Natural Science Forum / Physics / New Theories / January 2005

How do you know?

I like your science, but allow me to do the math, s'je te plais.
(mathematics is abstract, it's concepts have no coefficients.  When you
qualify the mathematical objects with coefficients, it is science, by my
estimation.)

Part 1
------
Allow yourself to undertake a thought experiment.
You assert that there is no such feature as "Nothing" (N) in the
Universe (U).  That is a good place to start, and I agree.

However, thoughts, if performed by your entire being and not just your
brain/body, transcend (U) and (N) is allowed.

You CAN think about (N) and I am asking you to allow yourself to
do just that.
Consider (N).  What is it's structure?
Now (I am asking the seemingly impossible, but to remember, thoughts
transcend (U) and can be about (N).
Consider what (N) is.  It is a void, at least when your thoughts are about
it.  But consider the substance of (N).  If there IS (N) (this is only a
thought experiment, so you are allowing (N) to be), then what is the
nature of (N)?  A quick deliberation will lead you to the conclusion that
if there IS (N), then (N) is all that there is.  There is (N) more.  There
is (N) less.  There is only (N).  (This is the experiment, remember)
So then, what is the structure of (N), being all that there is? (Not that
(N) actually IS, but we are allowing it to be in our experiment, just
to determine the structure of (N).)
Analyzing (N) reveals that (N) knows (N) of (N).  (N) knows ALL of (N).
(N) is ABSOLUTE UNITY.  (N) is a rigid solid!

That is the conclusion of the 1st part of the math.

Part 2
------

(N) does not exist in (U).  That much can be determined by examining the
structure and content of (U).  (U) has (E).  (U) has (G).  (U) therefore
does NOT have (N).

Part 3
------

(E) + (G).
1 km + 3 kg.
14 seconds + 3 meters.
?
These are mathematically unsound, because the coefficients are not equal.

17 + 45 = 52
This is mathematically sound.

3s x 14 m = 42 ms
Also mathematically sound.  But (AFAIK) unrelatable to any experience of
which I am cognisant.

(U) != (E) + (G)

Rather, see that
(U) is (G) x (E)

(E) is the "substance" which we perceive.
(There is no matter.  Matter is a limitation placed upon us by our own
perspective, and is illusory.  Matter are (E))
(G) is the field exhibited by (E).

But what propagates (G)?  A field needs be propagated in order to have
effect.  (G) has effect.  What propagates it?  If you have not guessed it
yet, I shall tell you.

(N) propagates (G).

And yet (N) is not in (U).  They are not the same, but they are related.

(U) = ((G)/(N)) x (E)
(U) = (G)(E)/(N)
(U)(N) = (G)(E)

Given that our (U) is a mini universe (a black hole, so to speak), there
are a plurality of (U), but the math is the same:
(U)(N) are (G)(E)

Part 4
------

So now we have a GUT (albeit an undeveloped GUT)
Can this be of benefit to us at all?

Let us presume that it can.  (We are scientists after all, and so
what is the point of knowledge if it has no effect?  And the effect can
be good or detrimental, it depends on how the knowledge is applied)

So, presuming that the GUT can have effect, we continue.
If we presumed otherwise, we would not continue.
I am continuing; I hope you are still with me.
Let us continue.

The question, now that we have a GUT (although a rather undeveloped one),
is "How can this discovery affect us??  At all?"

Let us deduct.

   discovery         ~       us   all
[(U)(N) = (E)(G)]     ~     (E)(G) (U)

discovery       affect     us at all
(U)(N)=(E)(G)          ((E)(G))^-1 x (U)
(U)(N)=(E)(G)            (U)/((E)(G))

affect us in that we (E)(G) can add to (U), would be beneficial to (E)(G)
If (U) is increased, then we (ie: (E)(G)) reap the dividends.

So . . . how?

Part 6
------

Enter applied science.
We know that (N) is a rigid solid.
We know that (E) is.  We really aren't sure what it is.  But it is.  And
(E) interacts with (E) via (G) within the emptiness which is (N)

We are in a black hole.
I'll have to stop speaking techno-babble now, because it is becoming
detrimental to the cause of benefitting us.  After all, we have a GUT now,
and (I presume), we wish to make something good come of our discovery.

OK.  Let's pretend that we have an object (the rest of this post is a
layman's study, an abstract on how to extract (E) from (N):).

An object is really energy.  The typewriter upon which I tap these letters
is really just a big, complexly-ordered amalgum of energies.  My fingers
tapping the keys are just energies.  The apparent solidity of the keys (E)
and my fingers (E) are just the fields (G) repelling each other when they
get too close.  They are a complicated bunch of energies, and on the
macro-level, appear to be solid.  But they are not.  They are as ethereal
as the Auraurae Borealis.

(N), however, is a rigid solid, and it is within this solid that we live
and breathe and work and play, energies dancing a dance, tricked by
perspective into beleiving that WE are the solids, dancing a dance in some
sort of energy field, which we suppose the universe to be.  It is
illusion, and not seeing it causes us to imagine all sorts of madnesses,
and to not come to the truth for answers, because we are insistant upon
beleiving the error, beleiving what we "see".

The truth is, yes, our universe is a "black hole", or something
similar thereto.  I know that it is, because I know that (N) is a rigid
solid.  There is not anything else that (N) <em>could</em> be.

Part 7

Okay, back to the practical.

Objects vibrate.  If you tap a crystal glass, it rings, because it
vibrates.  If you play a tone at the proper frequency, the
resonant frequency, crystal shatters.  Shatters, because the crystal
retained the energy of the tone within its structure, more tone was added,
more energy retained, until so much energy was contained in the crystal
that the molecular bonds holding the crystal lattice in place were
shattered by the excess energy.

Objects vibrate.  If you vibrate an object at its resonant frequency, it
retains the energy of the vibrating instead of dissipating it as heat.  It
resonates.
Objects are energies in a stable relationship.  Causing an object to
resonate is a stable ordering of the energies.  Being orderly, the
energies do not dissipate in a chaotic mess (heat).  They vibrate with
greater synergy, greater balance.  In the case of crystal, the lattice is
an energy plateau which is already as balanced as it's going to get.  It
will shatter at some small imperfection in the crystal lattice:  All the
energy which accumulates with the resonating gets quickly dispelled at the
point of relative weakness in the crystalline structure.

Yes, I am leading somewhere with this.

Consider if you will, a real world (not idealized) metal cylinder.  It too
has a resonating frequency, a frequency at which it will hum in tune.
EVERY object has such a frequency.  Remember, objects ARE energy, ARE
waveforms.  But there is a reason to choose a metal cylinder as the object
of choice.
Vibrate an object at its waveform, or some multiple thereof,
and it will resonate: It will retain the energy fed into it through the
vibration of it INSTEAD of dissipating that energy as heat.  In a metal
cylinder, the weaknesses of the structure, the place where the energy WILL
dissipate (how difficult it must be to cause some macro (real-world)
object to resonate perfectly!) lie not in some imperfections in a crystal
lattice, but rather in the electron shells at the SURFACE of the cylinder.
And (supposing that the metal cylinder is not in-vacuo), those electrons
will cause static electricity or some other such phenomenon so as to
dissipate the energy of resonance.  Because the cylinder is not vibrating
perfectly.
In the real world, it is not easy to cause something to resonate with
perfect harmony.
The resonating itself is the dissipation of energy into the atmosphere,
or table, or whatever medium is in contact with the object in question.

However, supposing that one were to dare to TRY to raise the energy
of some object (in this case, by introducing energy at the frequency of
resonance, so as to be able to introduce more and more energy into the
object . . . Suppose one were to dare to TRY to do this . . .
(which, hopefully, some will, after realizing that I really am serious)

What would actually be, in REAL WORLD terms, REAL WORLD, where
(U)(N) = (G)(E)?

We don't know until we try, and I am chronically unemployed, so I can
ill-afford same at this present time.  But I challenge somebody, somewhere
(many people, in any place) to construct the following simple apparatus in
order to obtain (E) from (U) according to theory

I'm not a machinist, and I don't (yet) have a lab, and my mind is occupied
with things other than trying to build a free-energy device on a
disability pension, so, I am urging you to determine how best to build
this device.  But the physics are plain.

A hollow metal cylinder (O) is placed in a non-conducting chamber in such
a way that it is stably supported by the chamber.  "Solidly
attached to the chamber" is one method.  
Attached to metal cylinder (O) in such a way that (O) becomes its axis is
some other (metallic?) object.  A larger cylender, perhaps, or maybe a
sphere. It is not the specific shape of it that matters, but rather that
it is free to rotate on its axis.  It's axis, remember, is the hollow
metal cylinder (O).  Since it must be free to rotate on its axis, it
cannot be solidly attached to (O) if (O) is solidly attached to the
surrounding chamber.  If, on the other hand, (O) is supported by, but not
attached to, the chamber, then the larger object may be securely attached
to (O), thereby making (O) a freely-turning object supported (somehow; I'm
not the engineer) by the non-conductive chamber which surrounds it.

Into each end of hollow cylinder (O) is placed an electrode in such
fashion that the electrode does not at all touch (O), but rather sits just
inside the cylinder.

Then the box is made vacuous.

                     |   +dc
                     |
 --------------------|----------------------
 |                |  |  |                  |--->vac box
 |                |     |--> cyl. (O)      |
 |                |     |                  |
 |         -------|-- --|-------           |
 |        /                     \          |
 |       |                       |->rot.   |
 |       |                       |  obj.   |
 |       |                       |         |
 |       |                       |         |
 |       |                       |         |
 |        \                     /          |
 |         -------|-- --|-------           |
 |                |     |                  |
 |                |     |                  |
 |                |  |  |                  |
 --------------------|----------------------
                     |
                     |   -dc

A voltage is applies across the terminals.
Then the freely-rotating object is caused to resonate.
Every object has a frequency of resonance.  You can use
some rules of elementary physics to guess pretty close to the
actual value.  You can cause the object to vibrate by means of
a loudspeaker or such.  (Dammit Jim, I'm a theoretical physicist,
not an engineer)  When the magic value is reached, the freely-rotating
object WILL rotate, slightly. That's how you know you've found the
resonating frequency. Remember, the electrodes do not touch the rotating
object (or) the hollow cylinder (O) They simply sit --within the hollow
cylinder (O) -- in vacu.

Okay.  Now you remove the voltage, and induce resonance in the
object.  The object is in the vacuum of the box.  How to induce resonance?
I don't know, but you need a means to cause the object to rotate on its
axis.  An electric motor?  A belt system of some sort?  There are
reasons banks don't give people like me large sums of money.  But ask your
friend with an Engineering degree, they're creative enough to figure out
how.

Anyway, induce resonance, and cause the object to rotate.
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The resonating object, once a collection of loosely-knit atoms, is now
dancing to its own tune, more tightly knit than before;  the closer to
actual resonance (a theoretical limit at which object would resonate ad
infinitum), the more excited the object.  The more excited the object, the
closer it is to being some solid "thing", as contrasted to a bunch of
relaxed energies within the void;  When you cause the object to rotate,
the "solid" object touches on the solid (N), causing it to be a
focal-point for the like-resonating energies in (U).

Part 8
------

Object O (Energy) resonates in rigid solid (N). (N) is solid, pervades the
entire universe (U).  O, resonating, is no longer hollow, no longer a
chaotic mess of heat and disorder and loose chemical bonds.  O, as it hums
in tune with its own harmonic, becomes solid.  It is no longer a chaotic
mass ((E) in disarray).  It is a vibrant, orderly mass. (E).  At it's
resonant frequency, it is no longer a group of energies masquerading as a
solid. It actually IS solid.  When no more energy can be added to it, when
it can become no more orderly, when it has "maxed out" . . . then it
qualifies to be called something.  It is an (E) on the order of (N), which
is, as you recall, a rigid solid. (N) is the medium which conducts (G),
(G) being the fields of (E) in relation to (the rest of (E) (aka: (U)).
Any (E) has a field (G) which is propagated throughout (U) via (N). In
theoretical terms, (U) is a black hole, and so is a closed system to all
(E) within it. In real, our mini-universe (U) actually does communicate
something beyond itself. (U) is resonating at its own resonant frequency
(closed system), and is somewhat of a solid in its own right, inparting
its own (G), the indication of its state of order.  And object (O)
resonating in (N) actually increases the order (decreases the disorder) of
(U), thereby adding to the energy of (U).  (U)'s resonance becomes
stronger, (U) becomes more orderly.  As it becomes more orderly, more
information (G) is transmitted via (N). Because (N) is a rigid solid, and
our object (O) is becoming more rigid (approaching the rigidity limit of
what is absolutely solid), the field (G) propagated through (N) can and
will add to the order of (O). hereas (O) is already maxed-out with regards
to what energy (E) it is: ( (E)max = (N) = 0 ), object (O) will dissipate
the order wia the real-world imperfections it has in its own structure
(ie: microscopic scratches on the surface of the cylender, etc.)  This
'dissipation' is collected and distributed for the performance of work,
for the increasing of energy.  ( (E0) + (E1) > (E0) )

(O), which is approaching the status of a solid in the order of rigid, is
becoming a medium in its own right, a medium for the forces of energy.  It
matters not that those energies may be coming from halfway across the
universe:  (N) is a rigid solid, therefore the energy piped via (O) will
propagate back into (U) in a waveform sympathetic to the original
source, it matters not that the source may indeed be half-way across
the universe.  (N) is a rigid solid!  The resonance of the universe can
ONLY be increased via this method, order is brought into existance;
It is a win-win situation.  We get free energy via (O).  That free energy
is the result of the order which is added to (U) by the very fact that we
are "hijacking" the medium (N) and distributing the ordered energies of
the universe back unto themselves, causing (U) to resonate, to
energize, to tighten.  It's good for the parent (U), it's good for the
child (O).

Part 9
------
It's like getting free Satellite TV.  The signal is in the air already:
If you descramble the signal, you can distribute it to the entire
neighborhood. The entire neighborhood can watch pro-lady latina
wrestlers in unison.  Ad revenue increases.  DirecTV is robbing
themselves with their short-sightedness.  We are robbing ourselves of
pulque by allowing them to acheive their goals.  Are we not all bathed
in their satellite signals?  No sense letting them go to waste.
Support the Free Software Foundation: www.fsf.org
Voice your opinion about the World Intellectial Property Organization.

.sSweetMarie
anyway.