[geocentrism] Re: Aspden effect and Aether.
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 09:44:44 +1000
I could hardly be accused of being a middle road adventurer Allen? You should
have seen that I must mean remaining balanced, in that all latteral thoughts or
theories pertaining to a subject must be investigated. Except the obvious
crackpots who write pseudo scientific material about orgone energy using words
like this:
The author suggests that the discovery by Reich of the orgone energy, which is
an excitable, pulsatile, water-active cosmic-atmospheric-biological force,
provides a concrete and experimentally-demonstrated mechanism to the entire
field of physico-chemical and biological fluctuating phenomena.
He really knows his dictionary I think? ???
The rest of your post was unclear to me.. Are you saying that my books are
useless without I buy and read GWW?? I did read all the free samples on the
internet when they were available.. Now as regards balance, Have you read all
the works of Athanasius Kircher Solang hertz, to name a couple which I posted.
(no cost) Niether of these are MS oriented or supported.
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 8:14 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Aspden effect and Aether.
...Keeping the middle road with a balanced analysis is what we should try to
do.....
"Keeping the middle road" is absolutely meaningless and has nothing to do
with ascertaining truth !!.. In fact it could only have any value if the
"middle" is correct but that is what you are attempting to figure out or
ascertain in the first place(what is the reality). Further, if your left or
right limit is too far to one side of the truth then the middle too will be to
one side of the truth, in which case it is of absolutely no value. This should
be the whole point for the questions, to ascertain THE TRUTH not to make sure
one is "keeping in the middle of the road"... . "Middle of the road" is not a
logical evaluation method it is in fact a political posture to appeal to the
feelings and sentiments of the greatest audience possible. That is not our
purpose here and they can correct me if I am wrong but that is not the purpose
of GWW either ...A "middle of the road" approach will never be able to
ascertain truth for you or anyone else. It will only perpetuate useless debate
in spite of what is actual LO&E by which is the only hope for eventually
ascertaining any truth or reality whatsoever........
One of the reasons for GWW as with the other books is to bring information to
and stimulate the discussions that are for the most part just ignored,.... not
necessarily refuted, just ignored ( the who, what, when, where and why).....
but if your not going to bother to read or utilize it ( the tools) and just
keep quoting from MS dogma that makes the same old excuses for why and how
things look, walk , talk like ducks but are not ducks because..."well it could
be something else other then what you actually see and observed ..even though
by our own admission we cannot prove or know that for sure ...(which itself
requires even more faith then just taking it at face value)... and quoting from
the MS books you do buy or read that tell you.. "don't worry about the man
behind the curtain" &.."they are crazy..the emperor is not naked because he
would not allow it". Then how can you even begin to claim a "balanced
analysis"? For that matter why even "support" the GS position in the first
place?
philip madsen <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Robert said,
Does ignoring GWW keep the analysis â?~fair and balancedâ?T?
Yes I would say so for the simple reason anything within that book that
comes from general science, is free to all, whereas anything in GWW that is the
opinion of the authors, comes at a claim for money.
You continue to avoid relevant questions asked in this forum , insisting
that if one is to get your answer, we must pay for it..
If thats your stock response, what is the point of asking you anything. The
only worth you seem to have in the authors opinions is the Dollar .
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Bennett
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 1:28 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Aspden effect and Aether.
-----Original Message-----
From: geocentrism-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:geocentrism-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of philip madsen
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 7:04 PM
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Aspden effect and Aether.
I have changed the subject line since this is no longer really pertaining
to a geostat satellite, but to our aether question. I would question the post
by Robert Sungenis.
Puzzling - if GWW is being ignored, then why read the excerpt from the
book posted here?
Interesting that the two that challenge GWW content here are also the two
that havenâ?Tt read it. Is ignorance bliss?
We are assailed with problems from both sides of science. On the one
side, that of MS we get statements like this,
"The Adams motor is an example of a claimed perpetual motion or "over
unity device" capable of producing more energy than is supplied to it. Such
claims are generally viewed as pseudoscience by mainstream scientists. It is
clear that functional electric motors can be built by following his design
principles, but claims of greater than 100% efficiency are met with skepticism
and rejection. At a 1994 meeting, several such motors were demonstrated, but
according to supporters "none of the motors present were of sufficient
engineering quality to manifest the elusive over-unity effect."
And on the other hand, we get crackpot claims of all sorts of free energy
divices that will never work or do anything. The conspiracy nut in me tells me
that this is manufactured and quack encouraged interference. After all, real
money is energy. We can't have people dipping in and taking their own.
Keeping the middle road with a balanced analysis is what we should try to
do.
Does ignoring GWW keep the analysis â?~fair and balancedâ?T?
In the first wikipaedia statement, scorn is obvious, accompanied as it
was with
Adams motor is reportedly a perpetual motion machine. Such machines
violate the known laws of physics. Claims of the development of such devices
are considered pseudoscience by most scientists
No true "overunity" free energy investigator uses the term perpetual
motion, and none should ever claim energy from nothing, which is the only way
the second law could be violated. They correctly claim to have an energy SOURCE
which is for nothing.. free to use. Tidal energy is an easily verifiable
example. That the aether provides another source is not as yet verified.
certainly not in the public domain anyway, where it can be duplicated. It is
only because MS denies the existance of the aether, that they claim a
violation. That puts them out on a limb. But there is nothing new in that.
Hence I must say I was surprised to hear Allen quote GWW as a source of
the Aspden Effect . I was even more surprised to hear the authors confirm it,
as though they treated it as reality. Have they demonstrated the hardware and
done the experiment? I would not trust the written word of Aspden, buried as it
is amongst so much false and foolish science that surrounds thousands of
"perpetual Motion" free energy machines that never could work.
Have you disproved the AE claim experimentally? The schematic is given in
the section.
Have you done the M-M exp, to verify the null result?
My answer is the same â?" because thereâ?Ts not time nor $ nor enough
interest to personally validate every claim. Evaluating the truthfulness of
human testimony is what we do constantly every day. If evidence of fraud or
incompetence by Aspden is presented I will certainly entertain it . But such a
demonstration has not yet been madeâ?¦..
The Aspden effect is credible because many other similar anomalies
involving the motion of spinning objects are discussed in GWW, such as
Probably there are â?~free energyâ?T frauds out there, but most of the
GWW examples were done by credentialed scientists.
I am not denying the existence of the aether. But I dispute certain
claims the authors make. Taking this for example.. assuming the stated action
was true and does occur,
"With a machine rotor of 800 gms, its kinetic energy and that of the
drive motor is less than 15 joules, contrasting with the 300 joules needed to
spin up from rest.After five minutes or more, the machine is stopped, but can
be restarted up to speed in the same or opposite direction with only 30 joules,
only 10% of the original effort, provided that the machine is not stopped more
than about a minute. This totally violates all known laws of physics. "
Why is any law violated? Taking the articles own analogy , (similar to
stirring up a glass of water and then removing the stirring rod, while the
glass itself remains still). we have the implication that original inputed
energy was stored in some way , energy that was supplied by the original effort
of winding up the motor. This conplies with the conservation of energy, in the
same way that energy can be stored in any flywheel or in the aether as a
magnetic field. No new energy is obtained.
Further, when I read ,
"The experimental evidence is that there is something that is:
· spinning,
· invisible,
· having energy of motion,
· occupying the space within the machine rotor.,"
I must ask... what and whose experimental evidence? I repeat my question
Robert.
I repeat my answer, Philip. A collection of aether experiments for the
last 250 years is summarized in GWW, as stated above.
Have you demonstrated the hardware and done the experiment? Or are you
merely trusting the word of Mr Aspden or others? I would trust your own
experimental evidence.
Suppose you say you did the AE exp. and disproved it. Why should I
believe you?
As regards the effects noted, such would be obvious, that as it is within
the rotor, it would be invisible, and as it is within the rotor, that the
energy could be molecular. There is no direct relation proved to an aether,
other than it can be certain that all magnetic fields are stored in the aether.
Why not E fields also?
The EM medium is different from this GI aether.
I look forward to further discussion and will comment further on the
material below, after I have finished studying the material on Harold Aspdens
web site.
Philip.
Does the GWW section make claim that Aspden has a perpetual motion
machine or itâ?Ts over unity?
Or is the Aspden Effect just cited in support of aether detection?
This effect does violate all known laws of physicsâ?¦. for closed
systems, which always are the understanding for conservation law application.
The effect of interest, however, is the hysteresis implication â?" the
motor â?~remembersâ?T that it has been recently running. This is what is
clearly anomalous about the AE, energy issues aside.
To show that energy is supplied to the motor by the aether, Aspden must
carefully and precisely measure all forms of energy in the motor system, like
heat and radiationâ?¦. which he did not do (or at least, did not publish.).
Until this is done no claim of energy conservation violation can be made. It
must be shown that energy drawn from the aether is not later returned to it.
This is the science view of the issue.
On the side of Scripture and private revelation we know that the source
of aether energy comes from outside the universe, so we do expect that the
aether will be found to be a free energy source, though it may never be
usefully harnessed.
Robert B
----- Original Message -----
From: Sungenis@xxxxxxx
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 12:21 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Geosynchronous satellites paper
In a message dated 6/29/2007 11:18:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
robert.bennett@xxxxxxx writes:
1. The Aspeden motor is a real observational effect not pseudo science
repeatable and demonstrable ( is also found In GWW cant remember the page..i
don't have the book in front of me right now.).
for the Aspden exp: Ps. 821, 882,1154,1158 inter alia.
It is now on page 429 in the new edition of the book. Here is the
excerpt.
Aspden Effect (1995)
An Adams motor with a magnetized rotor and no electrical power input is
started on no load by a drive motor and brought up to operating speed of 3250
rpm, then runs steadily at that speed for two minutes. With a machine rotor of
800 gms, its kinetic energy and that of the drive motor is less than 15 joules,
contrasting with the 300 joules needed to spin up from rest.
After five minutes or more, the machine is stopped, but can be restarted
up to speed in the same or opposite direction with only 30 joules, only 10% of
the original effort, provided that the machine is not stopped more than about a
minute. This totally violates all known laws of physics. It is ten times easier
to spin the magnet once it has already been spinning. (The term for this is
hysteresis, a memory of prior physical states).
Energy within the magnet seems to continue â?ospinningâ?? inside even
when the magnet is not moving (similar to stirring up a glass of water and then
removing the stirring rod, while the glass itself remains still). It will take
less energy to stir up the water in the glass again if you wait less than a
minute before trying. So it certainly appears that this energy in a magnet is
in a form of fluid motion, possibly spiraling in a vortex, like the water
example.
The experimental evidence is that there is something that is:
· spinning,
· invisible,
· having energy of motion,
· occupying the space within the machine rotor.
This â?osomethingâ?? has an effective mass density 20 times that of the
rotor, but spins independently and takes several minutes to decay/wind down,
while the motor itself comes to rest in a few seconds. Various machine
configurations tested indicated two dependencies:
· time of day
· compass orientation of the spin axis.
One machine with weak magnets showed evidence of gaining magnetic
strength with each test, as if permanently absorbing the ether energy.
Another separate experiment consisted of a reversible D.C. motor running
in a clockwise sense for two or three minutes, drawing from the power supply,
but then spontaneously slowing down, stopping, and then reversing rotation and
rapidly gaining speed, as if counter-clockwise was the preferred sense of
rotation. It was running well clockwise, with no external influence given to
change direction.
The basic motor used by Aspden consists of a central rotor either all
north out, or all south out, and high resistance coils.
Aspden rotor motor[1][1]
Aspden ether principles:
1) Extraction of energy from the ether does not violate the first
law of thermodynamics, conservation of energy, if energy flows from ether to
matter. If the ether delivers energy to run the motor, eventually that borrowed
energy is returned to the ether by generating heat and radiation.
2) Existence of the ether was not disproved by Einstein. Special
Relativity only says it is not necessary; General Relativity theory disguises
it as â?ospace-time curvature,â?? while moderns call it â?othe vacuum.â??
3) Ether has been measured in laboratories. The ether was probably
first detected by Sagnac in 1908, the experimental source of the modern ring
laser gyro. How can the speed of a laser beam traveling a circuit inside an
optical instrument detect rotation of that instrument, unless the beam is
keeping a fixed speed relative to something inside that instrument that does
not share its rotation? That something is the ether!
4) Its existence was not disproved by the Michelson-Morley
experiment. Michelson was trying to sense the Earthâ?Ts motion through the
ether, but violated the Miller condition for minimal ether shielding.
5) The ether reveals its existence when we have rotation, as in the
Adams motor.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
See what's free at AOL.com.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/882 - Release Date:
30/06/2007 3:10 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1][1]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e8/ Cdmotor2.gif
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/884 - Release Date: 2/07/2007
3:35 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/885 - Release Date: 3/07/2007
10:02 AM
Other related posts:
