Earth Bond Chap 12 Discussion...

[Seastallion]

I agree that some things in science are fairly rock solid, but only up to a point. The old saying that "truth is often stranger than fiction" is VERY true. There are still things we can't explain from observation when it comes to the leading edge of physics and quantum mechanics. To suggest that we truly understand energy at a fundamental level would be wrong. We've learned to use it in many ways, much like we've learned to use fire. Certainly, energy can be understood, measured, and explained up to a point in a relatively contained system. However, when you begin to study energy patterns on very large macroscopic levels, it gets harder to predict and understand. The reason weather prediction is still a half-hazard business, is because there are so many influences on a weather system that all of our technology and observation methods simply can't keep track of them all, or precisely predict their influences. The same is true of most other large scale energy systems, such as seismic activity or solar flare activity.

Something seemingly as simple as a river actually generates an electrical current, in fact any flowing water creates an electrical current. You can test it with your water faucet and an LED. The rivers, oceans, aquifers, and not to mention certain types of stone and metal deposits can all have various effects on the flow of energy all over the world. I read a story once about a mountain in Africa with uranium deposits (If I remember right...), where spontaneous nuclear reactions occur causing electrical discharges from the mountain. My point is, that with such a huge system of interconnected flows of energy, who are we to say that something extraordinary doesn't exist in our own "Real Life" world. I personally believe that to be the case, although I certainly couldn't prove it. Nor would I be able to say just what that something extraordinary even is. Still, to quote Shakespeare, "There are more things in Heaven and Earth, than are dreamt of in your Philosophies, Horatio..."

[ANTIcarrot]

There are still things we can't explain from observation when it comes to the leading edge of physics and quantum mechanics.

Stop right there. Just because there are still some mysterys left doesn't mean you get to make things up about actual science. If you're going to kill cat girls the least you can do is be professional about it.

Water for example does not generate electricity simply by flowing. Sufficiently concentrated brine flowing through a solonoid could induce electricity, but that's not quite the same thing. Poking a running tap with an LED shouldn't make it light up at all. If yours does, you really need to have your house wiring checked.

[Seastallion]

I admit I may be wrong about the LED experiment (as I haven't actually done it myself), it is something I'd heard of as an experiment. A neighbor and I did however test water flowing from the tap, using a Volt meter, and picked up an intermittent charge of about .03 volts. Granted, that is NOT a lot, but it was my understanding that the energy from flowing water is VERY low anyways. On the other hand, that alone says nothing to flowing bodies of water which carry impurities which would allow for better electrical conductance. There is apparently a process called a "physio electrical effect" which I don't really understand very well. The only places I've seen it are in medical related webpages, and a theory having to do with how the Great Pyramid might generate an electrical charge. The following story relates one of the reasons for that belief, as well as the credibility of the witness in question.

Sir W. Siemens, the British inventor, related that one day while he was standing on the summit of Cheops' pyramid an Arab guide called his attention to the fact that whenever he raised his hand with his fingers outspread an acute ringing noise was heard. Raising just his index, Siemens felt a distinct prickling in it. When he tried to drink from a wine bottle he had brought along he noted a slight electric shock. So Siemens moistened a newspaper and wrapped it around the bottle to convert it into a Leyden jar. It became increasingly charged with electricity simply by being held above his head. When sparks began to issue from the wine bottle, Siemens's Arab guides became distrustful and accused him of practicing witchcraft. One of the guides tried to seize Siemens's companion, but Siemens lowered the bottle towards him and gave the Arab such a jolt that he was knocked senseless to the ground. Recovering, the guide scrambled to his feet and took off down the Pyramid, crying loudly.

The electrical charge is theorized to be caused by the rise and fall of the Nile and the presence of aquifers beneath the pyramid. My neighbor (mentioned earlier, a former Navy Seal), has actually been to the Pyramids, and verified for me that there is indeed a network of flooded tunnels and natural aquifers beneath the Pyramid complex, with several openings that allow sunlight to shine on the water. The stones used in the structure of the Pyramid itself are also very interesting in terms of their electrical properties, and layout. The Wardenclyffe Tower that Nikola Tesla attempted to build was also theorized to function in a very similar manner, specifically built over an aquifer for much the same reasons, to utilize the electrical power generating capability of nature. What is certain, is that Tesla had stated that his ultimate goal was free, unlimited energy, for the whole world. Nothing I said was "made up". I said I believe there is more to the world than meets the eye, but I never suggested what exactly that is, or even what form it takes. I don't know. The science stuff I DID point out, is certainly true as far as we know. I'm not promoting religion, I'm simply saying that there is a lot more "weird" stuff going on than a lot of people realize.

As to what I said about the spontaneous nuclear reaction in the African Mtn... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nu ... on_reactor

Here is an interesting example of electricity from water... http://www.metacafe.com/watch/877015/fr ... batteries/

Granted, I'm sure the Copper and Aluminum used have a lot to do with it, but still very impressive. Three glasses of tap water powering an electronic calculator.

[GBLW]

I admit I may be wrong about the LED experiment (as I haven't actually done it myself), it is something I'd heard of as an experiment. A neighbor and I did however test water flowing from the tap, using a Volt meter, and picked up an intermittent charge of about .03 volts. Granted, that is NOT a lot, but it was my understanding that the energy from flowing water is VERY low anyways. On the other hand, that alone says nothing to flowing bodies of water which carry impurities which would allow for better electrical conductance. There is apparently a process called a "physio electrical effect" which I don't really understand very well. The only places I've seen it are in medical related webpages, and a theory having to do with how the Great Pyramid might generate an electrical charge. The following story relates one of the reasons for that belief, as well as the credibility of the witness in question.

Sir W. Siemens, the British inventor, related that one day while he was standing on the summit of Cheops' pyramid an Arab guide called his attention to the fact that whenever he raised his hand with his fingers outspread an acute ringing noise was heard. Raising just his index, Siemens felt a distinct prickling in it. When he tried to drink from a wine bottle he had brought along he noted a slight electric shock. So Siemens moistened a newspaper and wrapped it around the bottle to convert it into a Leyden jar. It became increasingly charged with electricity simply by being held above his head. When sparks began to issue from the wine bottle, Siemens's Arab guides became distrustful and accused him of practicing witchcraft. One of the guides tried to seize Siemens's companion, but Siemens lowered the bottle towards him and gave the Arab such a jolt that he was knocked senseless to the ground. Recovering, the guide scrambled to his feet and took off down the Pyramid, crying loudly.

The electrical charge is theorized to be caused by the rise and fall of the Nile and the presence of aquifers beneath the pyramid. My neighbor (mentioned earlier, a former Navy Seal), has actually been to the Pyramids, and verified for me that there is indeed a network of flooded tunnels and natural aquifers beneath the Pyramid complex, with several openings that allow sunlight to shine on the water. The stones used in the structure of the Pyramid itself are also very interesting in terms of their electrical properties, and layout. The Wardenclyffe Tower that Nikola Tesla attempted to build was also theorized to function in a very similar manner, specifically built over an aquifer for much the same reasons, to utilize the electrical power generating capability of nature. What is certain, is that Tesla had stated that his ultimate goal was free, unlimited energy, for the whole world. Nothing I said was "made up". I said I believe there is more to the world than meets the eye, but I never suggested what exactly that is, or even what form it takes. I don't know. The science stuff I DID point out, is certainly true as far as we know. I'm not promoting religion, I'm simply saying that there is a lot more "weird" stuff going on than a lot of people realize.

As to what I said about the spontaneous nuclear reaction in the African Mtn... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nu ... on_reactor

Here is an interesting example of electricity from water... http://www.metacafe.com/watch/877015/fr ... batteries/

Granted, I'm sure the Copper and Aluminum used have a lot to do with it, but still very impressive. Three glasses of tap water powering an electronic calculator.

ROFLOL - all I can think of is to quote the disclaimer at the beginning of this thread; "Book Specific Discussions (Contains Spoilers and many nuts)"

Thanks, Seastallion, I REALLY needed a good laugh this evening. In the mean time, might I suggest you read some books on physics and chemistry - each and every one of your 'proofs' have been disproved at one time or another. You might take a shortcut and watch 'MythBusters' on the 'Discovery Channel' though.

BTW, your final 'proof' about a water battery - a penny, a dime and lemon juice work much better.

[Seastallion]

Well, I'm not sure that I really gave anything I'd call a 'proof'. I related a story (about Siemens) which as far as I know is true, and one of probably many theories as to 'why' there might be an unusually strong EM field around the Pyramid. If we're referring to Tesla's work at Wardenclyffe, I would be hard pressed to casually believe that he was proven wrong, especially since he never got to demonstrate his idea to begin with. Tesla had an amazing track record, and I'd be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until he was proven wrong, which to my knowledge hasn't really happened. It is true that some of Tesla's ideas were never able to be demonstrated, and considered by many to be 'fringe' thinking. However, Tesla accomplished much and proved some ideas that were, at the time, considered equally impossible. Who knows what he might have achieved if he had been able to continue his work.

I can admit when I'm wrong, and I can admit when I don't understand something. I don't understand how the so called "Physio Electrical effect" is supposed to work, and I did look for an explanation. It may be nothing but bunk, but I have no proof of that either. Energy is energy however, regardless of what form it takes. Nothing I claimed, or presented as an example changes that. The Earth IS a large scale energy system, hard to understand, and equally hard to predict. I don't think anyone is debating that point, which is the central topic. The rest are side dishes.

If your referring to the natural nuclear reaction in the mountain thing, I'm more than willing to be directed to some alternate info source that would argue another side. As to the example of the water batteries, I never intended for it to be a 'proof', just something interesting I found while looking into the subject of unorthodox power generation from water. I'm well aware that to create an electrical flow you need an imbalance of positive and negative charges. I wasn't suggesting that water batteries were going to solve the worlds energy crisis, just that it was very interesting, and worth sharing. Honestly, if we're going to talk about "water power" (besides the sort created by turbines), I think the best candidate is the unfortunately infamous process known as 'Cold Fusion'. Specifically where Heavy Water is used in conjunction with a lattice of Palladium and an initial electrical charge to induce a nuclear reaction. Although it was given a bad name, it is NOT junk science, and there are several serious research organizations around the world still working on it, even here in the U.S. The preferred term for it these days is LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reaction). The early inconsistencies in others attempts to replicate the process, has since been discovered to primarily be a fault with Palladium lattices being used. The issue had to do with impurities in the lattice which could negatively effect the process.

Here is a video from 60 Minutes, about it. Not a 'proof', just something interesting.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4967330n

Even NASA has positive things to say about LENR, although I'm not sure which model they are working with...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxeKeuh_2Bw

Again... not 'proofs', just something interesting to think about. I think they'd have to submit a paper explaining every detail before it could be called a proof...

I actually enjoy it when Myth Busters do shows on ancient tech ideas. I missed the episode, but I heard the one they did on the Baghdad battery was really cool. I do watch it from time to time.

[ANTIcarrot]

Seastallion,
You are correct that naturally occuring fission and fusion reactors exist. All stars are examples of the latter, and the Earth's core is an example of the former. There are a few closer to the surface, but they're more along the lines of 'half a degree warmer than normal' rather than anything you'd normally think of as a reactor. But electricity doesn't work that way. The reason we're pulling faces at your opinions is because there are several large holes in your knowledge, and the conclusions you are comming to due to these holes appear very foolish to us.

I don't understand how the so called "Physio Electrical effect" is supposed to work, and I did look for an explanation. It may be nothing but bunk, but I have no proof of that either.

There are two very important ideas you need to understand here:

1) Fundamentally, if you don't understand something, then you shouldn't be expressing an opinion about it. If you don't understand something at all, in even the slightest amount, the only opinion you should be expressing is, "This makes no sense to me." Which is either a request for assistance or a strong condemnation of the idea, depending on your knowledge of surrounding subjects.

2) Because they didn't explain this to you in school, I'll tell you this now: Science isn't about making up ideas, science is about brutally torturing them until they break. The ideas that endure years of honest attempts to disprove them are assumed to be correct. One of the steps of being a scientist or rationalist in any reguard, is taking an idea (by preference the more deeply held the better) and honestly trying to break it as hard as possible. "People are easy to fool, and the easiest person to fool is yourself." If you make no attempt to test/disprove any claims you read before you repeat them, people will assume by default that you have been fooled. Or that you're a Troll.

If you want to fix these holes properly, you could do worse than The Magic of Reality or Unweaving the Rainbow, by Richard Dawkins, the James Randi institute online, or any number of other sources.

[Seastallion]

Seastallion,
You are correct that naturally occuring fission and fusion reactors exist. All stars are examples of the latter, and the Earth's core is an example of the former. There are a few closer to the surface, but they're more along the lines of 'half a degree warmer than normal' rather than anything you'd normally think of as a reactor. But electricity doesn't work that way. The reason we're pulling faces at your opinions is because there are several large holes in your knowledge, and the conclusions you are comming to due to these holes appear very foolish to us.

I understand what your saying and do appreciate it. However, I wasn't just referring to electricity, although that is certainly part of it. My main point of concern is the fact that the Earth is a very large scale (and somewhat contained) energy system unto itself. That involves forces more than just electromagnetism as I know you well understand. I think people got sidetracked with the whole pyramid thing, which I regret bringing up now, as it ended up being nothing but a distraction from the main point.

I don't understand how the so called "Physio Electrical effect" is supposed to work, and I did look for an explanation. It may be nothing but bunk, but I have no proof of that either.

There are two very important ideas you need to understand here:

1) Fundamentally, if you don't understand something, then you shouldn't be expressing an opinion about it. If you don't understand something at all, in even the slightest amount, the only opinion you should be expressing is, "This makes no sense to me." Which is either a request for assistance or a strong condemnation of the idea, depending on your knowledge of surrounding subjects.

As to the so called "physio electric effect", I do understand the outcome of the supposed effect, I just don't understand the actual mechanics in terms of generating an electrical charge. I certainly understand the idea of a magnet being moved through a coil to generate electricity. The physical movement of the magnet, combined with interaction of the magnetic field with the coil generates an electrical current by process of induction. This is because electricity and magnetism are the same force (Electromagnetism), and to have one, is to have the other. I also understand how LENR is supposed to work, and generate energy, whether you are referring to the process using Palladium, or Sonoluminesence, or even other means, where you effect change on a material in order to release electrons, ultimately altering the material in the process until it eventually becomes useless. I do get that. I'm simply unclear on the specific mechanism by which the physio electric effect is supposed to work, although to me personally, is sounds similar to a piezo electric effect. I'm still looking for an explanation about the mechanics of it.

2) Because they didn't explain this to you in school, I'll tell you this now: Science isn't about making up ideas, science is about brutally torturing them until they break. The ideas that endure years of honest attempts to disprove them are assumed to be correct. One of the steps of being a scientist or rationalist in any reguard, is taking an idea (by preference the more deeply held the better) and honestly trying to break it as hard as possible. "People are easy to fool, and the easiest person to fool is yourself." If you make no attempt to test/disprove any claims you read before you repeat them, people will assume by default that you have been fooled. Or that you're a Troll.

If you want to fix these holes properly, you could do worse than The Magic of Reality or Unweaving the Rainbow, by Richard Dawkins, the James Randi institute online, or any number of other sources.

I do understand the difference between Scientific Theory, as opposed to Scientific Fact or Law. I also understand that any "Fact or Law" is ALWAYS open to re-evaluation when new information becomes available that might rewrite a previous scientific notion. I'm also aware that many scientist, particularly in the nuclear field, are HIGHLY territorial with their theories because of the intense competition for money to fuel their work OR to maintain their own prestige. I do understand the process of peer review by scientist to get validation for their theories, as I'm distinctly aware that the process is also somewhat flawed. Precisely because many of those doing the reviews are also competing for the funding needed to work with their own theories.

I'm very well aware that science does NOT have every answer, and that we still have a LONG way to go. I think that people who believe that science does have all the answers are as fooled as those who ignore it. Science is very relevant but it is only as good as our ability to observe, and process those observations. Old theories sometimes have a way of coming back, when new information is found and confirmed. So you can't always write things off, just because the academic establishment tells you should. I believe in science, yes, but I also believe in other things as well. I actually do believe in spiritual forces, and I agree with Einstein that faith and science should not be seen as opposing forces, but rather as an alliance of ideas to find a greater truth. I believe that both are needed to truly understand the world and the universe. I see no problem with believing in a God that created a universe capable of self evolving, with perhaps the occasional interference.

I'm a fan of Michio Kaku, Burkhard Heim, Nikola Tesla (who considered himself a discoverer), and others. I loved Stephen Hawkings' Illustrated Universe in a Nutshell, one of my favorite books. I also enjoyed the 'The Science of God' by Gerald L. Schroeder. I suppose I do enjoy walking on the fringe of science, but only because I DO question the accepted ideas of academia. I think that accepted science is wrong about as many things (if not more) than the things it is right about. Or, if not wrong, then at least incomplete. I like to remain open to new ideas, rather than being rigid with distrust and bound to the 'accepted only' ideas. There are plenty of skeptics (I've been known to indulge in it from time to time), so I don't think there is any danger of accepted science just falling apart.

I agree I have many holes in my knowledge, but I don't think they are as great as has been imagined. I study about physics and cosmology for my own interests, and don't claim to be an expert at all. I do however, have a fair grasp on the principles of technology and scientific theory. I did quite well in science in school, and also took two years in 'the principles of technology' course, getting a physics credit out of it. I'm no expert, but I'm not an idiot either. I also understand the idea of psuedo science, as I made a hobby of it in my favorite fan forums for my favorite scifi shows. I was well known for being an 'answer man' about how things MIGHT work. That is because I understand that even psuedo science needs to be grounded at least somewhat, in real life science. It's one of the reasons I love Fel's work, as he too is grounded in the tenets of making good psuedo science. Or magic, as the case may be.

On that note, I suggest we get back to the main point of this thread... Fel's work is awesome..!