I am only interested in the physics as it relates to understanding aether, gravity, planetary motion and such not "free energy" extraction...... allen Seriously now Allen, a lot of people base their faith in Einstein on the fact that he proved relativity, when they produced the free energy of the bomb. , which he allegedly predicted.. Now we may theorise about the aether till domesday, asserting Aspdens model, R Bennetts Model, or yours truly, yet no amount of rational thiinking proves anything.. Now if the AdamsAspden motor produced over unity free energy, as predicted, that goes a long way to at least equalling Heinstein. Of course MS will merely say it is the return energy that went down the black hole , returning via warps in space. The aether and God, are off the agenda, and despite Pauls affirmation of the integrity of science, thats final. Philip. ----- Original Message ----- From: Allen Daves To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 4:47 AM Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Further on Aspden I personally don't believe in "perpetual motion machines" or "free energy" machines but the lessons of the experiments, regardless of anyones "interpretations", here are about the mechanics of matter in/ with a aetheral environment. What these experiments show again like the others is an aetheral interaction along with the other O&E designed to detect and observe aetheral/mass interaction/effects. All these were either designed or predicted in aetheral physics.......... I am only interested in the physics as it relates to understanding aether, gravity, planetary motion and such not "free energy" extraction...... I'll leave that bit to the future for any who might be clever enough to figure that out once the underlying physics of the universe are more correctly understood. Any implications these things might theoretically have on "free energy", I just ignore. First, It is not the real or importaint issue here and second even if it were possible i think our quest here must be solved first in any case whether or not "free Energy" were actually possible or not... having said that i lean toward the not anyway.J philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Allen I said earlier I would come back on the ucr article. I do not think much will surface later from this experiment. Not unless they want to revisit an aether.. Notice the wording on this from wiki. Ampère's law consistent with conservation of charge in cases where charge is accumulating, for example in a capacitor. He interpreted this as a real motion of charges, even in vacuum, where he supposed that it corresponded to motion of dipole charges in the ether. Although this interpretation has been abandoned, Maxwell's correction to Ampère's law remains valid (a changing electric field produces a magnetic field). Even Ampere seemed to have had the Aspden idea of the aether as having electrical charge components positive and negative. In the normal sense, I would expect that Aspdens retentivity of energy in the aether caused by the application of an electric field to the plates of a capacitor, as being no more than energy supplied initially by the charging source. That this charge may continue rotating is no more an indication of free energy, than is the normal rotation of electrons displaced in any dielectric of a capacitor. since there is no friction involved. Of course, just as I can agree that the atom itself which has continuous perpetual movement of electrons ; in the case of fusion or fission can be a source of energy, I have no reason to deny that similarly but in a different manner, the dipole charges in the aether may likewise be a source of energy waiting to be tapped. Why else would I give it a go? It won't be the first "perpetual motion?" machine I have dumped over the last 50 odd years. Phil. ----- Original Message ----- From: Allen Daves To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2007 3:11 AM Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Further on Aspden Oh Yea.....Herold Aspden was the one who predicted this efffect some years ago based on his other work........... Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Although this experiment was different its impact has the same net effect.....it might save you some some work.........A Spin effect (spining against somthing) was confirmed by Anders Wistrom of UC Riverside back in 03'... http://www.newsroom.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/display.cgi?id=548 philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Here is a request to the math professors here. To save me digging into my ancient Duncan & starling, and considering I'm rusty on the capacitor formula , without the hype jump to metric units, within the vacuum structure of Aspden's aether, what would you consider the capacitance to be if I used a gallon glass bottle, say 10 inches OD and !2 inches high, guess 0.25 inch thick glass, the dielectric , the constant of which can be anywhere between Glass 3.8 14.5 air is 1 (so what is a vacuum) on which I paste an alfoil sheet, and inside a connection electrode immersed in a strongly conducting solution of say H2SO4 or maybe salt.. Before I go to the manufacturing stage.. If this is suitable, my meter will give me the mfd ezactly. Assuming Aspden is correct, and if I can ignore the glass, the aether will begin to rotate if I connect an available 20kV DC to charge the thing. My problem, not having a scope is to measure the total charge (energy watts) component against that released on discharge. However, if I were to connect a very low R inductance making a parallel circuit that resonates at an available kHz frequency, If there was negligible damping, which seems to be obviously impossible using an electrolyte on one plate, we should see surplus energy if the oscillations are sustained without further supply input.. or I could measure the temperature increase.. I have also to consider the effect this alleged aether rotation has on the time constant which in the standard formula is only a factor of C and R. Wouldn't this aether rotation also cause a sort of hysteresis component of load were I to use Alternating current. Finally the modern chart here seems to make the dielectric constant of air 1 which I vaguely remember was considered to be that of a vacuum. It cant be identical. Now its getting complicated.. I await anybody suggestions. Phil. PS I am sure though , that if this aether is proven, we still cannot accept that there is any aether drift that supports geocentrism (complete immobility of the world) as Millers figures went more to support the opposite.. or we are left with the current position, the aether is moving and we are stationary, or the reverse.. Still be nice though to upset their egos and extract some of that ether magic. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.1/888 - Release Date: 6/07/2007 6:36 AM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.1/888 - Release Date: 6/07/2007 6:36 AM