A few days ago, I ran across your website while doing a search for related items. I had not been aware of your work before, and I read with considerable interest the material on the Companion Wave. However, I was disappointed that you did not mention the electric wave twin of the magnetic Companion wave. The twin is just as interesting as the Companion. Both the Companion wave and its twin are longitudinal, both propagate through salt water without loss other than normal inverse square loss and neither is stopped by a Faraday cage; for the Companion wave, E < cB and for the twin, cB < E. Both the Companion and its twin can be detected as end fire (not transverse) from an ordinary dipole, but it takes special phasing or a special antenna to detect either one.


:shock: Kinda just described the 4 quadrants of the electric wave. wow. thanks for the links.
:shock: and a colleague of Alfven's.... nice :geek:
User avatar
Jarvamundo
 
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 5:26 pm
Location: Australia

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby seasmith » Mon Sep 27, 2010 8:28 am

Gary, Jarv,

Have you all looked at Gillstrap's longit-wave antenna patent?


http://www.wikipatents.com/US-Patent-3964051/electrostatic-communication-system

Could you, or any of your electech mates, build and test one ?


s
seasmith
 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Mon Sep 27, 2010 12:13 pm

Could you, or any of your electech mates, build and test one ?


There is no information in the patents that would allow for the construction of such a device. I have a shop full of components, but it could take forever to try and recreate such a unit. My only efforts are on the construction of a bi-conical antenna, which, along with some aluminum wrapped spheres of various sizes, and with cores of assorted dielectric materials, and a plexiglass disk, I intend to show that I can make the spheres orbit (and rotate) around the antenna. I think by introducing harmonics I can make the spheres orbit in both directions.
I will at some point though, be contacting Mr De, as from what I have read so far, his ideas resonate( :roll: ) with many of my own. The crossed-field principle also applies to the crossed-field ampifier (Amplitron), which can be used as an oscillator(Stabilotron). Very much like the magnetron. Also, the M-BWO, which in the plasa-loaded version, is I believe responsible for the 'jets' of the more energetic galactic objects.

Image

http://www.radartutorial.eu/08.transmit ... 11.en.html

I'm also really interested to find out what he might think of the whole EU scenario.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby seasmith » Mon Sep 27, 2010 3:15 pm

There is no information in the patents that would allow for the construction of such a device.

http://www.wikipatents.com/electrostati ... 4051-2.jpg


Your images may only be up to 600 pixels high.


Gary,
Some details fyi:

" "
Gilstrap Jr., Lewey O. (Washington, DC)
Application Number:
05/476887
Publication Date:
06/15/1976
Filing Date:
06/06/1974
Export Citation:
Click for automatic bibliography generation
Assignee:
Infodyne, Inc. (Arlington, VA)
Primary Class:
340/850
Other Classes:
343/719, 455/40, 343/908
International Classes:
H04B13/02; H04B13/00; H04B13/00
Field of Search:
340/4R, 340/4A, 343/719, 343/898, 343/908, 325/26, 325/28, 325/318, 325/319, 325/373, 325/374, 179/1HR, 317/242, 317/244, 317/246
View Patent Images:
Download PDF 3964051


http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3964051.pdf


I claim:

1. An underwater electrostatic wave antenna, comprising a monopole radiator including a pair of concentric electrically conductive spheres, a dielectric material separating said spheres, means on said outer sphere to insulate said sphere from water when submerged in water, and means for applying varying voltages of opposite polarity to said spheres respectively.

2. The antenna system of claim 1, wherein said voltage applying means includes a pair of electrical conductors one of which is electrically connected to the outer sphere, the other conductor being electrically connected to the inner sphere through an insulated opening in said outer sphere.

3. The antenna system of claim 2, wherein said voltage applying means further includes means to generate an alternating voltage signal, and transducing means responsive to said alternating voltage signal for producing corresponding signals on said conductors respectively 180° out-of-phase with each other.

4. The antenna system of claim 3, wherein said transducing means includes a transformer having a primary winding connected to receive said alternating voltage signal and a secondary winding center-tapped at a reference potential, opposite ends of said secondary winding being connected respectively to said conductors.

5. An underwater electrostatic antenna, comprising a pair of concentric electrically conductive spheres, a dielectric material between said spheres for insulation, and means for applying corresponding voltages of opposite polarity to said spheres respectively.

6. A method of transmitting a signal underwater comprising providing an electrically conducting sphere, providing a waterproof insulating cover on said sphere, submerging said sphere with said cover underwater, applying an alternating signal potential to said sphere to generate a varying electrostatic field underwater radiating from said sphere as a monopole, and detecting variations in said electrostatic field radiating from said sphere, said detecting of the variations in said electrostatic field being carried out underwater.

Description:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The invention relates generally to electrostatic transmission and reception, and more particularly, to underwater electrostatic communication systems.

In the past, five basic systems have been investigated for underwater communication: acoustic, magnetic, laser, electromagnetic and electrostatic or capacitive systems. All of these systems have serious drawbacks, the most significant being a lack of range which precludes their use in distant submarine-to-submarine or submarine-to-shore communication. In particular, it has been found that electromagnetic fields of very high power levels operating at the lower end of the frequency spectrum are a suitable means of submarine communication. However, various considerations restrict their use to relatively short ranges.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Underwater communication can be accomplished using longitudinal electrostatic or capacative waves, also called scalar or polarization waves because of their relationship to the Maxwell wave equations. The general purpose of the invention is to improve underwater communication systems based on such electrostatic wave propagation. In particular, the invention is directed to improvements in elecctrostatic antennas and detection systems. In accordance with the present invention, the transmitting antenna is spherical and electrostatic transmission is achieved by applying a varying signal voltage to the spherical antenna which is submerged under water. More specifically, the antenna comprises a pair of concentric conducting spheres separated by a dielectric layer form a monopole radiator which serves as an antenna for electrostatic waves in water. An insulating coating is provided around the outer sphere to electrically insulate the sphere from the water in which it is submerged. Opposite charges are applied to the two spheres by means of a transformer. The secondary winding of the transformer has a grounded center-tap, and the end leads of the secondary winding are connected respectively to the two spheres. An alternating voltage generated in the primary winding of the transformer is applied with a constant 180° phase difference, i.e., with opposite polarity, to the two conducting spheres. The electric field associated with the voltage developed on the outer sphere is propagated throughout the medium.

In addition, an improved system for electrostatic wave detection or demodulation is presented. A field responsive pickup is provided by a field effect transistor (FET) having its gate electrode connected to a conducting plate or sphere. The FET converts the electrostatic field to a voltage which is applied to a coherent or synchronous detector, sometimes referred to as double-sideband reception. In the detector the received signal is multiplied by an internally generated signal having the same frequency as the carrier wave. The product is integrated or passed through a low pass filter to recover the information portion of the transmitted signal.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of an electrostatic wave transmitter system according to the invention.

FIG. 2 is a fragmentary view of the monopole radiator of FIG. 1 according to the invention.

FIG. 3 is a schematic and block diagram of an electrostatic wave receiver system according to the invention.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

FIG. 1 illustrates an underwater electrostatic wave transmitter 10. A signal generator 12 is coupled via amplifier 20 and a step-up transformer 14 to a monopole radiator 16 according to the invention. One end of the primary winding 18 of the transformer 14 has a grounded center-tap 24 dividing the secondary winding 22 into two sides of opposite phase.

As shown in FIG. 2, the monopole radiator 16 includes a pair of concentric electrically conductive spheres 26 and 28 separated by a dielectric layer 30. One end of the secondary winding 22 (FIG. 1) is connected by means of a conductor 32 to the inner sphere 28 through an insulated opening 34 (FIG. 2) in the outer sphere 26. The other end of the secondary winding 22 is connected by means of a conductor 36 to the outer sphere 26 of the monopole radiator 16. The conductors 32 and 34 are provided with waterproof insulation and an insulating coating 37 is provided on the sphere 26.

An alternating voltage generated by the signal generator 12 is applied through the transformer 14 to the monopole radiator 16 such that at any point in time the voltages applied to the two spheres 26 and 28 will be equal in magnitude but opposite in polarity, i.e., 180° out of phase. The outer sphere 26 then appears as an ideal monopole radiator to the external dielectric medium, in this case water. The charge placed on the outer sphere develops a surface voltage which stresses the dielectric (water) in which the sphere resides, and when the voltage and thereby the charge on the sphere 26 is changed in accordance with the signal to be transmitted, electrostatic or scalar potential waves will be generated which will transmit the signal through the medium.

As shown in FIG. 3, the propagated field is received by a receiver 38. The receiver 38 includes a field responsive pickup 40 employing an FET 42 to convert the received field intensity to a voltage, V r . The source electrode of the FET 42 is tied to a reference voltage via a resistor 44. The reference voltage is fixed or constant with respect to the dielectric field. The reference voltage should remain constant with respect to the electrical neutrality of the system. The drain of the FET 42 is grounded and the FET gate is connected to a conducting plate 46 or sphere (not shown). The current flow from the source to the drain of the FET 42 is controlled in accordance with variations in the sensed electric field. A voltage V r representing the instantaneous amplitude of the field is tapped off of the source electrode of the FET 42 and applied to a coherent detector 48.

In the detector 48, the voltage V r is multiplied in a multiplier 50 by a voltage A produced by a signal generator 52 or local oscillator replicating the carrier wave transmitted by the monopole radiator 16 in the transmitter 10. The output of the multiplier 50, the product voltage B, is applied to an integrator 54 or low pass filter which integrates the product B continously over a number of periods of the carrier wave to produce the demodulated output C.

It is necessary that both the frequency and phase of the signal A be synchronized with that of the carrier wave. Synchronization maintenance can be performed by means of a phase lock loop (not shown) which tracks the carrier wave and corrects for local oscillator drift.

The coherent detector 48 increases the range at which the electric field propagated by the transmitter 10 can be detected. The effectiveness of the coherent detector 48 in detecting very weak signals is illustrated for unmodulated sine wave detection in the following disucussion. Let V t = sin ωt be the transmitted signal, where ω is angular frequency and t is time. The received signal can be represented as V r = k sin ωt + S(t), where K<<1 and S(t) is background noise.

In the coherent detector 48, the received signal, V r , is multiplied by the signal A = Sin ωt to generate the product. B = V r A = [K Sin ωt + S(t)] sin ωt. (1)

The integrator or low pass filter 54 can be represented theoretically by the mathematical model of integration over a number, n, of whole periods, T = (2π)/ω, at the angular frequency ω. Thus the output of the integrator 54 may be approximated by the expression: ##EQU1## It may be assumed that ##EQU2## Thus, in expression (4) above the noise portion (righthand term) tends toward zero, while the signal portion is proportional to the length of time over which the integration is performed. Accordingly this coherent detection process is equivalent to amplifying the signal by the factor n/2 while the noise component remains unchanged or reduced. The signal to noise ratio is the enhanced and detection can take place at a much greater range.

The coherent detection process changes the allowable band width for modulation. For example, modulating the carrier wave at a frequency having a period much less than the product nT would result in a significant loss of information in the receiver. Information is lost because the integrator acts as a low pass filter tending to screen out frequencies above a predetermined value. Thus the modulating frequency must be lowered or the carrier frequency increased in order to increase the period of the modulating signal at least to the level nT. A convenient way to charactierize the coherent detector is by the ratio, R b = n, of bandwidths before and after integration.

The improved range achieved by use of the coherent detector 48 with a monopole radiator 16 as a transmitting antenna may be estimated as follows:

From Coulomb's Law the field intensity produced by a charged sphere in free space is: ##EQU3## where R is the distance from the center of the sphere, and ##EQU4## where E 1 , represents the field intensity measured at unit distance. Thus ##EQU5## Let the minimum detectable field be E min . Then the maximum range at which a field can be detected is R m = √E 1 /E min (9)

If a field effect transistor is used to convert E to a voltage and if coherent detection is used, then: R m = √V 1 r b /V min (10)

Thus the maximum range in kilometers at which a signal can be coherently detected is given by the equation R m = α √V 1 r b / V min × 10 - 3 (11)

where V 1 is the FET output measured one meter from the center of the radiating monopole, V min is the threshold of sensitivity of the receiver, α is the attenuation of the signal due to energy absorption by the medium, and r b is the ratio of band widths of the signal before and after integration in the coherent detector 48. Thus, the maximum range of the system is improved by the factor √r b .

The invention may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from its spirit or essential characteristics. For example, instead of a single monopole radiator 16 an array of a plurality of radiators 16 can be used. Besides the step-up transformer 14 shown in FIG. 1, it is possible to use other means for applying 180° out-of-phase signals to the conducting spheres 26 and 28. The present embodiments are, therefore, to be considered in all respects as illustrative and not restrictive, the scope of the invention being indicated by the claims rather than by the foregoing description, and all changes which come within the meaning and range of the equivalents of the claims are therefore intended to be embraced therein.



http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3964051.html
seasmith
 
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby Osmosis » Mon Sep 27, 2010 9:52 pm

The transformer seconday center-tap is grounded, the electrodes, one inside the other, are connected to the oppoosite ends of the winding. Doesn't that just short half the output signal, leaving the outer electrode to transmit-something? :roll: :roll: :roll:
Osmosis
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:52 pm
Location: San Jose, California

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby GaryN » Tue Sep 28, 2010 12:05 am

Hi seasmith, I can see the drawings OK, what I meant was that there are no values for voltage, frequency, or FET #, transformer manufacturer or part #, the dielectric. It looks simple, but without all the details it's just a guessing game.
I do think though, as Bibhas De has noted, that we may be missing some key pieces of the whole EM puzzle, without which we will keep going round in circles. (donning conspiracy hat) I have to wonder if the military have not kept some very important information to themselves, some of it Teslas, but also research and development from the usual suspects, Raytheon, Westinghouse, ...
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The EM Universe

Unread postby Jarvamundo » Tue Sep 28, 2010 5:58 am

Osmosis wrote:The transformer seconday center-tap is grounded, the electrodes, one inside the other, are connected to the oppoosite ends of the winding. Doesn't that just short half the output signal, leaving the outer electrode to transmit-something? :roll: :roll: :roll:


Well spotted... I thought the same thing

Could this be more Tesla style es- dielectric ground transmission? Dollard has clearly reproduced this transmission experiment with simple spiral coils, inclusive of a copper sheet ground-pickup ground laying in salt water on a beach, connecting to receiving apparatus. The coil does not require an antenna, sphere device and much like the Tesla single wire model, the Dollard apparatus uses the conductor for transmission, be it wire or earth, for the propagation. I've often wondered if Tesla's 1800's RC boat was it'self (the body) forming a grounded style circuit for his longitudinal propagation. It's kinda how i read his diagram in his (Tesla's) rc boat patent. Also his accounts to Lord Kelvin clearly state he's using a non-electro magnetic, non-hertzian (described as ray-radiation), transmission waveforms.

Seems like nothing new... as spotted by osmo, grounding is required on both excited coils?

The placement of the spherical conductor surfaces are interesting with this patent, but is this the functional component?... i'm wondering if this simply forms as condenser for flux to be shot down the low impedance earth.

I'd also love to hear anything about propagation velocities, we'd be expecting pi/2*c no?

As mentioned by Gary without any accompanying engineering values it's hard to figure out which bit is doing what, and is critical to the operation? Fascinating stuff tho, it's all pointing the same direction to me... for me Dollard is the only one who has it 'down'.

Thanks for the most interesting material.
User avatar
Jarvamundo
 
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 5:26 pm
Location: Australia

PreviousNext

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests