Let me attempt to explain something down on your level. I hope you can get it. Static-fields-cannot- transfer-any-information. To do that, they will have to be be changing (modulated) And any such modulation would be transfered by ordinary old EM waves. Just what makes you even think otherwise????
AH.. but you are forgeting... t=cr.. which shows the field itself... can grow... from 1% to 63% in one t.... thus it is a matter of detecting variations in this field... and its intensity.. i.e.. v.. dah... v can transfer... without ever the need for e- to actually cross the distance.. get it. subspace.. get it,.? -MT
The principle that a time varying electric field induces a magnetic field and that a time varying magnetic field induces an electric field is one of the most well tested parts of modern science. When the electric field grows, it is a time varying electric field. Therefore it initiates the self perpetuating cycle which is an electromagnetic wave. How do you think that an electric field can grow ( or diminish ) without being a time varying field?
Therein lies the whole question. He doesn't, really. Because he doesn't understand enough about the principles involved to actually think anything at all. He just makes up fiction.
MT, I would like to hear your proposal for measuring the speed of a static electric field. Thank you.
YOU are assuming.. that what i am proposing would be a 100% efficient system... no.. of course there would be em waves generated... in the direction of both terminals... but such would be seperate from the electric field which caused it... and if our power level goes up.. or v goes up... we can have hope of making the connection on a purely capacitive level... regardless of whether it is 1% of the energy in question.. doesnt matter.. 1% would be enough to establish the link.... get it? i am not the first one to say it is possible to generate a scalar wave... being diametrically opposite to a normal em wave... do you know who said so?? TESLA. -MT
I AM WORKING ON IT... but when i have done so.. and won my nobel prise.. one person i will not be thanking is you... as you have offered no worthwhile input or suggestions. you have no ideas, period. -MT
LETS not get crazy.. you seem bright enough... but you have a terrible attitude for a scientist... which clearly shows.. you are not one. you are a student... who thinks he has learned alot. -MT
WILL you retrack the statement...? and do have even the slightest doubt about anything you have been taught.? students learn and believe... scientists question and form doubts based on the long examination of the issues... do you just accept it all? -MT
Of course not you nut! I AM a scientist. But I start with a base of knowledge that allows me to actually seperate the wheat from the chaff of intellectual speculation. Your approach - starting with very little wheat - leaves not much but chaff.
I think you should retract the statement. I find it offensive and insulting to stand-up comedians Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!. They work hard to be entertaining and to avoid repetition, neither of which applies in the least degree to MT. He may be many things, but certainly not a comedian. -Dale
i said to jay leno one day.. i gave your secetary a copy of my field theory.. i thought of presnting it on your show... .. ... ... .. but is wasnt very funny.... he turned to me and said.. 'yeah.. thats kinda important...' -MT
But the problem is that U r struck in the basics only and unable to move ahead. In seperating the chaff U r left with nothing.
