How A Capacitor Really Works

[seasmith]

Solar wrote:

If the aether is 'fluid' does the 'polarization' happen on the fly as it passes?

Hi Solar,

Just curious, why would you ascribe a physical property to an aetheric field ?
If you concur with an example given by M. Mathis, which i believe you cited recently:

. .. irony, since it means that Einstein actually had more of an ether than Tesla. Tesla called his E/M field an ether, but it was a field, not an ether. Einstein called his field a field, but it was an ether, not a field. Curvature gave his field a mechanical property, and a fundamental field that has a mechanical property is not a field, it is an ether.

As the 'ground state' (the prime condition, not the negative "ground" of a battery) it would be the state from and to which all EM/ES flux arise and return. So often, in an experimental framework, much thought is given to the accumulation and transmittance of electrical phenomena, as if electrons or photons or whatever "quanta" are in some manner gathered up and conveyed from point A to point B via some pre-formed space. It seems readily apparent that none of those electrical effects are in the least separate from the duration of that 'ground state' ( or as Mathis calls "time differential").
~ The "Jitter" that is inevitably found at a quantum level is, imo, evidence for the regenerative aetheric circuit we may call the Aetheric Cycle.

s

[Solar]

Just curious, why would you ascribe a physical property to an aetheric field ?
If you concur with an example given by M. Mathis, which i believe you cited recently:

Ah. That question was in relation to the suggestion that an aetheric "tension" as stated in the Dollard quote was set up in the dielectric. But Faraday proposed 'molecular polarization'. So I was curious as to how an aetheric tension' could set up a molecular polarization (if Farady is correct).

With todays nanotechnology and vortices being 'directed' via E-fields it seems that it would be possible to determine if an E-field also (naturally) 'reduced' molecular or atomic 'spacing' along the E-field's vector in a dielectric. I think there may be something like that on the forum somewhere. The subject is interesting as it relates the London force, or Van der Waals’ dispersion force as suggested via Thornhill for inducing a potential gravity related resonant atomic 'electric dipole distortions' as briefly covered at Holoscience: "Columbia: Questions of Some Gravity (Update 7 June)"

And a bit further here:

Others and I have argued that a plenum of neutrinos forms the aether.[25] Based upon nuclear experiments, I have also proposed that neutrinos are the most collapsed, lowest energy state of matter. In other words they exhibit vanishingly small mass. However, being normal matter composed of subtrons, they are capable of forming electric dipoles. In an oscillating electromagnetic field a neutrino must rotate through 360˚ per cycle. That would link the speed of light in a vacuum to the moment of inertia of a neutrino. Having some mass, neutrinos must be ‘dragged along’ by gravitating bodies. They form a kind of extended ‘atmosphere’ which will bend light. It has nothing to do with a metaphysical ‘warping of space.’ - Holoscience: "Electric Gravity in an Electric Universe"

When looking at these as relates the "neutrino" and Aetherometry's claim that the "neutrino" is a mistaken form of their aether+ the fact that the EU requires an aether+Faradys suggestion of molecular polarization - there seemed to be a slight E-field vector inducing correlation of sorts going on in there. Taking the notion that matter 'encapsulates' the angular momentum of aetheric "particles" (if it is 'particulate') - said angular momentum being 'transmitted' via the E-field for the dipole distortion - well that seems it might work.

I was ponder those correlations.

. .. irony, since it means that Einstein actually had more of an ether than Tesla. Tesla called his E/M field an ether, but it was a field, not an ether. Einstein called his field a field, but it was an ether, not a field. Curvature gave his field a mechanical property, and a fundamental field that has a mechanical property is not a field, it is an ether.

As the 'ground state' (the prime condition, not the negative "ground" of a battery) it would be the state from and to which all EM/ES flux arise and return. So often, in an experimental framework, much thought is given to the accumulation and transmittance of electrical phenomena, as if electrons or photons or whatever "quanta" are in some manner gathered up and conveyed from point A to point B via some pre-formed space. It seems readily apparent that none of those electrical effects are in the least separate from the duration of that 'ground state' ( or as Mathis calls "time differential").
~ The "Jitter" that is inevitably found at a quantum level is, imo, evidence for the regenerative aetheric circuit we may call the Aetheric Cycle.

s

The Mathis article was cited in the Mathis thread not because of full agreement but to show that the subject matter wasn't of topic. Your last statements here are excellent. I do think that this is the case (Ouroboros or the dual nature of Shiva).

As for "fields" I don't like the term. Its a region. A field is an analogous description used as an explanation to avoid an actual answer to what is actually functioning in that region. Something may to be undergoing polarization/dipole distortion and/or moving through the spatial region surrounding magnets. (LMAO!! Ode to Alton) Okay sorry, I couldn't resist.

[Solar]

Apologies, meant to say "to show that the subject matter wasn't off topic."

Now, I was away for bit from the forum studying and what not. I'm chatty as of late because I'm simply sharing some of the concepts gathered over that period. It'll wear off in a few hehehe... This is the only place I can get these things out of my system so I'm just 'unloading' as it were.

I have another question. I'm a little bewildered by the persistent notion that either the aether is 'solid-like' or that it is 'fluid-like'. Harold Aspden is one of two that I currently know of who suggest that it can display both properties according to the situation. He placed this page up to describe:

What you see is a lattice like array of electric charges, all identical, immersed in a uniform background continuum of opposite charge polarity. Overall the aether is electrically neutral. Its properties are akin to those of a fluid crystal. When matter is present the electrical action of its charge components can cause the lattice to form a frame of reference locked to the matter frame and this can move bodily with that matter. This forms boundaries between lattice regions in relative motion. The fluid crystal property then asserts itself as the lattice charges at the forward boundaries dissolve into the fluid background only to reappear at the trailing boundary. This is a version of the aether that was no considered by the aether theorists of the 19th century. It structure determines the most important dimensionless constant in physics, namely the one which connects the speed of light with the electron unit of charge and the quantum of action we associate with radiation. - Harold Aspden

In relation to his "fluid crystal" analogy consider the action or statement "The fluid crystal property then asserts itself as the lattice charges at the forward boundaries dissolve into the fluid background only to reappear at the trailing boundary."

Compare this with The Plasma Crystal Experiment:

Plasma Crystals form under certain conditions in a complex ('dusty') plasma. There, the electrically charged dust particles arrange in a regular macroscopic crystal lattice.

When you hover your mouse over the photo showing the plasma crystal at the top right of the page. It changes to the lattice form under ideal conditions as can be seen in this actual photo here:



These melamine-formaldehyde spheres arranged themeless this way and appear to be electrostatically suspended and balanced. On the page "PKE Nefedov More Results (3)" there is an .avi linked. which you've probably seen.

A puff of air was injected into the chamber and the .avi shows the interaction. If you watch it you'll see that as the "void" caused by the puff of air moves around within the initially ideal lattice array "the lattice charges at the forward boundaries dissolve into the fluid background only to reappear at the trailing boundary.

Although I'm not quite sure what Aspden means by "dissolve" this .avi is the closest I've seen to what he describes. If you'll also notice towards the last 4 seconds or so, as the "void" (equipotential surface) settles down look at the spheres beneath the "void". They are 'compressed' and 'displaced' from the original state of equilibrium i.e. they form a "field" of greater density and compactification than their original balanced state.

This, because the "void" - analogous to an object - resides in the "space" of the original equilibrium.

Barring any phase-transitions that may occur once some critical value is reached what does one say? That it is a "field" within a larger "field"? To me, the presence of an object within the aether acts in similar fashion just as Aspden suggest. Such that its qualities are neither "solid" nor "liquid" but a 'phase-state' that can display both qualities as opposed to being limited to the early 19th century constraints.

Just as surely as plasma is now recognized as the 4th state, and a Bose-Einstein Condensate is hovering around being called a 5th state, what is it that limits us to the consideration of other potential states that do not meet rigidly established 'standards'?

[GaryN]

The link from a previous post has kept my mind busy a while Solar. Good post.

http://www.borderlands.com/dollardandtesla.htm

Now, I was away for bit from the forum studying and what not. I'm chatty as of late because I'm simply sharing some of the concepts gathered over that period. It'll wear off in a few hehehe... This is the only place I can get these things out of my system so I'm just 'unloading' as it were.

Unload away! Tensegrity looks like it explains much of the Universe, maybe Synergy explains the rest. I came to TB hoping for a Synergetic experience, and I think one day a big answer might just appear from a lot of lesser ideas.

[StefanR]

What you see is a lattice like array of electric charges, all identical, immersed in a uniform background continuum of opposite charge polarity. Overall the aether is electrically neutral. Its properties are akin to those of a fluid crystal. When matter is present the electrical action of its charge components can cause the lattice to form a frame of reference locked to the matter frame and this can move bodily with that matter. This forms boundaries between lattice regions in relative motion. The fluid crystal property then asserts itself as the lattice charges at the forward boundaries dissolve into the fluid background only to reappear at the trailing boundary. This is a version of the aether that was no considered by the aether theorists of the 19th century. It structure determines the most important dimensionless constant in physics, namely the one which connects the speed of light with the electron unit of charge and the quantum of action we associate with radiation. - Harold Aspden

Although I'm not quite sure what Aspden means by "dissolve" this .avi is the closest I've seen to what he describes. If you'll also notice towards the last 4 seconds or so, as the "void" (equipotential surface) settles down look at the spheres beneath the "void". They are 'compressed' and 'displaced' from the original state of equilibrium i.e. they form a "field" of greater density and compactification than their original balanced state.

Perhaps this movie shows it a bit better:

http://www.ieap.uni-kiel.de/plasma/ag-p ... wellen.mpg
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... 8358#p8358

And there is a movie of this one some where (can't find at the moment):

http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... 8008#p8008

And of this there was a movie too somewhere (same story):

Under certain conditions novel phenomena appear at the lower boundary of this void under gravity conditions: Bubbles form, which ''explode'' upwards into the void, like shown on the picture to the right (Enlarge. Courtesy of M. Kretschmer). Droplets or blobs such as the one shown on the cover appear, ejecting particles into the void. Another phenomenon is the formation of cusps in the particle cloud, which are pointing upwards. These cones remind of so-called ''Taylor cones'', which form in liquids under the influence of electric fields and surface tension.
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... 482#p23482

So a crude analogy seems possible:

dusty plasma : condensations/"objects"/interactions in dusty plasma :: matterpoints/aether : primary particles/"objects"/sensible matter

Then perhaps if taking the little spheres of the dusty plasma into Boscovich' matterpoints and seeing in such way as well Aspden's matrix, and the interactions there more dynamic than dusty plasma an interesting view comes there indeed.

This is a more recent release which is some what interesting
Phase separation (droplet formation) in a binary complex plasma

http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... 587#p33587

[Solar]

Stunning link StefanR.

Also in particular note the "waves" occurring in the initially ideal "medium" of 'balanced charges' as put forth via Aspden and demonstrated there throughout the regions of greater density ("field") of what? - the same "medium" that is 'displaced' by the "equipotential surface" defining the "void" as it asserts its existence within that "medium". This is of course barring any input modulation.

A "fluid crystal" demonstrating both 'solid' and 'fluid' characteristics of initially balanced 'charges' undergoing 'displacement via 'perturbation' appears to work much better. In one fell swoop several of the characteristics associated with the activities of the 'wave-particle' duality' can exist. That is perhaps how it may be that a dynamical aspect to an aether may exist through this kind of "tension" or Tensegrity relationship.

One can then speculate that were a second and much smaller 'puff' of a different quality and quantity of air were injected into the much more dense region very close to the edge of the larger "void" - would one then see activities along the "wavelength" similar to the 'acceleration of a charge in an electric field' and/or 'gravitational attraction' depending on the nature of the air so injected?

These are the kinds of things that strongly suggest, to me, that the 19th century debate over this issue is a circular constraint.

[seasmith]

Solar, Stefan et al,

I've long admired Aspden's work, before i had any concept of an EU.
His model of an aether has bothered me somewhat though. Other than the ubiquitous 'quantum jitter', it is rather non-dynamic.
It does not create or annihilate stars and galaxies. It doesn't contract or expand.
It does have "temperature" and can exist in multiple discrete crystal 'entities' which can interact with each other, but which together apparently do not comprise a unity;
that is, a prime ground state.

A material system such as body Earth which comprises, at its ultra microscopic atomic level, electric charges and their attendant fields can move through the aetherial fluid crystal and carry a kind of aether crystal with it, whilst surrounding aether has its own separate crystal form. The structure can dissolve at the foward boundaries, dispersing into the background fluid, only to reappear as new crystal structures forms behind the aether structure that is 'dragged' along by body Earth.

His model does very nicely describe a "dusty plasma', where voids can be "blown in to it" and can "convey" EM formations from A to B.
It is a more elegant model than the 19th century subtle atmosphere, but somehow seems to be as a meta-medium or transitional phase of matter/non-matter; which is precisely what a good EU engineer might call the pervading universal Plasma.

~The crystalline aspect (of both?) is the most intriguing. My middle-mind remains open.

s

[junglelord]

I would consider the quantum spin number vs a quantum jitter when defining aether. Try a quantum spin of 2.

I think its clear that the liquid crystal model (of which we are made) is a better definition of the properties of the aether phase state. As above so below. I am glad to see that link to borderland science and Eric Dollard on capacitance.
http://www.borderlands.com/dollardandtesla.htm

TESLA TECHNOLOGY

A collection of research and research materials for advance research in understanding the true nature of Tesla's discoveries.

Introduction to
DIELECTRICITY AND CAPACITANCE
by Eric Dollard

CAPACITANCE
The phenomena of capacitance is a type of electrical energy storage in the form of a field in an enclosed space. This space is typically bounded by two parallel metallic plates or two metallic foils on an intervening insulator or dielectric. A nearly infinite variety of more complex structures can exhibit capacity, as long as a difference in electric potential exists between various areas of the structure. The oscillating coil represents one possibility as to a capacitor of more complex form, and will be presented here.

CAPACITANCE INADEQUATELY EXPLAINED
The perception of capacitance as used today is wholly inadequate for the proper understanding of this effect. Steinmetz mentions this in his introductory book Electric Discharges, Waves and Impulses. To quote, "Unfortunately, to large extent in dealing with dielectric fields the prehistoric conception of the electrostatic charge (electron) on the conductor still exists, and by its use destroys the analogy between the two components of the electric field, the magnetic and the dielectric, and makes the consideration of dielectric fields unnecessarily complicated."

LINES OF FORCE AS REPRESENTATION OF DIELECTRICITY
Steinmetz continues, "There is obviously no more sense in thinking of the capacity current as current which charges the conductor with a quantity of electricity, than there is of speaking of the inductance voltage as charging the conductor with a quantity of magnetism. But the latter conception, together with the notion of a quantity of magnetism, etc., has vanished since Faraday's representation of the magnetic field by lines of force."

THE LAWS OF LINES OF FORCE
All the lines of magnetic force are closed upon themselves, all dielectric lines of force terminate on conductors, but may form closed loops in electromagnetic radiation. These represent the basic laws of lines of force. It can be seen from these laws that any line of force cannot just end in space.

FARADAY & LINES OF FORCE THEORY
Farady felt strongly that action at a distance is not possible thru empty space, or in other words, "matter cannot act where it is not." He considered space pervaded with lines of force. Almost everyone is familiar with the patterns formed by iron filings around a magnet. These filings act as numerous tiny compasses and orientate themselves along the lines of force existing around the poles of the magnet. Experiment has indicated that a magnetic field does possess a fibrous construct. By passing a coil of wire thru a strong magnetic field and listening to the coil output in headphones, the experimenter will notice a scraping noise. J. J. Thompson performed further experiments involving the ionization of gases that indicate the field is not continuous but fibrous (electricity and matter, 1906).

ENERGY INTO MATTER
As the voltage or impedance is increased the emphasis is on the inward flux. If the impedance is high and rate of change is fast enough (perfect overtone series), it would seem possible the compression of the energy would transform it into matter and the reconversion of this matter into energy may or may not synchronize with the cycle of oscillation. This is what may be considered supercapacitance, that is, stable long term conversion into matter.


IMPORTANT REFERENCE MATERIAL

1. Electricity and Matter, J. J. Thompson, New York, l906, Scribner's Sons, and l904, Yale University.

2. Elementary Lecture on Electric Discharges, Waves, and Impulses and other Transients, C. P. Steinmetz, second edition, 1914, McGraw-Hill.

3. Theory and Calculation of Transient Electric Phenomena and Oscillations, C. P. Steinmetz, third edition, l920, McGraw-Hill. Section III Transients in Space, Chapter VIII, Velocity of Propagation of Electric Field.

Great link.
The creation of matter is a Tensegrity event.

[junglelord]

OOPS!
I meant to say the creation of matter is always a Z pinch tensegrity event.


The convergence of tension and compression in a Z Pinch creates the synergetic combination of perfect balance b/t these two elements, continual tension, with discontinuous compression events, which generates the matrix equilibirum of eletrons and protons and the jitterbug device of an atom via photons.

[GaryN]

The Universe is synergetic, you could not predict the whole by examining any of its components.
Humans are both anti-entropic and synergetic structures, and even our consciousness is an emergent
feature, which depends on the metaphysical, language, for its very existence. Whew.

[Solar]

From Dollard
ENERGY INTO MATTER
As the voltage or impedance is increased the emphasis is on the inward flux. If the impedance is high and rate of change is fast enough (perfect overtone series), it would seem possible the compression of the energy would transform it into matter and the reconversion of this matter into energy may or may not synchronize with the cycle of oscillation. This is what may be considered supercapacitance, that is, stable long term conversion into matter.

It is this "inward flux", "folding", "overlapping", or 'interpenetration' of the "ground state" with Itself that results in the formation of subsequent "ground states" relative to the various 'secondary states':

The Maxwell field as a derived special case
As the derivations show, nobody can claim there wouldn’t exist potential vortices and no
propagation as a scalar wave, since only the Maxwell equations are to blame that these
already have been factored out in the approach. One has to know that the field equations,
and may they be as famous as they are, are nothing but a special case, which can be
derived.

The field-theoretical approach however, which among others bases on the Faraday-law, is
universal and can’t be derived on its part. It describes a physical basic principle, the
alternating of two dual experience or observation factors, their overlapping and mixing by
continually mixing up cause and effect. It is a philosophic approach, free of materialistic
or quantum physical concepts of any particles.

Maxwell on the other hand describes without exception the fields of charged particles, the
electric field of resting and the magnetic field as a result of moving charges. The charge
carriers are postulated for this purpose, so that their origin and their inner structure remain
unsettled and can’t be derived. The subdivision e.g. in quarks stays in the domain of a
hypothesis, which can’t be proven. The sorting and systematizing of the properties of
particles in the standard-model is nothing more than unsatisfying comfort for the missing
calculability.

With the field-theoretical approach however the elementary particles with all quantum
properties can be calculated as field vortices [1, chap. 7]. With that the field is the cause
for the particles and their measurable quantisation. The electric vortex field, at first source
free, is itself forming its field sources in form of potential vortex structures. - Meyl: "Faraday or Maxwell"

I would consider the quantum spin number vs a quantum jitter when defining aether. Try a quantum spin of 2.

The "tension" of the 'background ground state' as it "folds" via quaternion "space": 720

[junglelord]

Charge is and always will be a distribued sphere. It is only natural for it to have a stacked spin

The standard model states that matter has a dual nature, showing characteristics of a particle in some experiments and characteristics of a wave in others. But it does not tell us how matter expresses these characteristics. It assumes that it is impossible to do so. But it is not impossible. In fact, it is embarrassingly simple. Matter is NOT both particle and wave. Matter is a particle with a wave. That is, the photon, like the electron and the proton and every other incorporation of matter, is a discrete particle, with a radius, a surface area, a mass, and a spin. Fundamentally, it is not a wave. It is a physical sphere, just as much as the Earth or the Moon or a marble or a bowling ball.

So all those smug little PhDs on the forums are wrong. To solve the problem of duality, we must not think of the photon or electron as a probability. We must think of it as a physical sphere. We must do so because doing so is the only way to solve the mysteries of quantum mechanics. I have already proved this in the most direct fashion possible: by solving problems that had stymied them for generations. I have solved problems Bohr could not solve, that Einstein could not solve, that Feynman could not solve, and I have done it by ignoring all the warnings from the physics police—ignoring the warnings of the cult groupies.

They have said there is no way to visualize superposition, but I have done it. They have said there is no way to illustrate wave motions or characteristics, but I have done it. They have said there is no way to explain duality in a physical, mechanical way, but I have done it.

I have done it by showing that a simple sphere, of any size, can have four stacked spins. The first spin is an axial spin, with a size of R (where R is the radius). The second spin cannot be axial, due to gyroscopic rules. It must be outside the influence of the axial spin. Therefore it must be an end-over-end spin, with a size of 2R.

[Jaythree]

First principle: never trust anyone in a white lab coat

As for an explanation, I always prefer Dr. James Sung's model, in which charge is not a property of matter but literally a fourth dimension in which matter is "adddressed" (3X space, time and charge). In this case, charge is preserved ("memorized") dimensionally, so that reassembling the Leydon jar restores the total atomic configuration. Metaphysical, perhaps, but the model simplifies a lot of complexity in physics. Dr. Sung endorses the crystal lattice as representing reality (granular space-time-charge) except that matter doesn't actually move through a lattice; instead, defects in the lattice ARE what we perceive as matter and movement is a fiction of our observation as time advances from location to location. A qualitative and quantitative analysis pdf is available (300 pages) for anyone interested.

[Solar]

First principle: never trust anyone in a white lab coat

As for an explanation, I always prefer Dr. James Sung's model, in which charge is not a property of matter but literally a fourth dimension in which matter is "adddressed" (3X space, time and charge). In this case, charge is preserved ("memorized") dimensionally, so that reassembling the Leydon jar restores the total atomic configuration. Metaphysical, perhaps, but the model simplifies a lot of complexity in physics. Dr. Sung endorses the crystal lattice as representing reality (granular space-time-charge) except that matter doesn't actually move through a lattice; instead, defects in the lattice ARE what we perceive as matter and movement is a fiction of our observation as time advances from location to location. A qualitative and quantitative analysis pdf is available (300 pages) for anyone interested.

I'll take a link for that Jay. I'm curious regarding 'motion' as put forth in your reference (especially as regarding the lattice) and am amenable to other things you've mentioned. There may be some insights to Aspden's use of the word "dissolve". I only think that I may understand what Aspden meant. If it is what I think it is then "motion" is an even more interesting dynamic than the perception/observation of an object 'moving' through "space". PM it or otherwise and thank you.

[junglelord]

I agree with the fundamental idea that the aether is the source of all the properties of matter.
I would put it in the fifth, not the fourth dimension.
Aether is a RMF of extremely high frequency and quantum spin.
This magnetic field exhibts the properties that we are putting fourth!
Two magnets reveal this field. It is that simple

A field that is everywhere and matter expresses its fundamental properties as well as shows us the field itself.
Just push two magnets together or try to pull them apart, that field is not from the matter. The field exists unto itself and is the matrix or 3-6-9 fundamental. That field is the source of matters properties. It is a mirror image of what they teach. Matter does not create a field, it is created BY THE FIELD and exists in the field.

Wireless technology is due to the fact the field is the matrix, not the matter of technology.
This is why longitudinal scalar waves exist....it is NOT matter that "makes/creates" them, although it can "induce" them as Tesla realized, so it is the aether itself being manipulated, not matter making the field.

This field endows all matter with the properties that eletrons and protons exhibit, namely mass, charge, frequency - wavelength, light speed, spherical geometry (length-width-height).

Magnets are the perfect example of this theory and that can only have two sources.
They can say that matter makes the field, by aligning themself, but they cannot prove that.
They will however stick to it like a Law.

I cannot prove it, but I say the field is everywhere, and matter like a magnet allows access to that field.

It is that simple, just change your view of the source of the magnetic field.
If you do that, and it is not a sin to try, then your world view turns inside out.
Just like making the universe electric and not gravitational.
The simple answer is what my gut always told me, the field is everywhere, the magnets do not make this field.
Thats my theory and I am sticking too it.