Secret

[szczepan bialek]

"The secret lay principally in the direct current application in a small
time interval. " From:
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tesla/esp_tesla_24.htm

The light is the same as the radio waves.
Is light the electric direct current in the form of the sharp impulses?
S*

[Bert Hickman]

No. Vassilatos as a reference... really???

[benj]

NO is correct. Light is the same as radio waves. Namely waves.
But as usual, the "strategic writers" always come out of the woodwork to
ridicule anyone with an interest in Tesla!

No wonder! Just take a peer at the papers referenced in the link S* has
above! (You go to end and hit "return to Nikola Tesla" to find them)

It's clear why government writers attack anyone with anything but a
kooky interest in Tesla throwing all manner of lies and chaff into the
wind to confuse and mislead anyone and to provide enough ridicule to
discourage anyone with a causal interest from attempting to discuss him
rationally!

It's pretty clear that the rumors about Tesla which include development
of a "free energy" system, "death rays" (SDI), anti-gravity craft, and
the infamous "rainbow" "invisibility" ultra-dimensional experiments all
done in secret for the government seem to have some grain of truth. The
huge disinformation and discrediting campaign is indication enough of that!

S* may live in 19th century science, but there is clearly much more
there that has been covered up than most are aware.

--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\_:/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
\/__/ \/__/

[Bert Hickman]

benj wrote:
> On 04/10/2015 03:22 PM, Bert Hickman wrote:
>> szczepan bialek wrote:
>>> "The secret lay principally in the direct current application in a small
>>> time interval. " From:
>>> http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tesla/esp_tesla_24.htm
>>> The light is the same as the radio waves.
>>> Is light the electric direct current in the form of the sharp impulses?
>>> S*
>>>
>>>
>>
>> No. Vassilatos as a reference... really???
>
> NO is correct. Light is the same as radio waves. Namely waves.
> But as usual, the "strategic writers" always come out of the woodwork to
> ridicule anyone with an interest in Tesla!

What's a "strategic writer" Benj?

I've been a Tesla fan and HV experimenter for well over 50 years, so far
be it from me to ridicule those who have an interest in Tesla and his
works. I'm not ridiculing Tesla. Far from it.

I'm questioning the veracity of Vassilatos and his books as a credible
reference by S*... from the perspective of an active HV and Tesla
experimenter and electrical engineer (for 45 years).

>
> No wonder! Just take a peer at the papers referenced in the link S* has
> above! (You go to end and hit "return to Nikola Tesla" to find them)

Repeat: My problem was with the Vassilatos reference provided by S*.

As far as the Nikola Tesla References listed on the parent web site, I
have a large number of these in my personal library. Some are excellent,
such as actual writings by Tesla or his contemporaries. More modern
interpretations of Tesla's work can range from excellent to less
credible. And some are simply garbage.

I appreciate that my assessment of which references belong to which
category may be markedly different than yours. :)

>
> It's clear why government writers attack anyone with anything but a
> kooky interest in Tesla throwing all manner of lies and chaff into the
> wind to confuse and mislead anyone and to provide enough ridicule to
> discourage anyone with a causal interest from attempting to discuss him
> rationally!

Sorry to disappoint you, Benj.

I'm a retired EE and a long-time high-voltage and Tesla hobbyist. I do
not work for, and never have worked for, any government entity.

In fact, I'm actually quite interested in science at the fringes, and
have many books and papers by folks like Jefimenko, the Graneau's, Ken
Shoulders, etc., etc. in an extensive paper and electronic technical
library.

I "shrink" coins with pulsed ultra-strong magnetic fields. I also
"capture" lightning inside blocks of acrylic using multi-MeV particle
accelerators. And, my original web site (www.teslamania.com) has been
listed at the top of the Nikola Tesla section on Crank.net since 2003:
http://www.crank.net/tesla.html

So, you're complaining to/about another loon, Benj... :)

>
> It's pretty clear that the rumors about Tesla which include development
> of a "free energy" system, "death rays" (SDI), anti-gravity craft, and
> the infamous "rainbow" "invisibility" ultra-dimensional experiments all
> done in secret for the government seem to have some grain of truth. The
> huge disinformation and discrediting campaign is indication enough of that!

Perhaps. Fortunately, with the pervasive Internet, secrets seldom remain
secret for very long. I look forward to major breakthroughs in the above
areas any day now.

> S* may live in 19th century science, but there is clearly much more
> there that has been covered up than most are aware.

Quite possibly.

But Benj, are you seriously putting the unreferenced speculations by
Vassilatos in "Secrets of Cold War Technology - Project HAARP and
Beyond" on the same plane as Jefimenko's scientific speculations in
"Causality, Electromagnetic Induction, and Gravitation"?

I know you've extensively reviewed Jefimenko's writings with a critical
eye.

Have you honestly reviewed Vassilatos's books with the same critical eye?

Bert
--
Bert Hickman
Stoneridge Engineering, LLC
http://www.capturedlightning.com
***********************************************************************
World's source for "Captured Lightning" Lichtenberg Figure sculptures,
magnetically "shrunken" coins, and scarce/out of print technical books
***********************************************************************

[benj]

On 04/10/2015 11:12 PM, Bert Hickman wrote:
> benj wrote:
>> On 04/10/2015 03:22 PM, Bert Hickman wrote:
>>> szczepan bialek wrote:
>>>> "The secret lay principally in the direct current application in a
>>>> small
>>>> time interval. " From:
>>>> http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tesla/esp_tesla_24.htm
>>>> The light is the same as the radio waves.
>>>> Is light the electric direct current in the form of the sharp
>>>> impulses?
>>>> S*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> No. Vassilatos as a reference... really???
>>
>> NO is correct. Light is the same as radio waves. Namely waves.
>> But as usual, the "strategic writers" always come out of the woodwork to
>> ridicule anyone with an interest in Tesla!
>
> What's a "strategic writer" Benj?

Just what I said. Writers usually pretending to be scientists or
engineers but it quickly becomes clear they are not, whose job it is to
disrupt, mislead, and especially ridicule all reasonable discussions of
any "forbidden" topic. They are good at what they do.

> I've been a Tesla fan and HV experimenter for well over 50 years, so far
> be it from me to ridicule those who have an interest in Tesla and his
> works. I'm not ridiculing Tesla. Far from it.

Then Good for you! Then you know that it's not true that he invented
nothing but stole ideas of others who invented it first (like AC and the
Induction motor), that he was just a poor employee of Edison and at the
end was totally insane before he died. Right?

> I'm questioning the veracity of Vassilatos and his books as a credible
> reference by S*... from the perspective of an active HV and Tesla
> experimenter and electrical engineer (for 45 years).

Well, to question a Tesla reference is good. ALL Tesla references NEED
to be thoroughly questioned and that includes all the "official"
biographies.

>> No wonder! Just take a peer at the papers referenced in the link S* has
>> above! (You go to end and hit "return to Nikola Tesla" to find them)
>
> Repeat: My problem was with the Vassilatos reference provided by S*.

OK. It's just a fine line between questioning a given reference and
ridiculing anyone who brings up Tesla (Only Kooks love Tesla, right?)
As I said, there is SO much disinformation and chaff in the wind that
EVERYTHING on this (and any other "forbidden" subjects needs to
carefully examined with a forensic eye. Nothing less will do because
forming a quick opinion is what "they" hope you will do.

> As far as the Nikola Tesla References listed on the parent web site, I
> have a large number of these in my personal library. Some are excellent,
> such as actual writings by Tesla or his contemporaries. More modern
> interpretations of Tesla's work can range from excellent to less
> credible. And some are simply garbage.

Chaff in the wind. We certainly agree on that one.

> I appreciate that my assessment of which references belong to which
> category may be markedly different than yours. :)

If you are honest, I don't think so.

>> It's clear why government writers attack anyone with anything but a
>> kooky interest in Tesla throwing all manner of lies and chaff into the
>> wind to confuse and mislead anyone and to provide enough ridicule to
>> discourage anyone with a causal interest from attempting to discuss him
>> rationally!
>
> Sorry to disappoint you, Benj.
>
> I'm a retired EE and a long-time high-voltage and Tesla hobbyist. I do
> not work for, and never have worked for, any government entity.

So if not you, then who? Remember that those who ARE what I say will
also deny it up and down and pretend to be things they are not. It's
what "strategic writers" are paid to do. Well maybe that's your problem.
You see I HAVE worked for government entities and though never had
clearance high enough to actually KNOW things, I certainly do have a
good concept of how those organizations work. Of course if you say you
aren't a disruptor, then by their fruits ye shall know them.

> In fact, I'm actually quite interested in science at the fringes, and
> have many books and papers by folks like Jefimenko, the Graneau's, Ken
> Shoulders, etc., etc. in an extensive paper and electronic technical
> library.

Well, obviously this is where progress in science occurs... at the
"forbidden" topics. And this is also where discouragement is focused.
I mean you DO understand that Jefimenko was just a professor at minor
school (West Virginia...wretch!) who had a bunch of kooky ideas that
nobody would publish so he had to publish in second rate European
journals that will print anything and then resorted to the vanity press,
right? His so-called "equations" were published earlier by establishment
physicists anyway. (I'm pretending to be a "strategic writer" now for
your education)

> I "shrink" coins with pulsed ultra-strong magnetic fields. I also
> "capture" lightning inside blocks of acrylic using multi-MeV particle
> accelerators. And, my original web site (www.teslamania.com) has been
> listed at the top of the Nikola Tesla section on Crank.net since 2003:
> http://www.crank.net/tesla.html

Shrinking coins is max cool! Do you have a mega tesla coil? There are
some Amazing ones out there run from reversed pole pigs! Personally I
don't own nor have ever built a tesla coil though I started a couple of
times. I DO however have this giant aluminum dome that was once a
million volt van de Graff generator. (it was going to be an enlarged
version of the "Atom Smasher" that appeared in Scientific American back
when it was still a science magazine). I never finished the accelerator
part though. One of these days, I'll have to put it back together again!

> So, you're complaining to/about another loon, Benj... :)

Well, Hey! Welcome to the party! We kooks all have to stick together.
Topping Crank.net is certainly credentials enough for me! Personally
best I can do is being banned for life from Physics Forums for being a
"crank". I'll work at it harder!

>>
>> It's pretty clear that the rumors about Tesla which include development
>> of a "free energy" system, "death rays" (SDI), anti-gravity craft, and
>> the infamous "rainbow" "invisibility" ultra-dimensional experiments all
>> done in secret for the government seem to have some grain of truth. The
>> huge disinformation and discrediting campaign is indication enough of
>> that!
>
> Perhaps. Fortunately, with the pervasive Internet, secrets seldom remain
> secret for very long. I look forward to major breakthroughs in the above
> areas any day now.

Yes, Leaks are happening! Snowden is just one tip of the iceberg. Check
the "Disclosure Project" for yet more secrets. There is growing support
for that even IN government!

>> S* may live in 19th century science, but there is clearly much more
>> there that has been covered up than most are aware.
>
> Quite possibly.
>
> But Benj, are you seriously putting the unreferenced speculations by
> Vassilatos in "Secrets of Cold War Technology - Project HAARP and
> Beyond" on the same plane as Jefimenko's scientific speculations in
> "Causality, Electromagnetic Induction, and Gravitation"?

Hardly. But the key word here is "forensic analysis"! Do murderers just
confess when stupid journalist shove a mic in their face and ask if they
did it? When you KNOW people are spinning lies, each and every detail
needs to be examined like Sherlock Holmes to get facts to jibe. The
usual suggestion that you should believe some anonymous voice on the
internet or book author (like Vassilatos) just because they Say so, is
nuts, but it's what most people do. However, every book no matter HOW
off the wall in it's assertions needs to have each and every one
examined to see if there is a possible fit with what else is known.
Sherlock Holmes, remember?

> I know you've extensively reviewed Jefimenko's writings with a critical
> eye.

No, not extensively. I have not (yet) examined his approach to
relativity which is EXTREMELY interesting. And I'm a bit sceptical about
his Heaviside (S* will surely inform you of that) co-gravitation
theories, though I find it very interesting the GE has patented them!
(See how hints crop up here and there?)

> Have you honestly reviewed Vassilatos's books with the same critical eye?

No. I own many Tesla books but not that one and have only seen Chapter 4
that was online. What I liked about it was that it seemed a nice
collection of hints of topics to investigate further. Topics often not
mentioned in more "official" works even of the Kook community. And As I
noted I was ESPECIALLY impressed with the huge list of writings accessed
if you tracked backward from that link. Just wish I had more time to go
through them all.

[szczepan bialek]

Użytkownik "Bert Hickman" <bert-h...@comcast.net> napisał w wiadomości
news:-LWdnfbhGpp_v7XI...@giganews.com...

Here tou are the next:
But it was discovered by Becquerel in 1839.
"the production of an electric current when two plates of platinum or gold
diving in an acid, neutral, or alkaline solution are exposed in an uneven
way to solar radiation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaic_effect

In 1841 Henry discowered that "light-like rays" from sparks transfer
electricity through insulators.
The same discovered E. Thomson in 1871 and wrote that this can be use to
long distance communication.
The same discovered Tesla when he was working with the DC.
In the result in the transmitting antena, in the air and in the receiving
antenna is flowing the DC in a small time interval.

Do you know that discoveries?
S*

[szczepan bialek]

Użytkownik "Bert Hickman" <bert-h...@comcast.net> napisał w wiadomości

news:Nu6dnT7LQfKQDLXI...@giganews.com...

> benj wrote:
>> On 04/10/2015 03:22 PM, Bert Hickman wrote:
>>> szczepan bialek wrote:
>>>> "The secret lay principally in the direct current application in a
>>>> small
>>>> time interval. " From:
>>>> http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tesla/esp_tesla_24.htm
>>>> The light is the same as the radio waves.
>>>> Is light the electric direct current in the form of the sharp
>>>> impulses?
>>>> S*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> No. Vassilatos as a reference... really???

> I've been a Tesla fan and HV experimenter for well over 50 years

So it is the last time to start with the direct current application in a
small time interval.
>
>

> As far as the Nikola Tesla References listed on the parent web site, I
> have a large number of these in my personal library. Some are excellent,
> such as actual writings by Tesla or his contemporaries. More modern
> interpretations of Tesla's work can range from excellent to less credible.
> And some are simply garbage.

Do you have this:
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1892-12-21.htm
And this:
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1929-09-22.htm

>
>>
> I'm a retired EE and a long-time high-voltage and Tesla hobbyist. I do not
> work for, and never have worked for, any government entity.

Why you are not the Tesla radio hobbyist?

>
> In fact, I'm actually quite interested in science at the fringes, and have
> many books and papers by folks like Jefimenko, the Graneau's, Ken
> Shoulders, etc., etc. in an extensive paper and electronic technical
> library.

They are the experts in magnetic inuction vs electrodynamics.
The radiation is the quite different thing.

>
> I "shrink" coins with pulsed ultra-strong magnetic fields. I also
> "capture" lightning inside blocks of acrylic using multi-MeV particle
> accelerators. And, my original web site (www.teslamania.com) has been
> listed at the top of the Nikola Tesla section on Crank.net since 2003:
> http://www.crank.net/tesla.html
>
> So, you're complaining to/about another loon, Benj... :)
>

> Perhaps. Fortunately, with the pervasive Internet, secrets seldom remain
> secret for very long. I look forward to major breakthroughs in the above
> areas any day now.

From 1839 we are after breakthrough. Each scientist know that the light is
the electric impulsing current.
Here are the science Group. Not teaching Group.

>
>> S* may live in 19th century science, but there is clearly much more
>> there that has been covered up than most are aware.
>
> Quite possibly.
>
> But Benj, are you seriously putting the unreferenced speculations by
> Vassilatos in "Secrets of Cold War Technology - Project HAARP and Beyond"
> on the same plane as Jefimenko's scientific speculations in "Causality,
> Electromagnetic Induction, and Gravitation"?

Magnetic induction and electrostating induction are not the radiation.
S*

[Jos Bergervoet]

On 4/11/2015 8:16 AM, benj wrote:
> On 04/10/2015 11:12 PM, Bert Hickman wrote:
>> benj wrote:

...
...

>>> But as usual, the "strategic writers" always come out of the woodwork to
>>> ridicule anyone with an interest in Tesla!
>>
>> What's a "strategic writer" Benj?
>
> Just what I said. Writers usually pretending to be scientists or
> engineers but it quickly becomes clear they are not, whose job it is to
> disrupt, mislead, and especially ridicule all reasonable discussions of
> any "forbidden" topic.

And they are paid lavishly for it, benj! By the Tesla foundation.
Because who would remember Tesla without the extra gossip? As
He Himself already knew: any publicity is good publicity!

> They are good at what they do.

Their efforts even got the electric car named after him! Well,
perhaps there are a few other electric cars, but for generations
to come, we'll simplify that too: Tesla invented the electric car!

--
Jos

[benj]

Jos you are a pretty good example of why they are effective! Monkey see
Monkey do. And no, they are not paid lavishly. They are just
bureaucrats, with a liberal arts education lucky to have a reasonably
paying job. Was Snowden paid lavishly? And he had actual technical
skills and had the job of spying on the entire world!

As S* would say, you do their work for them.

[benj]

Actually, they are.

[szczepan bialek]

Użytkownik "benj" <nob...@gmail.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:osaWw.287787$2j2.2...@fx23.iad...

> On 04/11/2015 03:55 AM, szczepan bialek wrote:
>>
>> Magnetic induction and electrostating induction are not the radiation.
>> S*
>
> Actually, they are.

All forms of radiation were discovered by Becquerel familly.
Radiation is the mass transport.

Everywhere is wrote that the induction do not transport electric charge from
the primary to the secondary.
Do you agree?

Do not you know that Becquerel discovered that light transports the electric
charge?
The same was discovered by Henry and E. Thomson.

For this reason we are using the terms iduction and radiation.
Do you agree?
S*

[szczepan bialek]

"Jos Bergervoet" <jos.ber...@xs4all.nl> napisał w wiadomości
news:5528dac4$0$2917$e4fe...@news2.news.xs4all.nl...

> On 4/11/2015 8:16 AM, benj wrote:
>> On 04/10/2015 11:12 PM, Bert Hickman wrote:
>>> benj wrote:
> ...
> ...
>>>> But as usual, the "strategic writers" always come out of the woodwork
>>>> to
>>>> ridicule anyone with an interest in Tesla!
>>>
>>> What's a "strategic writer" Benj?
>>
>> Just what I said. Writers usually pretending to be scientists or
>> engineers but it quickly becomes clear they are not, whose job it is to
>> disrupt, mislead, and especially ridicule all reasonable discussions of
>> any "forbidden" topic.
>
> And they are paid lavishly for it, benj! By the Tesla foundation.
> Because who would remember Tesla without the extra gossip? As
> He Himself already knew: any publicity is good publicity!

So you do not know that:
"At about that time there was a significant problem of interference between
signals coming from different sources, due to the increasing number of
transmitting stations. Guglielmo Marconi was the first to adopt a tuning
system of this type. It's essentially composed of a tesla type high
frequency transformer," From:
http://www.sparkmuseum.com/SPKTRAN.HTM

In this sentence Marconi means the factory.
Before Tesla in all transmitting stations the source of electric waves were
the sparks.
The sparks produce many frequences.
Tesla invented and developed the equipment to produce only one frequency.
For this Tesla is the Father of radio and Tesla will be remembered for ever.
S*

[benj]

On 04/11/2015 01:10 PM, szczepan bialek wrote:
>
> Użytkownik "benj" <nob...@gmail.com> napisał w wiadomości
> news:osaWw.287787$2j2.2...@fx23.iad...
>> On 04/11/2015 03:55 AM, szczepan bialek wrote:
>>>
>>> Magnetic induction and electrostating induction are not the radiation.
>>> S*
>>
>> Actually, they are.
>
> All forms of radiation were discovered by Becquerel familly.
> Radiation is the mass transport.
>
> Everywhere is wrote that the induction do not transport electric charge
> from the primary to the secondary.
> Do you agree?

I agree. It transports the MOTION of charge.

> Do not you know that Becquerel discovered that light transports the
> electric charge?
> The same was discovered by Henry and E. Thomson.

They did not. Just thought they did.

> For this reason we are using the terms iduction and radiation.
> Do you agree?

No. Induction is electromagnetic radiation. 1/R proves it.

Coulomb discovered this.
Do you agree?

[szczepan bialek]

Użytkownik "benj" <nob...@gmail.com> napisał w wiadomości

news:LDgWw.268179$Xj5.1...@fx26.iad...

> On 04/11/2015 01:10 PM, szczepan bialek wrote:
>>
>> Użytkownik "benj" <nob...@gmail.com> napisał w wiadomości
>> news:osaWw.287787$2j2.2...@fx23.iad...
>>> On 04/11/2015 03:55 AM, szczepan bialek wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Magnetic induction and electrostating induction are not the radiation.
>>>> S*
>>>
>>> Actually, they are.
>>
>> All forms of radiation were discovered by Becquerel familly.
>> Radiation is the mass transport.
>>
>> Everywhere is wrote that the induction do not transport electric charge
>> from the primary to the secondary.
>> Do you agree?
>
> I agree. It transports the MOTION of charge.

Cause the MOTION of charge.
Do you agree?

>> Do not you know that Becquerel discovered that light transports the
>> electric charge?
>> The same was discovered by Henry and E. Thomson.
>
> They did not. Just thought they did.

Edison discovered that the electric charge is transported thorough the glass
of the bulb.
It is also do not true?

>
>> For this reason we are using the terms iduction and radiation.
>> Do you agree?
>
> No. Induction is electromagnetic radiation. 1/R proves it.

> Coulomb discovered this.
> Do you agree?

Coulomb discovered that electrostatic induction go through the insulators.
Oersted discovered that the magnetic induction go through the insulators.

Becquerel, Henry and Tesla discovered that the pulsating electric current go
through the insulators.
Do you agree?
S*