Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Machines & Experiments
Delta T, Helmholtz Variation
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sonix" data-source="post: 186373" data-attributes="member: 10954"><p>As said this is a variation on what I referred to as "classic Delta T" as found in the Montauk books, an antenna that, as you note, reportedly "bends/changes time". I've said "I intend to test for anomalous temporal effects." I've described my intention to "record continuous real-time comparison of the clocks" placed at different distances from the device. I don't know how much more explicit you need me to be.</p><p></p><p>I am not jumbling up the Montauk books description of Helmholtz coils use with the Delta Time Antenna. Helmholtz coils have a life outside of the Montauk books. I am replacing the 3 coils of the Delta T as described there, each with 2 coils of same shape and placed an optimal distance apart per Helmholtz configuration. I am not building a Montauk chair, and the use of circular Helmholtz coils in the description of the Montauk chair has no relevance to what I am attempting.</p><p></p><p>I'm not fudging. In that post I was explicitly expressing that mathematically, with a disk rotating at 47.7hz, if the radius was 1 meter, a point on the edge would be travelling at the speed of light. We cannot spin a disk at 47.7hz, but we can, "apparently" rotate an electromagnetic field at 47.7hz if it is so that sine and cosine of a frequency through two coils crossed at 90 degrees from each other will rotate the field at the rate of the frequency. I noted that this may be trivial or may be significant (possibly significant if only because this rotation of a field is being reported as an aspect of a device reported to distort time). I then explain why this may be only the appearance of the field travelling at or exceeding the speed of light, using the analogy of a row of light bulbs and the speed of a travelling virtual lit bulb. [USER=288]@Einstein[/USER] concured with that latter assessment, saying</p><p></p><p>The limitations of speed of a physical object, in respect to speed of light, I already recognized. [USER=288]@Einstein[/USER] did suggest there might still be something of interest happening in this scenario, though:</p><p></p><p>Ultimately, I am building this coil configuration and intend to try feeding it different frequencies, phase variations, etc. In that post I was expressing curiosity about whether there might be something significant about effects at higher frequencies, a line of thought prompted by what I recognized might be a trivial mathematical discovery of the speed of light in calculations regarding apparently producible rotating fields (using signals of 47.7hz and higher).</p><p></p><p>To sum up, I am not fudging - I was just not making the claims that you believed I made with the certainty you believed I made them. That you inferred does not mean I implied.</p><p></p><p>I'm not complicating things for myself, I am trying to avoid complications that you seem insistent in trying to introduce. Do I sometimes abreviate "Sine Wave" to simply "Sine" when in context there is no question I am speaking about waves and not about trigonometry? Absolutely.</p><p></p><p>I have been looking for sources of signal, regular sine wave signal. Sine wave is sine wave regardless of frequency - regardless of whether the frequency is in the ranges refered to as ELF, audio, Radio, Microwave, etc. If a sine (or any other changing electrical signal) is fed to an antenna or coil, then this creates fluctuation in the magnetic and electric fields. Some electromagnetic waves are stronger than others, propogate further, penetrate deeper into objects, etc., which is why different frequencies are used for different purposes and are put into different, named categories. But I am not concerned with microwaving meals or broadcasting, so I am going on the working supposition that those differences don't make a difference for my purpose. I am experimenting and looking for temporal anomalies using constructs that are within my resources to create. For the devices I am working on, that requires only local, close proximity fluctuating fields at frequencies within my control.</p><p></p><p>There are multiple schematics of devices on this site proported to have effect changing, distorting or transversing time. There are subjective reports of effects. There are also fraudulant claims - I recognize that. But what I do not see is anyone reporting that they have built a device and are consistently measuring time anomalies resulting from it. To suggest that we should be adherring to what I refer to as classic designs of these devices and not experiment with possible variations (as you've suggested to me regarding the Delta T antenna) is to suggest we stick to what demonstrably has not had consistent, replicatable results for those that have tried to recreate them.</p><p></p><p>Experimentation with attempts at "Time Travel" and all that falls under that umbrella is at the stage that aviation was prior to Kitty Hawk, 1903 - There is lots of debate, skepticism, speculation, amateur mechanics, etc. - but, to carry the analogy, with TT experimentation we have no birds, kites, gliders, etc, to point to as potential proofs of concept. One path forward - my chosen path forward and I think that of some others here - is in striving for innovation and recording of experimental results, to try to prompt temporal anomalies which would suggest possible paths for further, hopefully more fruitful, experimentation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sonix, post: 186373, member: 10954"] As said this is a variation on what I referred to as "classic Delta T" as found in the Montauk books, an antenna that, as you note, reportedly "bends/changes time". I've said "I intend to test for anomalous temporal effects." I've described my intention to "record continuous real-time comparison of the clocks" placed at different distances from the device. I don't know how much more explicit you need me to be. I am not jumbling up the Montauk books description of Helmholtz coils use with the Delta Time Antenna. Helmholtz coils have a life outside of the Montauk books. I am replacing the 3 coils of the Delta T as described there, each with 2 coils of same shape and placed an optimal distance apart per Helmholtz configuration. I am not building a Montauk chair, and the use of circular Helmholtz coils in the description of the Montauk chair has no relevance to what I am attempting. I'm not fudging. In that post I was explicitly expressing that mathematically, with a disk rotating at 47.7hz, if the radius was 1 meter, a point on the edge would be travelling at the speed of light. We cannot spin a disk at 47.7hz, but we can, "apparently" rotate an electromagnetic field at 47.7hz if it is so that sine and cosine of a frequency through two coils crossed at 90 degrees from each other will rotate the field at the rate of the frequency. I noted that this may be trivial or may be significant (possibly significant if only because this rotation of a field is being reported as an aspect of a device reported to distort time). I then explain why this may be only the appearance of the field travelling at or exceeding the speed of light, using the analogy of a row of light bulbs and the speed of a travelling virtual lit bulb. [USER=288]@Einstein[/USER] concured with that latter assessment, saying The limitations of speed of a physical object, in respect to speed of light, I already recognized. [USER=288]@Einstein[/USER] did suggest there might still be something of interest happening in this scenario, though: Ultimately, I am building this coil configuration and intend to try feeding it different frequencies, phase variations, etc. In that post I was expressing curiosity about whether there might be something significant about effects at higher frequencies, a line of thought prompted by what I recognized might be a trivial mathematical discovery of the speed of light in calculations regarding apparently producible rotating fields (using signals of 47.7hz and higher). To sum up, I am not fudging - I was just not making the claims that you believed I made with the certainty you believed I made them. That you inferred does not mean I implied. I'm not complicating things for myself, I am trying to avoid complications that you seem insistent in trying to introduce. Do I sometimes abreviate "Sine Wave" to simply "Sine" when in context there is no question I am speaking about waves and not about trigonometry? Absolutely. I have been looking for sources of signal, regular sine wave signal. Sine wave is sine wave regardless of frequency - regardless of whether the frequency is in the ranges refered to as ELF, audio, Radio, Microwave, etc. If a sine (or any other changing electrical signal) is fed to an antenna or coil, then this creates fluctuation in the magnetic and electric fields. Some electromagnetic waves are stronger than others, propogate further, penetrate deeper into objects, etc., which is why different frequencies are used for different purposes and are put into different, named categories. But I am not concerned with microwaving meals or broadcasting, so I am going on the working supposition that those differences don't make a difference for my purpose. I am experimenting and looking for temporal anomalies using constructs that are within my resources to create. For the devices I am working on, that requires only local, close proximity fluctuating fields at frequencies within my control. There are multiple schematics of devices on this site proported to have effect changing, distorting or transversing time. There are subjective reports of effects. There are also fraudulant claims - I recognize that. But what I do not see is anyone reporting that they have built a device and are consistently measuring time anomalies resulting from it. To suggest that we should be adherring to what I refer to as classic designs of these devices and not experiment with possible variations (as you've suggested to me regarding the Delta T antenna) is to suggest we stick to what demonstrably has not had consistent, replicatable results for those that have tried to recreate them. Experimentation with attempts at "Time Travel" and all that falls under that umbrella is at the stage that aviation was prior to Kitty Hawk, 1903 - There is lots of debate, skepticism, speculation, amateur mechanics, etc. - but, to carry the analogy, with TT experimentation we have no birds, kites, gliders, etc, to point to as potential proofs of concept. One path forward - my chosen path forward and I think that of some others here - is in striving for innovation and recording of experimental results, to try to prompt temporal anomalies which would suggest possible paths for further, hopefully more fruitful, experimentation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Machines & Experiments
Delta T, Helmholtz Variation
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top