NOTEPAD for RANDOM IDEAS

A place to engage extended discussions of things that come up on the ttbrown.com website. Anything goes here, as long as it's somehow pertinent to the subject(s) at hand.

Re: Sound

Postby Mikado14 » Wed May 07, 2008 1:45 pm

htmagic wrote:
Mikado14 wrote:I will give one comment since you asked. The "positron" is the "anti" equivalent to the electron. I may be wrong but you or some else can Wiki but Dirac may be the one who established and discovered it. So how is that imaginary in AC circuits only? Doesn't DC operate with electrons? As to your -1 you may be referring to the j operator used in front of a phasor.


[color=blue][b]For the imaginary numbers, I'm talking about the complex numbers that deal with vector addition. The imaginary (complex) numbers, that are denoted with "i". i = SQRT. (-1). Some use the notation "j" but we were taught "i" originally. Try doing that on a calculator and watch it blow up. DOES NOT COMPUTE! In resonant circuits this can get very confusing...


Thanks but I was talking excactly what you are and was keeping it simple. The j operator is used rectangularly, as opposed to polar and can easily be transposed, and the polarity indicates capacitive or inductive. And as to resonant circuits, I find it works quite well for everyday tasks and it worked quite well with my Texas Instruments SR-10 recording the steps as you went along, but I suppose there was something else used that students and Engineers taught in the past 25 years or so fail to use at times. As to your "we" being taught "i" originally, 'fraid not, it was "j" when I was being taught so as not to be confused with the letter "i" for current. As to other complex numbers, Mr. Trickfox would be the one to comment.


htmagic wrote:Thanks for your post and I'd like to hear from others on this if they have any thoughts. Your book sounds interesting and I don't know how you can keep up with it and all these posts that are flying around. In less than 600 more posts, this forum will break 15,000 posts! :!:

MagicBill


If interested in the classics here you go: http://books.google.com/books?id=1n7Btz0FYvgC&dq=beau+geste&pg=PP1&ots=CGChAZmYcL&sig=mcs-Xd-XvuRdNzck7vbJVdEgTpA&hl=en&prev=http://www.google.com/search%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3Dbeau%2BGeste&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail#PPT1,M1

My next one will be Oliver Twist, I wish to reread it. After that perhaps, Jane Erye, haven't read that one since 10th grade, remember the woman.

Mikado

side note: speaking of toys, you need to get past the federation of state Public Interest Research Groups known as PIRG. Been there, done that.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy
Mikado14
Mr. Nice Guy
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: Somewhere in Pennsy

Re: Shauberger Tornadoes

Postby greggvizza » Wed May 07, 2008 1:57 pm

Griffin wrote:GV-

Of course, you'll note the Shauberger "tornadoes" -- right up your tornado alley.

Griffin


I totally agree. The invisible forces present in a tornado are equally present in a man made vortex device. From what I remember reading the Shauberger device even produced the equivalent of lightning. High static charges would build up and arc inside the device.

GV
greggvizza
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 3:01 pm

How'd He Do That?

Postby Paul S. » Wed May 07, 2008 3:35 pm

I know, magicians aren't supposed to reveal their secrets, but...

greggvizza wrote: That is because the sound wasn’t coming from the speaker. It was coming from the air molecules themselves which were being vibrated by modulated gravity. So the sound just comes out of the air wherever air is, which is all around you.


Now, THAT has got to be one of the more intriguing things I've read around here for a while.

Gregg, I realize it may all be rather technical and scientific, but.... can you elaborate on that theory?

I mean, how well do you understand the construction of the electrokinetic loudspeaker. I think I gathered from another post I just read that it's something you've give a fair deal of thought to?

So, can you trace the inner workings? I mean, how do we get from a variation on the ionic breeze thing -- which is what the loudspeaker is/was, after all -- to this very intriguing effect you describe, where the sound is modulated "by gravity" and so emerges from the air wherever you are standing...??

It seems like an essentially important principle, one worthy of elaboration/discussion. Care to delve a little deeper?

--PS
Paul Schatzkin
aka "The Perfesser"
"At some point we have to deal with the facts, not what we want to believe is true." -- Jack Bauer
Paul S.
Sr. Rabbit Chaser
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:11 pm
Location: Psych Ward

SPeakers????

Postby JZimmer » Wed May 07, 2008 3:54 pm

Guess I am missing something, I thought the electrostatic speaker systems out today were an offshoot from Dr. Browns "basic" speaker design?
JZimmer
Deputy SysAdmin
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:46 pm
Location: Rocky Mount, Mo. (Lake of the Ozarks)

Electrostatic =/= Electrokinetic

Postby Paul S. » Wed May 07, 2008 4:01 pm

No Jim, I think I made that same mistake somewhere along the line.

Granted, I'm not entirely certain how electrostatic speakers work, but I'm pretty sure Dr. Brown's design -- which I have been calling "electrokinetic" -- is something entirely different.

I'd like to hear what others have to say on the subject, though.

--PS
Paul Schatzkin
aka "The Perfesser"
"At some point we have to deal with the facts, not what we want to believe is true." -- Jack Bauer
Paul S.
Sr. Rabbit Chaser
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:11 pm
Location: Psych Ward

something else entirely

Postby Mark Culpepper » Wed May 07, 2008 4:46 pm

Paul and Gregg and everybody reading this,

I think that you might have caught on to something here that most have missed. AND I'll bet the main reason Morgan had a future with Dr. Brown was that he somehow ( through intuition or sheer mental capacity) saw what the fan/loudspeaker that was shown to him at Ashlawn REALLY was.

Apparently the people at Ionic Breeze never figured it out for what ever reason because they said that they explored the possibilities of the loudspeaker end of things but didn't for some reason pursue development. I really have wondered why after all of these years.... why someone did not change those things to loudspeakers too?

Andrew? Didn't you say once that you had done that with a commercial Ionic Breeze. So doing it is possible?

Here is a situation where I don't believe the people were ready for the bubble. Until now ... and in this company. The fact that we are discussing this now just blows my socks off. MarkC
Mark Culpepper
The Dean
 
Posts: 655
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 6:02 am

TTB Speaker

Postby greggvizza » Wed May 07, 2008 5:00 pm

Electrostatic speakers are not much different than conventional loudspeakers in the fact they still use a diaphragm to push air. They are still a piston basically. The TTB speaker does not use a diaphragm.

I will give you my take on how the TTB speaker works:

If you have an electric fan you basically have a loudspeaker. What is sound but moving air. Since the TTB fan has no blades or impellors the direction of air flow can be instantly reversed with no inertial lag. If the direction of airflow is changed back and forth (from forward to reverse) fast enough, it no longer is air flow but now becomes vibrating air, which is sound. So instead of powering the TTB fan with DC voltage, you power it with AC, not 60 cycle AC, not even sinusoidal AC, but complex audio waveform AC from an audio amplifier.

GV
Last edited by greggvizza on Wed May 07, 2008 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
greggvizza
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 3:01 pm

Electrogravitics (kinetic) vs Electrostatic (Electric)

Postby FM No Static At All » Wed May 07, 2008 5:04 pm

Wiki wrote:
Description

The research, based upon Thomas Townsend Brown's hypotheses, included the idea that electrogravitics could be used as a means of propulsion for aircraft and spacecraft. The field became popular in the mid-1950s, but rapidly declined in popularity thereafter. At one point, the Glenn L. Martin Company placed advertisements looking for scientists who were "interested in gravity". Electrogravitic processes use an electric field to charge an object and counteract the effects of gravity. Electrostatic levitation was used, for instance, in Robert Millikan's oil drop experiment and is used to suspend the gyroscopes in Gravity Probe B during launch. Due to Earnshaw's theorem, no static arrangement of classical electrostatic fields can be used to stably levitate an object. There is a point where the two fields cancel, but it is unstable. However, it is possible to use dynamically changing electric fields to hold an object in position. On the moon the photoelectric effect charges fine layers of dust on the surface forming an atmosphere of dust floating in "fountains" over the surface of the moon.

The Biefeld–Brown effect, discovered by Thomas Townsend Brown (USA) and Dr. Paul Alfred Biefeld (CH), was researched during the 1950's and 1960's on the use of this electric propulsion effect during the publicized era of gravity control propulsion research. During 1964, Major De Seversky had in fact published a lot of his related work in U.S. Patent 3,130,945 , and with the aim to forestall any possible misunderstanding about these devices, had termed these flying machines as ionocrafts. In the following years, many promising concepts had to be abandoned and forgotten due to the technological limitations as well as those pesky laws of physics, but at the same time, science has advanced a lot in the EHD field. The effect has only recently become popular again and such flying devices are now known as EHD thrusters. Simple single-stage versions lifted by this effect are sometimes also called lifters.

Some, such as Byron Preiss, considered electrogravitics development to be "much ado about nothing, started by a bunch of engineers who didn't know enough physics" (which is a negative historical revision). Priess states that electrogravitics, like exobiology, is "a science without a single specimen for study" in his opinion.[2] This ignores ionocraft devices, commonly known as a lifters, and their development. These electrohydrodynamic devices produce thrust in the air using electrical energy without moving parts. Paul LaViolette continues to champion and publish Brown's hypotheses and ideas derived from them.

Emphasis added by me. Dr. Brown's work in electrogravitics is different than electrostatic lifters.
I am not sure it was air that was being "moved" as aether theory indicates that gravity is an effect of the cubic lattice pushing against particles to restrict their motion within the structure of that aether providing equilibrium.
Dr. Harold Aspden describes in his papers the structure of that cubic lattice which is in harmony with those that speak of tetrahedral dynamics (Richard Hoagland et. al.) and the Golden Rule/Sacred Geometry of many others.
Wiki wrote:Electrostatics is the branch of science that deals with the phenomena arising from what seems to be stationary electric charges. Since ancient history it is known that some materials attract light particles after rubbing. The greek word for amber, ήλεκτρον (electron), gave name for many areas of natural science. Electrostatic phenomena arise from the forces that electric charges carry out on each other. Such forces are described by Coulomb's law. Electrostatic phenomena include such as simple as the attraction of plastic wrap to your hand after you remove it from a package to apparently spontaneous explosion of grain silos, to damage of electronic components during manufacturing, to the operation of photocopiers. Electrostatics involves the buildup of charge on the surface of objects due to contact with other surfaces. Although charge exchange happens whenever any two surfaces contact and separate, the effects of charge exchange are usually only noticed when at least one of the surfaces has a high resistance to electrical flow. This is because the charges that transfer to or from the highly resistive surface are more or less trapped there for a long enough time for their effects to be observed. These charges then remain on the object until they either bleed off to ground or are quickly neutralized by a discharge: e.g., the familiar phenomenon of a static 'shock' is caused by the neutralization of charge built up in the body from contact with nonconductive surfaces.


Again, I take exception the idea that charge can be stationary. Perhaps only in "relative" terms, based on the assumption that there is no flow of electric charge until on completes (closes) a circuit by which that charge has a path in which to flow.

But if that is the case (which I am certain it is NOT) then we have no hope of tapping that aether for the purpose of providing energy without fuels.

Fred
FM No Static At All
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 558
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: TTB Speaker

Postby Paul S. » Wed May 07, 2008 5:20 pm

greggvizza wrote:If you have an electric fan you basically have a loudspeaker. What is sound but moving air. Since the TTB fan has no blades or impellors the direction of air flow can be instantly reversed with no inertial lag. If the direction of airflow is changed back and forth (from forward to reverse) fast enough, it no longer is air flow but now becomes vibrating air, which is sound. So instead of powering the TTB fan with DC voltage, you power it with AC, not 60 cycle AC, not even sinusoidal AC, but complex audio waveform AC from an audio amplifier.


That's a good start, Gregg, but can you now tie what you've said here into what you said earlier:

That is because the sound wasn’t coming from the speaker. It was coming from the air molecules themselves which were being vibrated by modulated gravity. So the sound just comes out of the air wherever air is, which is all around you.


I'm still trying to understand how you get from "modulated air" (which I think I can understand) to "modulated gravity" (which almost sounds like that magician's trick that can't be explained).

Can you make that connection for me?

--PS
Paul Schatzkin
aka "The Perfesser"
"At some point we have to deal with the facts, not what we want to believe is true." -- Jack Bauer
Paul S.
Sr. Rabbit Chaser
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:11 pm
Location: Psych Ward

Gravity Modulation

Postby greggvizza » Wed May 07, 2008 5:25 pm

How is the air being modulated by the TTB fan? Isn't it using gravity to push the air?

If gravity is modulated, wouldn't all matter in the vicinity feel those vibrations?

GV
greggvizza
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 3:01 pm

instantly off

Postby Linda Brown » Wed May 07, 2008 5:30 pm

I could be wrong, but I wanted to correct the thought that the air flow is " reversed". It was always my understanding that the fan had the ability to turn on and off instantly. Creating a pulse . Which could then be modulated. Ask Andrew for the specifics. I believe that he can help, having already done it. Linda
Last edited by Linda Brown on Wed May 07, 2008 5:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Linda Brown
Resident Mystic
 
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:16 pm

Re: Gravity Modulation

Postby Paul S. » Wed May 07, 2008 5:32 pm

greggvizza wrote:How is the air being modulated by the TTB fan? Isn't it using gravity to push the air?


I dunno, is it?

That is precisely the assumption that seems to be taken for granted around here, I'm looking for some cause-and-effect explanation.

Granted, not even Edward Teller understood what makes it work, so hey, maybe it is gravity. I just want to see/hear how the connection is made.

In precise technical terms, if somebody can offer them.

--PS
Paul Schatzkin
aka "The Perfesser"
"At some point we have to deal with the facts, not what we want to believe is true." -- Jack Bauer
Paul S.
Sr. Rabbit Chaser
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:11 pm
Location: Psych Ward

both ways

Postby James Barrett » Wed May 07, 2008 5:33 pm

And while you are considering this I would remember that what can be " sent" as a speaker .... can also be "picked up" as a microphone.

And on that thought, before you guys get too roaringly technical I should probably mention that some of this discussion should possibly be in PMs. I love this forum with a passion but everyone out here knows that it has some very big ears. James
James Barrett
Junior Birdman
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 6:13 pm
Location: Hawaii

Re: instantly off

Postby greggvizza » Wed May 07, 2008 5:45 pm

Linda Brown wrote:I could be wrong, but I wanted to correct the thought that the air flow is " reversed". It was always my understanding that the fan had the ability to turn on and off instantantly. Creating a pulse . Which could then be modulated. Ask Andrew for the specifics. I believe that he can help, having already done it. Linda


Pulses sound distorted and raspy. It is definitely possible to clip the bottom off of the audio waveform and deliver it to the fan so that it operates all in one direction but it would not be hi fidelity. Maybe just biasing the entire audio signal until it no longer swings below zero would do it. Not sure, but this is the same basic concept as forward and reverse. Just that we are going to stop at zero instead of continuing on to negative. Instead of reversing, it is just going from “off” to various levels of “on” and modulating things all in one direction.

What happens when you hook up the TTB fan in reverse?

GV
greggvizza
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 3:01 pm

Re: Gravity Modulation

Postby greggvizza » Wed May 07, 2008 6:16 pm

Paul S. wrote:
greggvizza wrote:How is the air being modulated by the TTB fan? Isn't it using gravity to push the air?


I dunno, is it?

That is precisely the assumption that seems to be taken for granted around here, I'm looking for some cause-and-effect explanation.

Granted, not even Edward Teller understood what makes it work, so hey, maybe it is gravity. I just want to see/hear how the connection is made.

In precise technical terms, if somebody can offer them.

--PS


Did I sound like I knew what I was talking about? If I did, I apologize.

I’m with Edward Teller, I don’t know the principal by which it works. I have to figure that if a physicist of that stature didn’t understand it, then it wasn’t ion wind or any other standard electrical principle. Gravity is all that comes to mind or electrokinetics or whatever term you want to apply. That seemed to be Dr. Browns area of expertise.

GV
greggvizza
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 3:01 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 5 guests

cron