+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 35 of 35

Thread: Musings about Physics

  1. Link to Post #21
    Madagascar Avalon Member silvanelf's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th May 2019
    Age
    59
    Posts
    143
    Thanks
    1,472
    Thanked 406 times in 119 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics



    Some food for thought:

    conspiracy of light

    Quote This website examines historical and modern experiments on the nature of space and light, and possible new interpretations based on an alternative approach to the scientific evidence at hand. Fred Hoyle once said "anytime you point a new telescope at the sky now you are only going to find what you already know is up there." Has modern physics become complacent? New science is where the real opportunities lie, so we're focusing on the holes in physics theory instead.
    • Paradoxes
    • Historical Papers
    • Theory
    • Experiments
    • Cosmology

  2. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to silvanelf For This Post:

    Baby Steps (5th June 2019), Bill Ryan (7th September 2019), Jad (5th June 2019), Jayke (5th June 2019), rogparan (7th September 2019), Star Tsar (5th June 2019), william r sanford72 (6th June 2019)

  3. Link to Post #22
    Canada Avalon Member Fellow Aspirant's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th July 2011
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario
    Age
    69
    Posts
    1,030
    Thanks
    5,973
    Thanked 5,190 times in 929 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    Thanks for starting this thread, silvanelf. It is a very rich area for investigation, and fits perfectly with the aims of this forum.

    Brian
    A human being is a part of the whole, called by us "Universe," a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest—a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness.

    Albert E.

  4. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Fellow Aspirant For This Post:

    Baby Steps (8th June 2019), Bill Ryan (7th September 2019), Jad (5th June 2019), Jayke (5th June 2019), silvanelf (5th June 2019)

  5. Link to Post #23
    Madagascar Avalon Member silvanelf's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th May 2019
    Age
    59
    Posts
    143
    Thanks
    1,472
    Thanked 406 times in 119 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    Faraday homopolar generator -- also known as unipolar generator

    It's not a free energy device, but there seems to be a clue towards free energy.




    Quote A homopolar generator is a DC electrical generator comprising an electrically conductive disc or cylinder rotating in a plane perpendicular to a uniform static magnetic field. A potential difference is created between the center of the disc and the rim (or ends of the cylinder) with an electrical polarity that depends on the direction of rotation and the orientation of the field. It is also known as a unipolar generator, acyclic generator, disk dynamo, or Faraday disc. The voltage is typically low, on the order of a few volts in the case of small demonstration models, but large research generators can produce hundreds of volts, and some systems have multiple generators in series to produce an even larger voltage. They are unusual in that they can source tremendous electric current, some more than a million amperes, because the homopolar generator can be made to have very low internal resistance. Also, the homopolar generator is unique in that no other rotary electric machine can produce DC without using rectifiers or commutators.

    -- snip --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homopolar_generator


    Quote We know of no other place in physics where such a simple and accurate general principle requires for its real understanding an analysis in terms of two different phenomena. Usually such a beautiful generalization is found to stem from a single deep underlying principle. Nevertheless, in this case there does not appear to be any such profound implication. We have to understand the “rule” as the combined effects of two quite separate phenomena.
    http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_17.html

    see also: Reading Feynman


    Quote Its because one of the postulates of special relativity, that the laws of physics are not necessarily the same between non-inertial frames of reference. A rotating frame such as that of the magnet or the circular disk is not an inertial frame. When we do the experiment you describe in the OP, supplying current to the disc and watching the magnet rotating, an observer in the rotating frame of the magnet will see the disc rotating and hence he will measure voltage on the disc and everything will be fine. But an observer on the frame of the stationary disc will measure no induced voltage. Different non inertial frame of references, different results, absoletuly normal for SR.
    Reference https://www.physicsforums.com/thread....805357/page-2


    Quote Nikola Tesla, The Electrical Engineer, N.Y., Sept. 2, 1891.

    It is characteristic of fundamental discoveries, of great achievements of intellect, that they retain an undiminished power upon the imagination of the thinker. The memorable experiment of Faraday with a disc rotating between the two poles of a magnet, which has borne such magnificent fruit, has long passed into every-day experience; yet there are certain features about this embryo of the present dynamos and motors which even to-day appear to us striking, and are worthy of the most careful study.
    http://www.andrijar.com/teslahom/index.html


    Quote William J. Beaty: Untried Homopolar Generator Experiments

    In 1992-94 I messed around with homopolar generators, ("HPGs" or "N-machines",) tried a simple test, and drew some GIFs of possible devices. Check out the above links for these diagrams.

    Quote Bruce E. DePalma, free energy researcher"Tewari has investigated the co-rotating Faraday homopolar motor. He calls it the Space Power Motor or SPM. The increased torque available when rotating is mitigated by a "slippage" which increases with rotational speed. Over a certain speed range the product of the two effects can result in a superior machine."
    -- De Palma
    see: Tewari homepage

  6. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to silvanelf For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th September 2019), Intranuclear (6th June 2019), Jad (6th June 2019), Jayke (6th June 2019), rogparan (7th September 2019), william r sanford72 (6th June 2019)

  7. Link to Post #24
    Madagascar Avalon Member silvanelf's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th May 2019
    Age
    59
    Posts
    143
    Thanks
    1,472
    Thanked 406 times in 119 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    Stefan Marinov

    Quote Stefan Marinov was a Bulgarian physicist, researcher, writer and lecturer who promoted anti-relativistic theoretical viewpoints, and later in his life defended the ideas of perpetual motion and free energy. He committed suicide in Graz, Austria on July 15, 1997.
    more at link, including a list of articles written by S. Marinov;
    https://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/i...Stefan_Marinov

    About his alleged suicide:
    Quote On July 15, 1997, Marinov fell to his death from a staircase at a library at the University of Graz. He was 66 years old and was survived by his son Marin Marinov, who at the time was a vice-Minister of Industry of Bulgaria.

    Word has been received of the tragic, apparent suicide of new energy researcher, Stefan Marinov. The police explanation is that Dr. Stefan Marinov killed himself, on July 15, 1997, jumping from the University of Graz (Austria) Library building (Bibliotheque).
    https://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/i...Stefan_Marinov


    Siberian Coliu -- a free energy device?





    There are some disagreements about the Siberian Coliu device:

    Quote In 1997 in the last issue 21 of Deutsche Physik, Marinov self-published experimental results that disprove that the Siberian Coliu, constructed by Marinov himself, is a perpetual motion machine, and where Marinov concluded that Ampere's law in electromagnetism is correct.
    http://everything.explained.today/Stefan_Marinov/

    Quote Demonstration of the Marinov Motor Principle

    Robert B. Driscoll

    Working models of the Marinov motor have been built and run by others. (1-3) This model will demonstrate, in this session, the motors principle.

    -- snip --

    (1) R. Angulo, O. Rodriquez, and G. Spavieri. Hadronic Journal 20 (1997) 621.
    (2) T. E. Phipps, Jr. Apeiron 5 (1998) 193, 209.
    (3) J. P. Wesley, Apeiron 5 (1998) 219.
    https://www.researchgate.net/publica...otor_Principle

  8. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to silvanelf For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th September 2019), Jayke (15th June 2019), rogparan (7th September 2019), william r sanford72 (15th June 2019)

  9. Link to Post #25
    Madagascar Avalon Member silvanelf's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th May 2019
    Age
    59
    Posts
    143
    Thanks
    1,472
    Thanked 406 times in 119 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    Angular Momentum of Light -- Beth's experiment (1936)

    A famous experiment, which was nearly ignored for a long time ...

    Quote Mechanical Detection and Measurement of the Angular Momentum of Light
    Richard A. Beth
    Phys. Rev. 50, 115 – Published 15 July 1936

    The electromagnetic theory of the torque exerted by a beam of polarized light on a doubly refracting plate which alters its state of polarization is summarized. The same quantitative result is obtained by assigning an angular momentum of ℏ (−ℏ) to each quantum of left (right) circularly polarized light in a vacuum, and assuming the conservation of angular momentum holds at the face of the plate.

    -- snip --
    Abstract: https://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract...PhysRev.50.115
    Full paper (pdf): http://www.df.uba.ar/users/schmiegel...Rev.50.115.pdf


    An explanation of the experiment -- emphasis mine:

    Quote Does somebody understand the Beth experiment?

    -- snip --

    The description that you quote is correct. It is important to note that the quartz plate used in the original experiment is birefringent.
    More recent related work (from the Leiden quantum optics group) can be found in
    http://spie.org/Publications/Proceed...1117/12.584515
    or using microwaves:
    https://hal.inria.fr/docs/00/77/64/94/PDF/AES_Final.pdf

    The purpose of the experiment is to show that light contains spin angular momentum. If light indeed carries angular momentum it should be possible to transfer this to matter, which results in a torque. The transfer of angular momentum is done by the birefringent plate, because the polarization of the incoming and outgoing light is different. This difference corresponds to a change in the spin angular momentum of the photons. The change in angular momentum should generate a torque on the birefringent plate that could, in principle, be measured using a torsion balance.

    In practice this is very difficult to measure because you need to measure a small rotation of the birefringent plate. This is hard because you will need a very high sensitivity of the setup even if you have access to large optical powers. There are several systematic errors you need to deal with before drawing conclusions from the experiment.

    -- snip --
    https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do...eth_experiment


    Quote Measuring the Angular Momentum of Light

    What does the paper describe? The paper reports on a series of experiments looking for angular momentum in light. Angular momentum, as the name suggests, is related to the rotational motion of objects, and circularly polarized light is predicted to have angular momentum. The experiments in the paper looked for, and found, evidence of this angular momentum by measuring the twisting of a quartz plate when circularly polarized light was sent through it. The apparatus is shown at right.

    Back up a minute-- circular polarization? Yeah, circular polarization. Normally, when people talk about the polarization, they refer to the direction of the electric field associated with the classical light wave. The electric field oscillates up and down along some direction, changing its magnitude all the time.

    There's another way to make polarized light, though, which is to keep the magnitude of the electric field constant, and make the direction change all the time. In this case, the electric field starts out pointing up (say), then some time later points to the left, then down, then to the right, then up again. It completes one full revolution in the same time that it takes the light wave to complete an oscillation. There are two different circular polarization states, corresponding to the two different directions of rotation.

    And this is real? Absolutely. You can make circularly polarized light using properly cut calcite, or a variety of other materials. It's even got technological applications-- some 3-d projection systems use circular polarizers as the lenses of the glasses, because they look less dorky than colored filters, and don't require you to hold your head at a particualr angle to get the 3-d effect.
    https://scienceblogs.com/principles/...gular-momentum

  10. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to silvanelf For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th September 2019), Jayke (15th June 2019), rogparan (7th September 2019), william r sanford72 (15th June 2019)

  11. Link to Post #26
    UK Avalon Member
    Join Date
    20th February 2011
    Location
    Manchester
    Age
    35
    Posts
    975
    Thanks
    7,394
    Thanked 5,381 times in 899 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    Primer fields by David Lapoint. Very significant experiments showing how bowl magnets modelled on a dome at CERN create fascinating plasma structures that look very similar to galactic star formations.

    Quote In this video series the currently accepted theories of physics and astrophysics are shaken to the core by a radical new theory of the fundamental forces in all matter.

    You will be amazed as a magnetic model of the dome at CERN is used to create a 100 mm diameter plasma Sun with a 300 mm diameter equatorial disc of plasma around it!

    All the plasma videos are actual footage with no enhancement or manipulation other than speed. In other words, this is real thing. Hard to believe, but it is all true.

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jayke For This Post:

    Baby Steps (28th August 2019), Bill Ryan (7th September 2019), rogparan (7th September 2019)

  13. Link to Post #27
    Madagascar Avalon Member silvanelf's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th May 2019
    Age
    59
    Posts
    143
    Thanks
    1,472
    Thanked 406 times in 119 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    Why the multiverse is religion, not science

    Quote @ 00:30
    You can postulate the existence of things that are not useful to describe observations, such as gods, but this is no longer science. Universes besides our own are logically equivalent to gods. They are unobservable by assumption, therefore they can exist only in a religious sense. You can believe in them if you want to, but they are not part of science.

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to silvanelf For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th September 2019), rogparan (7th September 2019), Satori (7th September 2019)

  15. Link to Post #28
    United States Avalon Guide: Here to help
     
    Ron Mauer Sr's Avatar
    Join Date
    5th January 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Age
    77
    Posts
    1,921
    Thanks
    12,564
    Thanked 15,041 times in 1,858 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    Perhaps magic is simply misunderstood science.

  16. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Ron Mauer Sr For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th September 2019), gs_powered (10th September 2019), rogparan (7th September 2019), Sammy (29th August 2019), T Smith (29th August 2019)

  17. Link to Post #29
    United States Avalon Member Sammy's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th December 2011
    Location
    a lovely park bench
    Age
    62
    Posts
    5,175
    Thanks
    29,630
    Thanked 26,137 times in 4,825 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    Quote Posted by Ron Mauer Sr (here)
    Perhaps magic is simply misunderstood science.
    Or yet to be understood science. [if ever it can be scientifically understood]

    Magic is very real in my life. Magic expresses itself in my life constantly. It also does so for my wife. And when we are both together and in the "magic zone," the manifestations of magic are prolific and profound.

    Much of what is considered settled science today began as theories, yet it seems possible that consciousness has primacy and that consciousness may be immeasurable. If immeasurable, how can science ever explain it as long as science is required to use measurement (math) for everything it has to explain.

    Currently, there are few scientists that share the metaphysical, cosmological world view of idealism. One who does is Bernardo Kastrup. Some might be interested in his works. His Site

    It might appear my post is disconnected but I am attempting to state things with more than just words... in the spaces between the words.

    Those who experience magic to the degree a few of us here do, don't need to know what "the science" is behind it (if it can ever be known) to validate these experiences. I say that from experience as to the complexity of conditions (constantly fluid) that seem to be required in place for magic to arise. The world view of idealism may be required just to open one's mind to magic. I am content that consciousness may never be measurable. What's fascinating is living an ever expanding life whereby one becomes intimate with the conditions of which magic arises and then learns how, more and more, to bring forth these conditions.

    Example, my wife and I have just recently experienced three dramatic events. Cristina (my wife) likes to play with a Tarot deck. Just three days ago, she told me how she had picked Card 13 (Death) three times in a row over the course of the last three days. She shared with me her interpretation that this card suggested to her she was experiencing significant transformational opportunities. I shared her interpretation in conversation with her. I then felt compelled to grab the phone and say into the Google Voice, pick a number between 0 and 71 (Tarot has 72 cards that starts with the number 0). 13 was the result.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	2019-08-25 - 13 selected randomly.png
Views:	19
Size:	75.0 KB
ID:	41457

    Then today is our 17th wedding anniversary. Before Cristina awoke, I ran to the Florist shop. I hand wrote the little card as follows...

    Click image for larger version

Name:	17 Year Anniversary.gif
Views:	19
Size:	96.0 KB
ID:	41458

    Soon after I arrived, Cristina awoke. After a few great hugs and kisses inspired by the flowers and our celebration, we sat together and reminisced and while sitting there I grabbed my favorite "cards" (The Crop Circle Cards) and after my normal five cuts, drew out a card and sure enough it was...

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Card 17 - Grace.jpg
Views:	19
Size:	53.8 KB
ID:	41459

    This is just the experience of magic Cristina and I share with one type of divination device, cards. The fuller experience often emulates a constant conversation with all the reality as it arises. Keys to experience a magical life appear to be 1.) a love for meaningful life 2.) Living a life where symbols of archetypal representations become a code system for reading the reality as it arises 3.) an openness that "things can and do arise" which correspond with your inner journey/inner dialogue in the present moment 4.) that you allow yourself to experience waves of enthusiasm as to this form of experience.

    Note: I don't participate in intentional magic (casting). I don't because I don't trust my judgement that what I might think is best for another is actually indeed the best for that other. I prefer to allow the Universe to do that sort of job (if it so does).

    ...and oh, I am not retired... at least not fully.
    Last edited by Sammy; 8th September 2019 at 17:54.
    All the above is all and only my opinion - all subject to change and not meant to be true for anyone else regardless of how I phrase it.

  18. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Sammy For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th September 2019), edina (30th August 2019), rogparan (7th September 2019), Satori (7th September 2019)

  19. Link to Post #30
    United States Avalon Member Sammy's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th December 2011
    Location
    a lovely park bench
    Age
    62
    Posts
    5,175
    Thanks
    29,630
    Thanked 26,137 times in 4,825 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    I once posted this over at Flatlandia... perhaps this may be appreciated here as well.

    All the above is all and only my opinion - all subject to change and not meant to be true for anyone else regardless of how I phrase it.

  20. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Sammy For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (7th September 2019), Ernie Nemeth (7th September 2019), rogparan (7th September 2019)

  21. Link to Post #31
    Brazil Avalon Member rogparan's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th June 2019
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro
    Posts
    221
    Thanks
    963
    Thanked 984 times in 197 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    I posted this comment in another thread, but maybe here can be more appropriated

    ---

    briefly, a great scientific area was improperly divided into three, as follows -- Gravity, Magnetism and Electricity. They should have been studied as a single scientific area.

    Then, a ironic example, even today, no one knows how electricity really works (not kidding). The symbology of electric flux are represented unlike (from + to -), albeit are knowed it works like to Ground (-) pole to Potencial (+) pole (by electrons moves)

    The little irony is -- nobody knows how or why the Ground pole really works -- but even so, we can produce, conduct and consume electricity, working with devices on Positive side of the "scientific equation".

    The great irony is -- The scientific equations are " Polarized " -- Why ? for What ?
    here I am, but I don't belong to this world
    So, nothing there are here belongs to me.

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to rogparan For This Post:

    Sammy (8th September 2019)

  23. Link to Post #32
    United States Avalon Member Sammy's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th December 2011
    Location
    a lovely park bench
    Age
    62
    Posts
    5,175
    Thanks
    29,630
    Thanked 26,137 times in 4,825 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    Perhaps the answer you seek could be pointed to in this 38:00 minute video -



    I would love to hear Sabine's response to the premise of this video.

    Here's an interesting quote Donald Hoffman posted around 18:30 -

    Quote Spacetime is doomed. There is no such thing as spacetime fundamentally in the actual underlying description of the laws of physics. That's very startling, because what physics is supposed to be about is describing things as they happen in space and time. So if there's no spacetime, it's not clear what physics is about."
    Nima Arkani-Hamed
    All the above is all and only my opinion - all subject to change and not meant to be true for anyone else regardless of how I phrase it.

  24. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Sammy For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (8th September 2019), rogparan (17th September 2019), silvanelf (9th September 2019)

  25. Link to Post #33
    Madagascar Avalon Member silvanelf's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th May 2019
    Age
    59
    Posts
    143
    Thanks
    1,472
    Thanked 406 times in 119 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    Quote Posted by Sammy (here)
    Here's an interesting quote Donald Hoffman posted around 18:30 -

    Quote Spacetime is doomed. There is no such thing as spacetime fundamentally in the actual underlying description of the laws of physics. That's very startling, because what physics is supposed to be about is describing things as they happen in space and time. So if there's no spacetime, it's not clear what physics is about."
    Nima Arkani-Hamed
    Nima Arkani-Hamed works mainly in the fields of quantum field theory and string theory -- just take a look at the list of 'selected works'. This means that ""spacetime is doomed" under the assumption that his favorite theory is correct. But Donald Hoffman ignores the context, he presents Arkani-Hamed's view as a fact, not just a speculative idea.

    Quote A user comment on reddit:
    After watching many lectures, especially by Nima, I am getting the just that spacetime is basically an approximation or emergent phenomenon from something more fundamental. Nima has even said that he thinks there might be a more fundamental theory that gives rise to quantum mechanics and relativity.
    ...
    Reply from another user:
    First of all, what Nima is talking about is essentially hopeful speculation and a potential research program. Not truth.

    However, he appears to be excited that it appears, at least in his toy field theory, that a simple "geometric" object (in the sense of mathematics, not physical geometry) can be used to develop the same predictions as string theory/QFT without the assumptions of spacetime structure that they usually involve.

    The basic hope then would be that you can describe all the interactions in string theory or QFT using a more abstract mathematical object. And, finally, if that includes the parts of string theory that describe gravity, all the behavior of spacetime would be a result of the same kind of abstract mathematics.
    https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics/com...kanihamed_and/


    Donald Hoffman says, after quoting Einstein: "We create objects on the fly, they are not symbols of truth, ..." But @16;07 he turned Einstein's statement into its opposite -- Einstein lampooned, “Is the moon only there when we look at it?”

    Quote Here is the actual quote from the paper by Pais:

    “We often discussed his notions on objective reality. I recall that during one walk Einstein suddenly stopped, turned to me and asked whether I really believed that the moon exists only when I look at it.” Rev. Mod. Phys. 51, 863–914 (1979), p. 907

    In asking the question, Einstein was challenging the dominant view that quantum mechanical systems lack definite objective properties (e.g., position), independent of observation. He used the moon to emphasize the apparently absurd consequences of this view. Erwin Schrödinger's famous cat paradox makes the same point.
    https://www.quora.com/What-did-Einst...you-look-at-it

  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to silvanelf For This Post:

    rogparan (17th September 2019), Sammy (10th September 2019)

  27. Link to Post #34
    Madagascar Avalon Member silvanelf's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th May 2019
    Age
    59
    Posts
    143
    Thanks
    1,472
    Thanked 406 times in 119 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    Quote Posted by Sammy (here)


    I would love to hear Sabine's response to the premise of this video.
    I don't know Sabine Hossenfelder's opinion, but I'm sure nearly all physicists would agree with this:

    Quote First, let's clarify the physics details.

    The article says all observation, all science, all attempts at objectivity is belied by a major flaw: “Physics tells us that there are no public objects.”

    No, it doesn’t.

    Public objects is a made-up term, not a physics one if you're wondering; implying that we all essentially live in our own private universe with our own private objects -- that is, you and I cannot perceive the same 'public' object. If you assume objects are 'public' -- that is, if you assume you and I can both perceive the same thing -- we will fail. He says that this dramatic personally-exclusive reality is implied by physics.

    Classical physics describes 'public objects' all the time with great precision. You and I can both use our own telescopes, even be on different sides of the planet, observe the same comet, and use gravity equations to know where it will go next and when. We will observe the same thing, arrive at the same prediction.

    The more modern physics of enormous objects ('theory of relativity') can successfully describe momentums, energies, velocities, and masses from any vantage point you pick in a system. Yes, counter to our initially-limited intuition, if one vantage point is travelling close to the speed of light, it will observe different masses, velocities, and even passages of time. But, all these vantage points within this system are consistent with each other.

    In fact, using the theory, you can pick any vantage point ("observer"), and then proceed to describe the rest of the public objects.

    Successfully, even.
    https://www.psychologyinaction.org/p...se-for-reality

  28. The Following User Says Thank You to silvanelf For This Post:

    rogparan (17th September 2019)

  29. Link to Post #35
    Madagascar Avalon Member silvanelf's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th May 2019
    Age
    59
    Posts
    143
    Thanks
    1,472
    Thanked 406 times in 119 posts

    Default Re: Musings about Physics

    Unconventional research in USSR and Russia (part I)

    Summary: Unconventional research embraces physics, artificial intelligence and the paranormal.

    Quote Arkadiusz Jadczyk
    Sott.net
    Sun, 22 Dec 2013 03:24 UTC

    The title of this article comes from a recent paper by Serge Kernbach:

    'Unconventional research in USSR and Russia: short overview', Serge Kernbach (Submitted on 4 Dec 2013 (v1), last revised 5 Dec 2013 (this version, v2))
    This work briefly surveys unconventional research in Russia from the end of the 19th until the beginning of the 21th centuries in areas related to generation and detection of a 'high-penetrating' emission of non-biological origin. The overview is based on open scientific and journalistic materials. The unique character of this research and its history, originating from governmental programs of the USSR, is shown. Relations to modern studies on biological effects of weak electromagnetic emission, several areas of bioinformatics and theories of physical vacuum are discussed.
    [...]

    It follows from this article that Kernbach is interested in "highly penetrating radiation". In fact he is an inventor of some of the devices that produce such a "radiation". The physical nature of this radiation is not clear. It may act both on physical devices and on biological systems as well. It can penetrate walls and act at a distance, even 'faster than light".

    Yet, until now, it belongs to the "fringe science", "pseudo-science" or "false science". In fact, sometimes publications dealing with this subject find their way to the mainstream physics journals, but always under disguise.

    We can ask now again: why is it that Serge Kernbach, an expert in artificial intelligence and swarms of robots, is also interested in "paranormal phenomena" (or in "psychotronics", as it was called in Russia)?

    [...]

    To quote from the last paper 3):

    Long and Super-Long Range device-device and operator-device Interactions
    Serge Kernbach, Vitaliy Zamsha, Yuri Kravchenko
    Abstract - This work describes performed device-device and operator-device experiments at long and super-long distances of >1 km, >100 km and >10000 km. Experimental setup uses two types of sensors, based on electric double layers and IGA-1 device, and two types of LED and laser generators. We analyzed the construction of the setup, establishing a connection between receiver and emitter, and multiple effects appeared. A common character of operator- and device- interactions is assumed. This approach can be considered as a novel communication system as well as a system for operator training with an objective feedback from devices.
    https://www.sott.net/article/270676-...SSR-and-Russia

  30. The Following User Says Thank You to silvanelf For This Post:

    rogparan (17th September 2019)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts