Blackboard

EPD LABORATORIES, INC.

PO BOX 10029

SPOKANE, WA 99209

info@epdlabs.org

http://ericpdollard.com

1)

In this Digital Age, the theoretical basis provided for Electrical Engineering has been defiled, reduced to an assemblage of delusive denouncements enforced by a cabal of academic theoreticians. What gives authoritative force to their dictates is the overtly complex and convoluted mathematics which enshrouds them. This mathematics in turn becomes a “right of passage” in teaching and replacing reason and experiment. Once the idols become digitized, they become law, and consequently electricity has become a lost science, relegated to the same scrap heap as alchemy.

However, in historical perspective, the theoretical basis for electrical engineering had achieved a very high level of development at the onset of the 20th century, this to meet the demands of a rapidly developing commercial enterprise, most notably that of the electro-magnetic telegram, and later electric light and power. Electrical science progressed remarkably well in this era, and thus became an exact science which engendered well thought out theories. The foundations of this science were derived from the Experimental Researches of Michael Faraday and their Mathematical Development by Clerk Maxwell. This became known as the “Faraday-Maxwell” Theory of Electricity. J.J. Thomson gives an account of the basis of the theory:

“This method is based on the conception, introduced by Faraday, of tubes of electric force, or rather, of electrostatic induction. Faraday, as is well known, used these tubes as the language in which to express the phenomena of the electric field. Thus, it was by their tendency to contract, and the lateral repulsion which similar tubes exert on each other, that he explained the mechanical forces between electrified bodies, while the influence of the medium on these tubes was on his view indicated by the specific inductive capacity in dielectrics.” (1)

Essential to the Faraday-Maxwell concept is the existence of a fundamental “Electric Medium,” or aether, which fills all space and permeates all matter. Regardless of the fruitfulness of this idea of the aether, and its tubes of electric induction, it was later forcibly driven from electrical theory and replaced with an idol, the “Electron,” and its sacred companion, Einstein-Minkowski Relativity.

In the course of human events there always comes a time when certain forces set out to tear apart what became a well-established and thought out process of reasoning. Such was the objective of the modernistic theoreticians. An excellent remark on this condition in historic events is given by E.T. Whitaker:

“Perhaps nothing in the history of natural philosophy is more amazing than the vicissitudes of the theory of heat. The true hypothesis, after meeting with general acceptance throughout a century, and having been approved by a succession of illustrious men, was deliberately abandoned by their successors in favor of a conception so utterly false, and in some of its developments, grotesque and absurd.” (2)

Meanwhile, as Gustave Le Bon remarks:

“The mathematicians were drawing up formulae, the physicists were making experiments, and these experiments fitted less with the formulae. So soon as the equations no longer agreed with the experiments, the equations no longer agreed with the experiments, the equations were rectified by imagining “hidden forces,” which completely baffled observation.” (3)

2)

The modernistic mathematicians ultimately regained the ground they had lost to Faraday, and electrical science was reduced to meta-physics. The three fundamental commandments established are:

(I)

The abolition of the aether,

(II)

The Enshrinement of a certain set of so-called “Maxwell’s Equations,”

(III)

The idolization of the so-called “electron.”

A discussion of these three commandments follows.

The first commandment, The abolition of the aether:

Nikola Tesla once remarked, “The discovery of the aether was as significant in his era as was the discovery of fire was for primitive man.”

However, at the onset of the electronic age, the concept of the aether was rejected with all the vehemence of religious fanaticism. The justification for this was that no physical model could be devised that could survive the test of experiment. This is no surprise since the aether is not physical and accordingly it is outside the realm of physical science. Many resisted this abolition at its onset at the beginning of the 20th century, one was Oliver Heaviside, to quote:

“As one regards the aether, it is useless to sneer at it this time of day. What substitute for it do we have? Its principle fault is that it is mysterious. That is because we know so little about it. Then we should find out more. That cannot be done by ignoring it. The properties of air, so far as they are known, had to be found out before they became known.” (4)

Joseph Larmor states the following:

“It therefore may be held that, in so far as theories of the ultimate connection of different physical agencies are allowed to be legitimate at all, they should develop along the lines of a purely electric aether until critics of such a simple scheme are able to point to a definite group of phenomena that requires the assumption of a new set of properties and that moreover can be reduced to logical order thereby. A charge of incompleteness without indication of a better way, is not effective criticism in question of this kind, because, owning to the imperfections of our perceptions and the limited range of our intellectual operations, finally can never be attained.” (5)

Larmor continues with:

“From remote ages, the great question with which, since Newton’s time, we have been familiar under the somewhat misleading antithesis of contact vs. distance actions, has engaged speculation, -how is it that portions of matter can interact on each other which seems to have no means of connection between them, can a body act where it is not? If we answer directly in the negative, the spatial limitations of substance are to a large extent removed, and the complication is increased. The simplest solution is involved in a view that has come down from the early period of Greek physical speculation, and forms one of the most striking items in the stock of first principles of knowledge which has been struck out by the genius of that age. In that mode of thought, the ultimate reality is transferred from sensible matter to a uniform medium which is a plenum, the ultimate elements of matter consisting of permanently existing vortices or other singularities of motion and strain located in the primordial medium.” (6)

At the onset of the “Age of Enlightenment,” this concept was revived from the age of antiquity by Rene Descartes in his absolute rejection of “Action at a distance” through an empty or vacuous space devoid of any physical properties. He assumed that force cannot be communicated except by actual pressure or impact. “It is thus erroneous to regard the heavenly bodies as isolated in vacant space; around and between them is an incessant conveyance and transformation of energy. To the vehicle of this activity, the name aether has been given.” (7)

Following this line of reasoning is that of Michael Faraday, which is a continuous transmission of physical actions through an electrified aether. This was one of the first and most important, in the stock of first principles, in the theory of electricity. To quote Lord Kelvin:

“During the 56 years which have passed since Faraday first offended physical mathematicians with his curved lines of force, many writers and many thinkers have helped to build up the 19th century school of the plenum, one aether for light, heat, electricity, magnetism… (8)

“Faraday had strong geometric conceptions which he formulated qualitatively. To the more abstract minds of the European theoreticians, these concepts did not appeal at all.” (9)

At the onset of the electronic age, Faraday’s concept of the electric lines of force were rejected, despite all the physical evidence to substantiate their existence, and the meta-physical notion of action at a distance again reigned supreme. However, action was now presented through so-called “curved space,” to circumvent reality.

The common sense appeal to facts demands the retention of the philosophy of Michael Faraday; that is, this electric aether can be expressed in practical terms as an “electric fluid.” This concept held supreme in the pioneering days of the science of electricity (Ben Franklin). J.J. Thomson remarks:

“The influence which the notion and ideas of the fluid theory of electricity have, ever since their introduction, over the science of electricity and magnetism, is a striking illustration of the benefits conferred upon this science by a concrete representation of the symbols which in the mathematical theory of electricity define the state of the electric field. Indeed, the services which the old fluid theories has rendered to electricity by providing a language in which the facts of the science can be clearly and briefly expressed, can hardly be over-rated. A descriptive theory of this kind does more than serve as a vehicle for the clear expression of well-known results, it often renders important services by suggesting the possibility of the existence of new phenomena.” (10)

Gustave Le Bon provides a similar viewpoint:

“What is called electricity proceeds solely from phenomena from the so-called displacement of the electric fluid or of its elements.” (11)

Electricity will appear as the connecting link between the world of matter and that of the aether.” (12)

“Electricity allowed for the connection of two worlds, the ponderable and the imponderable.” (32)

“Such is the current theory. It is probable that things happen in a less simple, perhaps in even a very different manner; but when an explanation fits in fairly well with known facts, it is wise to be satisfied with it.” (13)

Second Commandment, Enshrinement of the So-called, “Maxwell’s Equations”:

The Faraday-Maxwell theory of electricity has for quite some time served as the principal foundation for electrical engineering theory.

“Maxwell’s brilliant synthesis of all electric and magnetic phenomena as well as their interactions into two simple “field equations” was an achievement of singular grandeur and beauty.” (14)

Well, maybe not really all electric and magnetic phenomena, and what bout the rest of the equations?

“As a matter of historical fact, Maxwell himself never wrote or saw “Maxwell’s Equations.” (15)

In reality, he conceived twenty mathematical propositions, four of which ultimately were named “Maxwell’s Equations,” but these were in reality the result of the combined efforts of Heinrich Hertz in Germany, and Oliver Heaviside in England. As it stands, the physicist prefers Hertz, whereas the engineer prefers Heaviside. However, the fundamental units, dimensions, and terminology from which the science and engineering of electricity derived its basis, are essentially as Maxwell formulated them. This is a rather unfortunate circumstance since these formulations exist in a primitive form, which in turn were “set in stone” by the academians before such formulations could develop into a mature theory of electricity. Also unfortunate is how the work of Herman von Helmholtz was swept under the carpet, which led to the unfortunate omissions in electrical theory.

Hertz gives his comments on this:

“In the researches to which I have hitherto referred, the experiments were interpreted from the standpoint which I took up through studying von Helmholtz’s papers. In these papers, Herr von Helmholtz’s distinguishes between two forms of electric force, the electro-static and the electromagnetic to which, until the contrary is proven by experiment, two different velocities are attributed. An interpretation of the experiments from the point of view could certainly not be incorrect, but it might be unnecessarily complicated. In a special limiting case, Helmholtz’s theory becomes considerably simplified, and its equations, in this case, become the same as those of Maxwell’s theory; only one form of force remains, and it is propagated with the velocity of Light.” (16)

At this historic juncture, the so-called “Velocity of Light” became enshrined, and the electro-static wave faded from existence. But, Nikola Tesla, who worked from the electro-static viewpoint remarks:

“For more than 18 years I have been reading treatises, reports of scientific transactions, and articles on Hertz-Wave Theory, to keep myself informed, but they always impressed me like works of fiction.” (17)

Here, it becomes evident that the so-called Maxwell’s Theory is not without significant limitations. For example, Charles Steinmetz makes a rather harsh statement on this matter:

The Maxwellian Theory of the Transformer describes a device that does not exist in practice, but haunts in textbooks and mathematical treatises on transformers.” (18)

Consequently, what has become known as “Maxwell’s Equations” is in part, of dubious practical value and serves in actuality as a kind of “religious ritual” rather than a fruitful method of analysis.

“At the time of Maxwell’s death, which happened in 1879, before he completed his 49th year, much yet remained to be done both in the investigations with which his name is associated; and the energies of the next generation were largely spent in extending and refining that conception of electrical and optical phenomena whose origin is correctly indicated in the name of Maxwell.” (19)

The three principal figures involved in this extension, or adaptation, of the work of clerk Maxwell were:

1.) Heinrich Hertz
2.) Oliver Heaviside
3.) J. J. Thomson

These illustrious individuals can rightly be called the “Followers of Maxwell.”

“In the decades proceeding the death of Maxwell, his “theory” would be developed in ways which could scarcely have been anticipated. But although every year added something to the super-structure, the foundations remained much as Maxwell had laid them; the doubtful argument by which he had sought to justify the introduction of displacement currents was still all that was offered in their defense. In 1884 however, the theory was established on a different basis by a pupil of Helmholtz, Heinrich Hertz.” (20)

Hertz states, in his book on electric waves, the following:

“And now to be more precise, what is it we call the Faraday-Maxwell Theory? Maxwell has left us as a result of his mature thought a great treatise on electricity and magnetism; it might therefore be said that Maxwell’s Theory is the one which propounds that work. But such an answer will scarcely be regarded as satisfactory by all scientific men who have considered the question closely. Many a man has thrown himself with zeal into the study of Maxwell’s work, and even when he has stumbled upon unwonted mathematical difficulties, has never the less been compelled to abandon hope of forming for himself an all-together consistent conception of Maxwell’s ideas.” (21)

Oliver Heaviside, the leading proponent of Maxwell’s Electromagnetic Theory, comments on the efforts of Hertz to verify this theory:

“Returning to electromagnetic waves. Maxwell’s Inimitable Theory of Dielectric Displacement was for a long time generally regarded as speculation. There was, for many years, an almost complete dearth of interest in the unverified parts of Maxwell’s Theory…”

“Still, however, they wanted experimental proof. Three years ago, electromagnetic waves were nowhere. Shortly after, they were everywhere. This was due to a very remarkable, and unexpected event, no less than the experimental discovery by Hertz, of Karlsruhe (Now of Bonn), of the veritable actuality of electromagnetic waves in the aether.” (22)

Heaviside continues on Maxwell:

"What is Maxwell’s Theory? Or, what should we agree to understand by Maxwell’s Theory? The first approximation to the answer is to say; There is Maxwell’s book as he wrote I; There is his text, and there are his equations: Together, they make his theory. But when we come to examine it closely, we find that this answer is unsatisfactory. To begin with, it is sufficient to refer to papers by physicists, written say during the twelve years following the first publication of Maxwell’s treatise, to see that there may be much difference in opinion as to what his theory is. It may be and has been, differently interpreted by different men, which is a sign that is not set forth in a perfectly clear and unmistakable form. There are many obscurities and some inconsistencies…

It is therefore impossible to adhere strictly to Maxwell’s Theory as he gave it to the world, if only on account of its inconvenient form. But it is clearly not admissible to make arbitrary changes in it and still call it his.” (23)

Professor J.J. Thomson gives a similar view on the problems in expressing the ideas of Maxwell:

“The descriptive hypothesis, that of displacement in a dielectric, used by Maxwell to illustrate his mathematical theory, seem to have been found by many readers neither so simple nor so easy of comprehension as the old fluid theory; indeed this seems to have been one of the chief reasons why his views did not sooner meet with the general acceptance they have since received. As many students find the conceptions of ‘displacement’ difficult, I venture to give an alternative method of regarding the process occurring in the electric field, which I have often found useful and which is, from a mathematical point of view, equivalent to Maxwell’s s Theory.

This method is based on the conception, introduced by Faraday, of tubes of electric force, or rather, of electro-static induction.” (24)

It is evident that three distinct contributions were laid out by these followers of Maxwell’s Theory. First was the experimental verification by Hertz. Second was the development of a suitable mathematical representation applicable to engineering formulation by Heaviside, and Third, an aether physics representation by Thomson.

The problem introduced however, is that Helmholtz Theory was left to be forgotten, and the non-electromagnetic aspect of electricity was thereafter ignored by most with the exception of Nikola Tesla, and possibly Charles Steinmetz.

Heaviside concludes with:

“It is not by any means to be concluded that Maxwell spells finality. There is no finality. It cannot even be accurately said that Hertzian Waves prove Maxwell’s Dielectric Theory completely. The observations are very rough indeed, when compared with the refined tests in other parts of electrical science. The important thing proved is that electromagnetic waves in the Aether at least approximately in accord with Maxwell’s Theory are a reality, and that the Faraday-Maxwellian is the correct one.” (25)

However, Heaviside imposes and arbitrary restriction:

“The other kind of electrodynamic speculation is played out completely. There will be plenty of room for more theoretical speculation, but it must be on the Maxwellian type to be really useful”. (25)

Heaviside is correct in his criticism of the old German electrodynamics, the useless potential theories, and other such illusions in electrical theory, which find their origin as far back as Isaac Newton. However, to ignore the aspects of electrical theory, which are not of an electromagnetic nature is not permissible when framing a general theory of electricity. It is a strange irony that while Heaviside rejects the Helmholtz Theory, (33) his so-called Telegraph Equation does provide the required framework for a true General Theory of Electricity. For an excellent analysis of the development of Electric Transmission Theory, see Ernst Guillemin “Communications Networks”, Volume Two, Chapter One.

Third Commandment, Idolization of the Electron:

To Quote Lucien Poincare:

“The electron has conquered physics and many adore the new idol rather blindly”. (26)

Gustave Le Bon states:

“The conception of the electrons, a near relative to the old Phlogiston, is one of the most unfortunate metaphysical ideas recently formulated…..” The electron has become at present day, a sort of fetish for many physicists, by which they think to explain all phenomena.” (27) (34)

In a toast to a gathering of his illustrious colleagues, J.J. Thomson makes a rather startling remark:

“Here is to the electron, may it be of no use to anyone.” (28)

It must be remembered that it was Thomson himself that is credited with the quantification of the so-called electron, so what would motivate him to make such an outlandish statement? (35)

Charles Steinmetz outright rejected the electron concept, or what he sometimes called the “Ionic Theory of Electricity.” He regarded the notion of electronic charge as an impediment to the understanding of the behavior of electricity, to quote:

“Unfortunately, to a large extent in dealing with the dielectric field, the pre-historic conception of the electro-static charge on the conductor still exists, and by its use destroys the analogy between the two components of the electrical field, the magnetic and the dielectric and makes the consideration of the dielectric field unnecessarily complicated.” (29)

After the introduction of the myth of Santa Clause, we as children are also “taught” that “electricity is the flow of electrons.” It is later learned the truth of Santa, but the fallacy of the electron persists.

Oliver Heaviside writes extensively on the mis-guided notion that electricity is the flow of electrons in a so-called conductor. “A perfect conductor is a perfect obstructer, but does not absorb the energy of the electromagnetic wave…...”

“The properties of a perfect conductor are derived from those common conductors by examining what would happen if the resistivity were continuously reduced, and ultimately became zero. In this way, we find that a perfect conductor is a perfect obstructer, for one thing, which idea is singularly at variance with popular notions regarding conductors…...”

“According to Ohm’s Law alone, a perfect conductor should be one which carried an infinite current under a finite voltage, and the current would flow all through it because it does so ordinarily. But what is left out of consideration here is the manner in which the assumed steady state is established. If we take this into account, we find that there is no steady state when the resistance is zero, for the variable period is infinitely prolonged, and Ohm’s Law is out of it, so far as the usual applications goes…...”

“The smaller the resistance the greater the time taken for the current to get into the conductor from its boundary, where it is initiated. In the limit, with no resistance, it never gets in at all. Where then is the current?” (30)

Heaviside continues:

“The uniformly distributed current of the steady state appropriate to finite conductivity becomes a mere surface current when the conductivity is infinite.”

“In the usual sense that an electrical current is a phenomenon of matter, it has become quite an abstraction, for there is no matter concerned in it. It is shut out completely.” (31)

The electron represents a phenomenon of electronics, but not a phenomenon of electricity. Moreover, the motion of electrons is representative of the time rate of the destruction of electric induction, this is what is known as resistance. The concept of electrons finds, however, useful application in the theory of so-called semi-conductors, such as silicon, carbon, selenium, etc.

Where it is found in practice that electrical devices do not consume energy but serve to convert this energy into another useful form, electronic devices in practice consume nearly all the energy, turning it into useful heat.

The contemporary Leibnitz-Einstein notion of the electron has worked further mischief into electrical theory by it becoming a “catch all” for kindred phenomena, such as the cathode ray, etc.

The electron has become so endeared to the physicist that any criticism of it will draw an almost fanatical reaction.

What has been learned here is that in its fundamental nature, electricity is not a physical phenomenon married to gross physical matter, and such it should be left aside in the Science of Electricity, and the ill-advised pronouncements of the physicist should be ignored.

3) REFERENCES

Recent Researches in Electricity and Magnetism

J. J. Thomson (1898)

(1) Page 2

(10) Page 1

(24) Page 1-3

---

A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity

E. T. Whittaker (1910)

(2) Page 36

(7) Page 1-3

(19) Page 309

(20) Page 353

---

The Evolution of Physics

Lucien Poincare’

(26) Page 324

---

The Evolution of Force

Gustave Le Bon (1908)

(3) Page 35

(13) Page 109

(26) Page 112

---

The Evolution of Matter

Gustave Le Bon (1906)

(11) Page 218

(12) Page 198

(34) Page 227

---

Old Physics for New

T. E. Phipps Jr. (2012)

(15) Page 5

---

Electromagnetic Theory

Oliver Heaviside (Dover 1950)

(4) Article 179, Page 221

(9) Page XIX

(14) Page XX

(22) Article 5, Page 5

(23) Page XXVII

(25) Article 6, Page 6

(30) Article 189, Page 338-339

(31) Page 339

(33) Appendix D, Page 493

---

Aether and Matter

J. Larmor (1900)

(5) Page VIII

(6) Page 23

---

Beyond the Electron

J. J. Thomson (1928)

(35) All

---

Proceedings of the Royal Institution of Great Britain

Vol 35 (1951) Page 251

(28) All

---

Electric Dischargers, Waves, and Impulses

C. P. Steinmetz (1914)

(29) Page 13-14

---

Electric Waves

Heinrich Hertz (1893)

(8) Page XV

(16) Page 15

(21) Page 20

---

Theory of Wireless Power

E. P. Dollard (1986)

(17) Page 1

---

Steinmetz, Engineer and Socialist

R. R. Kline (1992)

PRESENTATIONS AND BOOKS BY ERIC DOLLARD

Four Quadrant Representation of Electricity - http://fourquadranttheory.com/

Extraluminal Transmission Systems of Tesla and Alexanderson - http://extraluminaltransmission.com/

Electrical Transmission in Multiple Coordinate Systems - http://extraluminaltransmission.com/

Power of Aether as Related to Music and Electricity - http://powerofaether.com/

Musical Seismograph – Demonstration of the Tesla Converter -

http://emediapress.com/ericdollard/musicalseismograph/

History, Theory & Practice of the Electrical Utility System - http://emediapress.com/ericdollard/utility/

Crystal Radio Initiative - http://crystalradioinitiative.com/

Versor Algebra as Applied to Polyphase Power Systems I & II – http://versoralgebra.com

Lone Pine Writings I & II - http://lonepinewritings.com/

Lone Pine Writings I – Paperback on Amazon -

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1518815936?ie=UTF8&tag=maimounas-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1518815936

INTERVIEWS AND OTHER MISC VIDEOS WITH ERIC DOLLARD

https://www.youtube.com/user/aaronmurakami/search?query=eric+dollard

ERIC DOLLARD’S OFFICIAL FORUM

http://www.energeticforum.com/eric-dollard-official-forum/

ENERGY SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE

http://energyscienceconference.com

ERIC DOLLARD’S FACEBOOK & TWITTER PAGES

https://www.facebook.com/ericpdollard/

https://twitter.com/EricDollard

The Integratron is a unique and enigmatic structure located in Landers, California, near Joshua Tree National Park. Designed by George Van Tassel, a former aircraft mechanic and ufologist, it was built between 1954 and 1959.

Core Technical Design of the Integratron

• Structure: A 38-foot-high, 55-foot-diameter all-wood dome built without nails or metal, using shipbuilding techniques with glued layers of old-growth Douglas fir. The adhesive is primarily paint and caulk, creating a seamless, non-metallic structure.

• Electrostatic Generator: Designed as an "electrostatic generator" for cell rejuvenation and time travel, Van Tassel claimed it harnessed geomagnetic energy from a vortex beneath the site. Magnetometers detect elevated magnetic fields at its center

Eric Dollard’s Role and Technical Contributions

• Last Engineer to Work on the Integratron: Dollard, an electrical engineer and Tesla researcher, was one of the few to understand the Integratron’s original purpose. He designed a pulse modulator for its energy systems, critical for its purported electrostatic functions.

• Connection to Lakhovsky’s Multi-Wave Oscillator (MWO):

  • The Integratron was inspired by Georges Lakhovsky’s MWO, a high-voltage, high-frequency device theorized to enhance cellular health via electromagnetic fields. Dollard reverse-engineered the MWO’s unbalanced design, which used longitudinal waves (non-Hertzian) for energy transmission without loss.

  • Dollard emphasized the MWO’s grounding system (e.g., 16 ground rods in a radial pattern) to optimize Earth’s conductivity, a principle likely applied to the Integratron.

• Four-Quadrant Electricity Theory: Dollard’s work on the Integratron tied into his broader research on dielectric and magnetic induction (Psi and Phi fields), aligning with Van Tassel’s vision of the structure as a "resonant tabernacle" for energy manipulation

Energy and Wave Theories Behind the Integratron

• Longitudinal Waves: Dollard and Van Tassel believed the Integratron could harness longitudinal (scalar) waves, which propagate without energy loss, unlike transverse EM waves. This was key to claims of "time travel" and anti-gravity effects.

• Ether and Electrostatics: Dollard’s theories posited that high-voltage electrostatic potentials could repel the "Ether" (the medium of space), reducing inertia—a concept Van Tassel may have incorporated for the Integratron’s rejuvenation goals.

• Geomagnetic Vortex: The site was chosen for its intersection of geomagnetic forces, which Dollard’s grounding systems aimed to amplify.

“As AI continues to transform industries, nuclear energy is going to become a more vital energy source to help power these capabilities,”

Nvidia, through its venture capital arm NVentures, has joined Bill Gates and HD Hyundai in raising $650 million to back TerraPower, Gates’ nuclear power startup founded in 2006.

AI needs a lot of energy. The only reasonable solution was - 'go nuclear'. Big guys play with millions billions and win again. Nvidia stock is on the rise. And, as per usual, nothing happens without Billy Gates to hell, the doctor of everything.

...but, somewhere war(s) is happening, isn't it. Oh, but not for big important guys, you say? War is war, it's always 'happening somewhere', but business is business.

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/nvidia-goes-nuclear-company-joins-bill-gates-in-backing-terrapower-a-company-building-nuclear-reactors-for-powering-data-centers

Compilation of powerful ideas from three brilliant minds — Federico Faggin, Bernardo Kastrup, and Chris Langan. Each of them offers a unique perspective on consciousness and reality.

Original Video Description

Hopf fiber bundle topology is taught as simply as possible. Physicist Roger Penrose called the Hopf fibration, "An element of the architecture of our world." Essential in at least 8 different physics applications, the Hopf fibration is a map from a hypersphere in 4D onto a sphere in 3D. Many visualizations are displayed herein. Mathematician Eric Weinstein commented on the structure on Joe Rogan's podcast as, "The most important object in the entire universe."

If you're not yet familiar with higher dimensional shapes, you may want to first watch my video explaining a 4D hypercube known as the tesseract:  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGmQe85cBeI

The initial outline for this video was over 25 minutes, so I trimmed details of n-spheres for the sake of brevity. Including here for those interested:

S0 0-sphere | Pair of points | Bounded by lines

S1 1-sphere | Circle | Bounded by pairs of points (S0)

S2 2-sphere | Sphere | Bounded by circles (S1)

S3 3-sphere | Hypersphere | Bounded by spheres (S2)

So the pair of points at the ends of a 1D line segment is considered a 0-sphere, or S0. It's hard to visualize, but a straight line is an arc of a circle whose radius is infinite.

Now, a circle is bounded by those pairs of points. We say a circle is S1, or a 1-sphere, sitting in 2D space.

A sphere is bounded by circles. We say a sphere is S2, or a 2-sphere, sitting in 3D space.

You are probably noticing an important pattern here. Each of these structures are one dimension lower than the Euclidian space they are embedded within. This is because we are only concerned with the boundaries of each shape.

So for a circle, we look at just the 1-dimensional circumference. Thus, S1. For a sphere, the surface is actually 2-dimensional. Thus, S2.

Now, we are navigating beyond the limits of human perception. A hypersphere is bounded by spheres. We say a hypersphere is S3, or a 3-sphere, sitting in 4D space. This is technically impossible to visualize.

At 2:58, I've included two visualizations of a hypersphere. The first is the shadow of a wire-frame surface of a hypersphere, projected in 3D. A perfect model would be an opaque object, so this cage gives you a sense of the hypersphere composed of spheres. The second is a highly polished version with a few vertices in view. Neither version is perfect, but they are the next best things compared to Hopf maps:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hypersphere.gif

Seemann (2017) https://vimeo.com/210631891

🚩 Nerd Alert 🚩 The interactive Hopf map visualizer by Nico Belmonte (@philogb) http://philogb.github.io/page/hopf/#

Sources:

Prof. Ludwik Kostro’s “Einstein and the Ether” - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234957049_The_Physical_Meaning_of_the_Coefficients_cnG_n_015_and_the_Standard_Model_of_the_Universe

Is there an Æther? P.Dirac - https://www.nature.com/articles/168906a0

Lightness of Being, F. Wilczek - https://archive.org/details/lightnessofbeing00wilc/mode/1up

Zitterbewegung structure in electrons and photons, D. Hestenes - https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.11085

Interacting spiral wave patterns underlie complex brain dynamics and are related to cognitive processing (Tip off: Bob Greenyer) - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-023-01626-5

Ben R. Rich interview - https://eu.columbiatribune.com/story/opinion/editorials/2014/05/27/ufo-accounts-are-journalists-stuff/985695007/

Experimental Study of Plasmoids, W.Bostick - https://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.106.404

Communications system, H. Puthoff - https://patents.google.com/patent/US10361792B2/en

Communication method and apparatus with signals comprising scalar and vector potentials without electromagnetic fields, H. Puthoff - https://patents.google.com/patent/US5845220A/en?oq=US5845220

Optical anapoles - https://www.nature.com/articles/s42005-019-0167-z

O-Day - ESP, Bob Greenyer -

Viktor Schauberger (1885–1958) was an Austrian forester, inventor, and naturalist known for his pioneering ideas on water management, energy generation, and biomimicry. He observed natural processes, particularly the movement of water in rivers and forests, and developed theories and technologies inspired by nature's principles.

Key Concepts & Contributions:

1. Water as a Living Element

   • Schauberger believed water was a living organism that must flow naturally (in vortices/spirals) to stay healthy.

   • He opposed straight, channelized rivers, arguing they disrupted water's energy and led to environmental damage.

2. Implosion Technology

   • Unlike conventional explosion-based engines (e.g., combustion), Schauberger proposed implosion—using inward-spiraling forces to create energy.

   • His Repulsine (a flying disc-like device) and other vortex-based machines aimed to harness this principle.

3. Log Flumes & River Engineering

   • Designed curved wooden flumes to transport logs efficiently, mimicking natural water flow.

   • Advised against concrete in river regulation, promoting natural meanders and gravel beds.

4. Copper in Agriculture & Water Revitalization

   • Used copper tools to enhance water quality and soil fertility, believing certain metals interacted beneficially with water's energy.

5. Eco-Technology & Free Energy

   • Explored concepts like "levitation" through vortex dynamics, leading to speculation about anti-gravity devices (though much remains unverified).

Legacy & Controversy:

• Schauberger's work was suppressed during WWII (Nazis reportedly forced him to research unconventional propulsion).

• Modern permaculture, vortex water revitalization, and eco-engineering movements cite his ideas.

• Some claims (e.g., free energy devices) remain disputed or unproven.

Famous Quotes:

• "Comprehend and copy nature!"

• "Water is a living substance."

The original Michelson-Morley experiment was done parallel to the ground, so at exactly the only angle where you can't measure the aether.

Accounting for the fact that the aether is parallel to gravity, suddenly it's measurable.

In just the last 20 years, the North Magnetic Pole has moved 400 miles out of Canada and into the Siberian side of the geographic pole.

From perplexity.ai:

Ashton Forbes: Career, and MH370 Investigation

Professional Career

Forbes has worked as an educator, author, and public speaker, emphasizing the transformative power of education. He has also been involved in community initiatives, mentoring students and advocating for accessible education.

MH370 Investigation & Online Controversy

In 2023, Forbes gained prominence as the organizer of MH370x, a group investigating the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370. He promoted viral videos claiming to show the plane being abducted by UFOs and transported through a wormhole

The SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar) scan project of the Khafre Pyramid has recently revealed potentially groundbreaking discoveries about the internal structure of the pyramid and the surrounding area.

Key Findings

Internal Structure:

• The scan uncovered a hidden chamber inside the Pyramid of Khafre containing five mysterious djed-like structures, similar to symbols found in the Great Pyramid of Giza and Egyptian hieroglyphs.

• The 3D reconstruction of the pyramid's interior revealed 5 identical structures near the base, connected by geometric pathways. Each structure has 5 horizontal levels and a sloping roof.

Underground Structures:

• Massive underground structures were detected, extending nearly two kilometers deep beneath the pyramid.

• The subterranean network includes:

  • Giant cylindrical constructions going 648 meters (approximately 2,126 feet) below the plateau.

  • Two cubical structures at the bottom of the cylindrical formations.

  • Spiraling columns and cube-like formations.

Technology Used

The project utilized an advanced form of Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) doppler tomography. This technique, developed by Filippo Biondi, transforms radar signals into phononic information, allowing for the detection of millimetric vibrations. The method analyzes micro-movements on the pyramid induced by ambient seismic waves, enabling high-resolution, full 3D tomographic imaging of the pyramid's interior and subsurface1.

Researchers

The project was led by:

• Corrado Malanga from the University of Pisa

• Filippo Biondi from the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow

Significance and Controversy

This discovery has sparked significant interest and debate in both academic and alternative archaeology circles. While the findings are potentially revolutionary, there is some controversy surrounding the reliability of the methodology, as it is a relatively new application of SAR technology in archaeology. The researchers did not have official permission from Egyptian authorities for this project, conducting their scans independently using satellite-based technology.

As more information is revealed, it remains to be seen whether these findings will be confirmed and lead to further discoveries about ancient Egyptian technology and architecture.