Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I have little doubt that the greens would have some form of free energy that they simply do not want us to have.
So you reject conventional science in lieu of "greens"? What are "greens"? My mother always told me to eat my greens.
One at a time - we are talking about the photoelectric effect.
NO LIGHT IS NEEDED TO VIEW THE RESULTS OF THIS.
The issue is you have absolutlely no idea what it is - and you have no inclination to look for it.
you can lead a horse to water...........
Electrons emitted from a material when light shines on it, I know what the photoelectric effect is, it requires light to behave predictably, which it does not.
Yes it does - the results can be reproduced exactly 100% of the time. This is fact.
One at a time - we are talking about the photoelectric effect.
NO LIGHT IS NEEDED TO VIEW THE RESULTS OF THIS.
The issue is you have absolutlely no idea what it is - and you have no inclination to look for it.
you can lead a horse to water...........
Thanks for the links, but I still don't see any support from mainstream publications, you are digging up stuff that I would class as pseudo science.
gsjournal is an interesting site with lots of unconventional papers, but if there was any substance to your claims about nuclear energy, there would be more support from reputable sources. Bendini is a free energy nutter, not a source I would automatically trust without some corroborating sources.
I once did some contract work on free energy devices, it was good fun, but despite herculean engineering efforts, nothing ever came up to the claims of the inventors.
I have no hesitation is saying John Bedini is a fraud. He makes his money selling plans to things that don't work.
I'm familiar with Maxwells equations, but only the normal 4, I was aware of the extra 4 equations, but I'm not clear on the relevance in this context
Have you ever published any of your work in the field of nuclear energy? Or if you haven't, can you point me to a paper relating to "dextrorotatory subquark strings"?
you do not rely on light to receive the results of the photoelectric effect.
you are continuing to reinforce my opinion
You do, you rely on light to see the results of every conceivable experiment.
no - you do not. You use an ammeter. If you are really that bent on this - you can connect the ammeter to a computer that turns text into sound via a speaker, so you don't even have to worry about light from the computer screen.
you do not rely on light to receive the results of the photoelectric effect.
you are continuing to reinforce my opinion
We can only know what we deduce about light. All of our observations rely on light: how can you run a test on something which cannot be confined to a test space? Studying light must remain strictly theoretical. Logic alone suffices.
This is how we can see that light requires a quantum field to exist in.
Yes - we can run tests on light.
Look at the photoelectric effect, and youngs slits experiments. These can be repeated at a low budget by anybody. I do them at work several times a year.
How do you trust the results when you're testing the properties of what you need to observe the results?
You are not testing the properties of what you need to observe the results with the photoelectric effect. The photoelectric effect can be measured with a simple ammeter if you want.
Youngs slits can be carried out with lasers, and the difference in defraction pattern as you change frequency can be predicted accurately, before you even make the change.
Like I often say - people believe nonsense because they have a very poor understanding of physics. You are proving this to me right here and now.
We can only know what we deduce about light. All of our observations rely on light: how can you run a test on something which cannot be confined to a test space? Studying light must remain strictly theoretical. Logic alone suffices.
This is how we can see that light requires a quantum field to exist in.
Yes - we can run tests on light.
Look at the photoelectric effect, and youngs slits experiments. These can be repeated at a low budget by anybody. I do them at work several times a year.
Why does anyone lie? they have something to gain.
The people from outside the known Earth are the sponsors and benefactors to most governments, and they own all the land not covered on maps. The southern hemisphere is larger on a flat earth, yet the maps don't allow for this, so what of all this missing land? there are mineral rich plains, spoken of in legend like El Dorado, and all that precious metal and gems and oils are mined and used, giving a great advantage and great gains. And on this unknown land, there is no need to worry about human rights, and the natives could be used as slaves.
So long as no one thinks to question, so long as no one knows, there are huge tracts of land to be used and abused, and no need to worry how the working conditions might seem.
So there's an unknown Earth..... And.... You know about it??
The flat earth map is wrong! There's no "missing land"!!
Calculate it yourself it's immediately obvious we don't receive the incredible energy amounts you're proposing simply by standing in the Sun. The orders of magnitude are completely wrong. For one, we ought to be cooling exponentially during night time. Do you observe that?Heat is caused by the vibration of molecules: that is, velocity. It is a velocity in multiple directions, as objects with heat do not simply crawl away in a certain direction, so there must be an acceleration acting constantly on any object.
That is every molecule of an object is accelerating at any given moment. The house you're in, and its tremendous mass, are accelerating at every second of every minute of every hour of every day.
Where does the force and so energy required for this come from?
From the sun.
That isn't enough. Don't forget we still have heat at night. You would need a truly incredible amount of energy for the molecules to keep moving on and on, and we simply do not observe that much. If it were, solar panels would be far more effective than they are.
Why? Can you calculate that for me?
I'm not proposing incredible amounts of energy, you are. Why? Why ought we to be cooling exponentially during night time?
Calculate it yourself it's immediately obvious we don't receive the incredible energy amounts you're proposing simply by standing in the Sun. The orders of magnitude are completely wrong. For one, we ought to be cooling exponentially during night time. Do you observe that?Heat is caused by the vibration of molecules: that is, velocity. It is a velocity in multiple directions, as objects with heat do not simply crawl away in a certain direction, so there must be an acceleration acting constantly on any object.
That is every molecule of an object is accelerating at any given moment. The house you're in, and its tremendous mass, are accelerating at every second of every minute of every hour of every day.
Where does the force and so energy required for this come from?
From the sun.
That isn't enough. Don't forget we still have heat at night. You would need a truly incredible amount of energy for the molecules to keep moving on and on, and we simply do not observe that much. If it were, solar panels would be far more effective than they are.
Why? Can you calculate that for me?
Ask a local, unsponsored, surveyor. And publish details of recent flat experiments.
Like I said, the Bedford Level Experiment is only one example. Given that there is no curvature (a more profound result than "it looks flat,") the Earth cannot be round.
God almighty, you are thick.... forget the Bedford Level experiment, there are hundreds of thousands of geodetic surveys measuring the curvature of the earth.
Go find a local surveyor and ask for an example of a geodetic survey. NONE, ( got that) NONE of the hundreds of thousands of geodetic surveys ever done has ever shown a flat earth.
Why is that?
PS. It occurs to me that you might not know what a geodetic survey is, so here for your enlightenment and enjoyment is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesy
Why is it the experiments performed by individuals beyond influence detect flatness, and the surveys performed by large, sponsored organizations detect curvature?
What varies is their direction, not their velocity. Therefore, no acceleration is needed. Or I could be terribly wrong. I'm an Arts guy, what do I know?
Actually that's wrong, try thinking of it as vibration, imagine perfectly elastic collisions, two molecules collide, the translational energy is briefly stored in the electric field, then released as they bounce apart, there is a slight loss of energy in the form of radiation, this is called black body radiation. ( look up the planck equation for details ). To understand black body radiation you need to appreciate that the interactions are quantized, the states involved are rotational, translational, as well as vibrational, and they are all quantized. Refer to all those famous debates around the early 1900's
The only time matter is NOT radiating is when it's at absolute zero.
If you are having trouble with all that, then it's time to do a basic physics course.
The interaction with a quantum field, which I have termed the caloric field, is the only explanation.
First define caloric field.
Then show that it better explains something already explained.
Then show that the new concept has some useful purpose.
Then everyone will stop laughing at you.
Heat is caused by the vibration of molecules: that is, velocity. It is a velocity in multiple directions, as objects with heat do not simply crawl away in a certain direction, so there must be an acceleration acting constantly on any object.
That is every molecule of an object is accelerating at any given moment. The house you're in, and its tremendous mass, are accelerating at every second of every minute of every hour of every day.
Where does the force and so energy required for this come from?
From the sun.
What varies is their direction, not their velocity. Therefore, no acceleration is needed. Or I could be terribly wrong. I'm an Arts guy, what do I know?Varying direction is varying velocity.
Like I said, the Bedford Level Experiment is only one example. Given that there is no curvature (a more profound result than "it looks flat,") the Earth cannot be round.
God almighty, you are thick.... forget the Bedford Level experiment, there are hundreds of thousands of geodetic surveys measuring the curvature of the earth.
Go find a local surveyor and ask for an example of a geodetic survey. NONE, ( got that) NONE of the hundreds of thousands of geodetic surveys ever done has ever shown a flat earth.
Why is that?
PS. It occurs to me that you might not know what a geodetic survey is, so here for your enlightenment and enjoyment is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesy
I've seen a lot of round earthers talk about how clear proofs that the world is flat, such as the bedford level experiment, or cases where the light of a light house was visible when it should be blocked by the Earth's curvature, or situations where more of the world over a lake could be seen than should be possible on a round Earth, are unreliable given they have only been performed a handful of times.
What would you say is the best-documented example of seeing a light house that should have been blocked by the Earth's curvature?
I am deleting the nested quotes for the sake of simplicity.Then why do you accept claimed accounts of the experiment only when they show curvature? Sunlight is explained by the caloric field.Given that no curvature has been detected on the Earth, there must be an explanation for the odd distances detected there. Manufactured spatial distortions conceal huge, mineral-full areas of Earth such as El Dorado. These are mined and harvested for profit, while the rest of the world has no access and no knowledge to these areas. Oil, gold, precious metals...
Why is the observation of curvature only unreliable and based upon refraction if the conclusion that the world is not round?
Curvature has indeed been detected multiple times. As has been stated in another thread, the curvature was visible to the users of the Concorde. The very same Bedford Level Experiment, when performed correctly, is evidence of the same. The fact that mountains get dark from bottom to top, too. Curvature is easily detectable and measurable, and your negative to accept such a well proven fact is apalling.
Your manmade spatial distortions hypothesis is, as per your own words, based on the existance of places such as El Dorado, a myth born from the massive amount of gold and silver the Spanish Empire acquired from its american territories. It has no real support aside from tales and your own imagination.
Refraction is a very real phenomenon. Cases such as the Flying Dutchman, Crocker Land and other ghostly things spotted by ship crews can be explained in the same way. So watching the horizon and saying "I see things that I shouldn't be able to see" is no proof of anything.