My predictions for the coming Months.

reply to post by Ravinski

I have just chucked the Eye Of horus picture instructions into the Science Section.

I am sure it will ruffle feathers in there now.....

reply to post by aoi3610


Well there have always been weird and huge natural disasters on this world. Heck, there have been stranger days on this planet. I mean, I haven't forgotten the tsunami of 2004 in Sumatra etc. Now that was a natural disaster of biblical proportions!!!

www.youtube.com...

Yet we keep going on with our lives.... on to the next disaster.... So I'm not expecting to see any world wide difference this time... But I'm always open for discussion, theories and facts, so I will see what the next 2 years bring. If 2013 starts and nothing significant (worldwide) has happened I will put less time in predictions and theories and more in my social life I promise, looking @ my girlfriend now....

What I learn from these disasters is that I should be humble, happy and really lucky with all the small fortunes I have en try to be a good example for my surroundings! Life is for living we all know that!

reply to post by aoi3610


I will bump it a little and I'm hoping it will shake some feathers!!
I find it very interesting and it has alot to do with science to say the least, so I'm sure the mods will see that too !

reply to post by Ravinski

Well, I did not get a response either way, so I did it.

I kept it to the Science bit only.

Zero predictions.

1 Debunker instanlty. LOL

We are blind.

reply to post by aoi3610


A few pages back you asked if you can square a circle...I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say with this statement? I assume it has to do with the dome shape you talk about? Anyway, I am not sure if you can square a circle, but there are formulas for spheres. Any shape 2d, or 3d will have a formula.

reply to post by dumpaling
Thanks.

That is not quite what I mean.

The point is that you cannot reflect 98% more of something you don't have.

Well, math says you can't, but the physical world says you can.
The Physical world also says that every action has it's equal and opposite reaction.

If you understand the meaning.

I understand how to calculate the surface area of a sphere etc.

Shapes like this Pear shape are much more difficult to calculate, you have to break it up into pieces, then add the together to get the hole.

This, 65mm Diameter shrinking to 8.75mm, 130mm Tall has an external Surface Area of about 150cm2.

A lot for such a small item, in fact, close to the maximum that is possible.

reply to post by aoi3610


Maybe it was best to keep it here for a little bit longer . I've been following this thread since you started it, and to be honest, I didn't want you to "share" your time between the two threads. lol But I do have a couple questions for you:

1. Why not build a replica of the Pyramid?
2. Do you mind if I used Sketch up to build a 3d model of your Eye of Horus (EoH)? If it's legit I'll post it.
3. Is the dome on the bottom of your can necessary? IE. Does the Pyramid have a dome some where?
4. What are you using to "plate the inside with gold"? IE. Gold leaf etc.

Op you really got me excited to build one of these, but I'm just curious as to why you chose the can, I would imagine if you're on the right track, which I think you may be, the calculations and "pyramid" would need to be exact. And I'd assume it would have to be completely sealed except for at the top to minimize or even negate any energy escaping. Am I off track? Would welding together an aluminium pyramid be better? Or is it just the expense?

Looking forward to your response.

JohnnyR

Originally posted by JohnnyR
reply to post by aoi3610

 

Maybe it was best to keep it here for a little bit longer

. I've been following this thread since you started it, and to be honest, I didn't want you to "share" your time between the two threads. lol But I do have a couple questions for you:

1. Why not build a replica of the Pyramid?

That is an awesome idea if expensive, I have given it much though, I'm going for the Dome of the Rock from a practicality point of view.

The Pyramid has many "hidden" details that are difficult to get information on, it would be quite a learning process to do. I am sure it is possible though.

2. Do you mind if I used Sketch up to build a 3d model of your Eye of Horus (EoH)?

That is too an awesome idea, my graphic arts skills are, poop.

If it's legit I'll post it.

Minimum of 2000 years old, doesn't get any more Legit.

3. Is the dome on the bottom of your can necessary?

The pyramid has a bottom, the ground. Yes, I think it is needed to stop the contents falling out and to provide the reflective surface.

IE. Does the Pyramid have a dome some where?

It is using the same principal, but in a pyramid.

4. What are you using to "plate the inside with gold"? IE. Gold leaf etc.

The outside, as it reflects either way, and no, an electro brush-plating kit, Leaf won't take the heat.

Op you really got me excited to build one of these, but I'm just curious as to why you chose the can, I would imagine if you're on the right track, which I think you may be, the calculations and "pyramid" would need to be exact.

I did not "Choose" the can, it was the ONLY choice. There was a co-incidence that led me to the can too that I have yet to understand. My first couple of attempts really did look like nuclear reactors. t

You are not the firsthat wants to build it, and yes, I think the calculations would need to be pretty close for it too work. It is pretty easy to make.

And I'd assume it would have to be completely sealed except for at the top to minimize or even negate any energy escaping.

Yes, using that 1/64 - 1/2 - 1/4 - 1/16 principle.

Follow the instructions, they are quite precise.

Am I off track?

I do not think you are.

Would welding together an aluminium

pyramid be better? Or is it just the expense?

The pyramid is made of Stone, because stone is an even better insulator than Dry Earth, by 100%.
I would imagine a stone pyramid covered in Aluminium would be fine.

I think Gold from a reflectivity point of view is the ideal.

Looking forward to your response.

Thanks

reply to post by aoi3610


by legit, I was referring to whether or not my model was right, not your premise.

As far as the dome shape, I figured it would need a bottom , I was wondering if it was the lynch pin of the experiment. At the start of the thread you mentioned how you bent a solar panel? and noticed increased output? Is this the same theory your working with for the bottom of the can? I assume the surface area is increased, there by reflecting more energy.

I'll start building a 3d model of your can first, if nothing else you'll have an easier time explaining it.

JohnnyR

ETA: If you don't have it already, download Google Sketchup, its free, and you'll be able to view the model in 3d. I'll send you the file. May take me a few hours though.

reply to post by aoi3610


The biggest point you are missing is the 98% reflectiveness. You seem to be assuming that that means 98% is reflected and AMPLIFIED, while 2% is lost, when this is not the case. There is absolutely no "amplification" of the heat created. Why do you assume that somthing reflecting off a reflective surface is amplified when it is simply doing what you already described, being reflected.

While it is possible to focus a source so it is amplified to a smaller point (such as in a magnifying glass), it is only amplified in that smaller area. The energy output does not INCREASE.

I do not see how any amplification of the heat is accomplished. What you are trying to do here is somthing greater than a perpetual motion machine, which in itself has not been achieved.

Originally posted by nightbringr
reply to post by aoi3610

 

The biggest point you are missing is the 98% reflectiveness.

Am I, I think I've sussed it really, really well, It is YOU who does not understand the principal, despite me explaining it like 5 times.?

You seem to be assuming that that means 98% is reflected and AMPLIFIED, while 2% is lost,

You like to mis-read.

The Can is receiving input heat from ALL sides, the heat can ONLY go to the CENTRE of the POT.

Do you understand that the pot is taking 250-300 degrees from 150 cm2, then putting all that heat into an area the size of a 16g lump of lead?

What, 1.5 cm2

THAT IS AMPLIFICTION of the HIGHEST degree.

when this is not the case. There is absolutely no "amplification" of the heat created.

What did I just explain above then?

Why do you assume that somthing reflecting off a reflective surface is amplified when it is simply doing what you already described, being reflected.

It is being REFLECTED back into the centre of the POT, 98% reflected Back in, 2% loss.
And it ain't losing ANYTHING until the outside of the pot reaches 250-300 degrees.

While it is possible to focus a source so it is amplified to a smaller point (such as in a magnifying glass), it is only amplified in that smaller area. The energy output does not INCREASE.

Magnifying Glass

BOOM, you've done it again, answered YOUR OWN question - This magnifier is NOT made of GLASS, and it is not FLAT either. This is a "Spherical" Magnifying GLASS, magnifying HEAT into the centre of the CAN.

I do not see how any amplification of the heat is accomplished.

If it can't get out where is it too go?
This is like a thousand Heat arrows, all trying to get to the LEAD.

What you are trying to do here is somthing greater than a perpetual motion machine

There is nothing perpetual about it, the can only manages this twice before it falls apart.
This is about the release of ENERGY.

which in itself has not been achieved.

I do not believe I made an comment ANYWHERE about this being perpetual motion.

I ask this, how many times am I going to have to SMASH your question?

It is the same question, over and over.

I am sorry, I DO NOT intend to offend you, but I cannot see how you cannot understand the principle of this, yet you understand how you can burn your hand with a magnifying glass?

Did you actually say that the Magnifying glass does not amplify the energy or you did?
Did you say that it doesn't increase the energy at that small point or not?

Do you see how I am confused.

You understand the Magnifying glass?

I suggest you take a deep sleep.
You are not a god,demi-god,a messiah,a messenger or any other deity-connected entity.
You are a human.What's in your mind,will stay in your mind.
Reflect upon this.You and me are equals.You and the rest of the population of the world are equals to nature.
The sole purpose of making a prediction makes me irritated.
Im sorry,it's nothing personal and i apologize if my comments make you mad.

Originally posted by metodex
I suggest you take a deep sleep.
You are not a god,demi-god,a messiah,a messenger or any other deity-connected entity.

Thankfully we both agree, and I have stated this on several occasions.

You are a human.What's in your mind,will stay in your mind.

This is why the world will NEVER get free energy.

Reflect upon this.You and me are equals.You and the rest of the population of the world are equals to nature.

We are, except I am offering YOU, FREE ENERGY.

My device has everything you could want, including instructions on how to build it.

The sole purpose of making a prediction makes me irritated.

Then why did you read it?

Im sorry,it's nothing personal and i apologize if my comments make you mad.

I have heard it all before, I am thick skinned.

I read we have Mount Etna now Pouring Magma down the side....

ATS Thread

Webcam footage is live.

I read someone with more technical equipment than me is predicting a big quake within 24/48 hours?

ATS Thread

Can't say I liked the quote about the high readings still on the Magnemometer...

Click here for more information.

More to come.

Originally posted by aoi3610
I am sorry you do not believe the predictions, but they are not wrong, well, at least not the general idea.

May 2011, There are too many co-incidences.

I think you misinterpret me, and if so I am sorry! I support you and your research. I have never been able to get much into these type of threads because usually the OP gets worked up and the threads deteriorate into name calling, or the claims are outlandish.

The main point I want to drive home is that even if nothing comes from this thread (no horrible disasters, which is of course the preferable outcome) the science still seems valid. I don't see any holes in what you are claiming science wise. I usually don't frequent this forum, just have found your thread to be interesting and worth keeping up with all the pages.

I think there are some big changes coming. Keep up the good job aoi3610. Prediction thread or not, you are doing phenomenal defending your ground and not exploding.

reply to post by aoi3610


2nd that, geez tough crowd o.O

I think you misinterpret me, and if so I am sorry! I support you and your research. I have never been able to get much into these type of threads because usually the OP gets worked up and the threads deteriorate into name calling, or the claims are outlandish.

You do not need to appologise.

I try to not get too pulled in, sometimes I can't help it with some of the "Science" comments.

The main point I want to drive home is that even if nothing comes from this thread (no horrible disasters, which is of course the preferable outcome) the science still seems valid. I don't see any holes in what you are claiming science wise. I usually don't frequent this forum, just have found your thread to be interesting and worth keeping up with all the pages.

Thanks, I really, really hope I am wrong. I have stated catagorically I would say I was.
If I was. It's still not looking any better, worse if anything.

I still have every intention of continuing this, one way or another. I have several Irons in the fire as it were.

I think there are some big changes coming. Keep up the good job aoi3610. Prediction thread or not, you are doing phenomenal defending your ground and not exploding.

Like I said before, sarcasm is my favourite kind of humour.

I am most happy to receive pertinent questions, even off the wall questions.
But, Sarcasm will receive sarcasm.

Your "science comments" line brought me back to my previous post and as I said then and others pointed out, your equations, methods of working whatever it is out etc are incredibly intelligent and incredible but the hardest part is, my mind is not as mathematically or scientifically inclined as yours to be able to properly follow and understand.

Hope you take no offense to that but as before, I'll be following this and perhaps when you come to a breakthrough in the design and creation of the object you've focused on you could post it on your youtube account as a way of teaching us all how to build oneefore you and your family decide to depart