Tesla's Longitudinal/Scalar Wave

Mary Rose

Mary Rose
However, famous scientists such as Noble Prize winner Paul Dirac said that they have to exist and we have to search for these magnetic monopoles, because this is a missing link, and we need it.

Meyl then said that in 2009, the Helmholtz Society, the biggest German research society, found it, and they have opened the way for him and his approach and his calculations.

He said that the Helmholtz Society has only seen that the magnetic monopoles in spin ice, in a special situation, are observable and detectable, but that he has published all the consequences. Meyl said he had to wait for twenty years for this door to be opened.

Link: “Magnetic Monopoles in Spin Ice”

Ok a magnetic field has to have at least 2 poles no matter if your talking about a magnet planet or a star. Magnetism has to create a flow of energy just like electricity completing a circuit. If you managed to make a monopole magnet or it existed somewhere in the universe you wouldnt have a detectable magnetic field. If it doesnt have a magnetic field how would you even know it was a monopole magnetic field?

Bedlam
reply to post by dlbott

 

Tesla had nothing to do with lasers, or as far as I know, "sonics ".

What about sonic lasers on the heads of sharks?

Meyl said Maxwell's 3rd equation is describing magnetic monopoles and that it was okay one hundred years ago to set it at zero because it was appropriate to accept only what had been proved.

But nowadays you have to prove that it is acceptable to set it at zero, and that is not done; it's just stated that the equation is set at zero and we don't have to look at it.

He said this is the problem if you look at mobile phones, which are sending this part. He said they're not measuring, they are not realizing, because, they say, it's up to the equations: It's zero.

DenyObfuscation
reply to post by dragonridr

 

Are you familiar with this?

Scalar wave equation in three space dimensions

en.wikipedia.org...

Is this just a mathematical construct? Does it have a place in physical reality?

I'm not even sure what I'm asking. Clueless on this.

Sure. A scalar wave equation in three dimensions is a mathematical model of a partial differential equation with at least a 2nd derivative (so you get propagating waves) operating on a scalar field (the simplest possible field, a single number which is a function of (x,y,z,t)). That's math.

Then there is physics which says that certain mathematical models are useful for describing physical phenomena in certain cases. The primary physical example for a scalar wave equation in 3 dimensions is acoustics, i.e. sound, in a fluid (a liquid or gas in practice) which has no rotation. The scalar in this case is the pressure field, meaning that you can define and measure pressure at all points in space in the geometrical configuration. Fluctuations in this field can propagate in all 3 dimensions. This is known as sound.

en.wikipedia.org...

Note that the applicability of this scalar equation depends on certain assumptions which are not always satisfied---more generally fluid mechanics has a vector part too (the velocity field) in addition to the pressure. And then there's a scalar temperature field (vibrations dissipate energy into heat) which should really be in there as well.

Temperature and pressure are scalars meaning that there is just a number at any one place---temperature doesn't have a direction, and neither does pressure, but velocity of a fluid (or the direction of electric or magnetic fields) does and is a vector field.

In a complex solid like the Earth which can support transverse (bending) waves in addition to compression (waves), sound is not represented by a simple scalar field but a tensor field and this explains how sound from earthquakes propagates at different speeds for the different modes.

Mary Rose
Meyl said Maxwell's 3rd equation is describing magnetic monopoles and that it was okay one hundred years ago to set it at zero because it was appropriate to accept only what had been proved.

But nowadays you have to prove that it is acceptable to set it at zero, and that is not done; it's just stated that the equation is set at zero and we don't have to look at it.

He said this is the problem if you look at mobile phones, which are sending this part. He said they're not measuring, they are not realizing, because, they say, it's up to the equations: It's zero.

If mobile phones were "sending this part" then mobile phones must be capturing magnetic monopoles.

But they aren't. There isn't any experimental evidence for a non-zero magnetic monopole. Think about it this way: a magnetic monopole would find its lowest energy state inside a regions of very high magnetic susceptibility. Such as the core of the Earth which has thousands of miles of iron which is a very good ferromagnetic material (is it above the desaturation temperature though?). Then we would notice the effect from the captures monoples in that the direction of the Earth's magnetic field (which has been measured extensively over the globe for scientific & navigation purposes) would have a significant global 'in' or 'out' component. But it doesn't---it's just a dipole and higher orders which can arise from electric currents and not the monopole which requires the unicorn of a fundamental monopole.

Besides if the unvierse had stable magnetic monopoles opposited signed ones would attract one another directly and presumably annihilate into photons when they met one another. So they would eat each other up and we'd be left with either positives or negatives, or if they were created in perfect pairs, none left.

dragonridr

Had nothing to do with people stealing anything the man had no head for business at all. Had huge amounts of money coming in had huge investors like JP Morgan. Problem was he experimented with electricity but never truly knew what he had. For example he was so obsessed with trying to transfer power without electric wires he didnt even realize he invented the radio and allowed Marconi to basically invent something using his patents.He really wasnt a scientists he really didnt truly understand the principles behind electricity he was an experimenter at heart. If it involved electricity he played with it and it was at a time when electricity wasnt understood.

So this supposed genius Tesla had radio by the horns, and even with Westinghouse and JP Morgan, he didn't realize it and instead of inventing radio (making him and investors wildly wealthy) he wanted to transmit power in such a way that any freeloader could take power without paying for it?

In radio, the receivers don't incur any extra load and hence cost on the transmitter---in inductive power transmission they do. (That's the difference between 'radiation' and 'induction').

Which one is a better business?

Mary Rose
Meyl said Maxwell's 3rd equation is describing magnetic monopoles and that it was okay one hundred years ago to set it at zero because it was appropriate to accept only what had been proved.

But nowadays you have to prove that it is acceptable to set it at zero, and that is not done; it's just stated that the equation is set at zero and we don't have to look at it.

He said this is the problem if you look at mobile phones, which are sending this part. He said they're not measuring, they are not realizing, because, they say, it's up to the equations: It's zero.

What this makes no sense at all!!! Maxwells 3rd equation explains electrostatics basically explains properties of stationary or slow-moving electric charges with no acceleration. We call this static electricity however there is an addition that we can make to this. Faraday's Law of Induction, if a closed circuit has a changing magnetic flux through it, a circulating current will arise, which means there is a nonzero voltage around the circuit. Now think about what you said science only accepts whats been proved. Then he says science requires you to prove and equation is zero. Does that make sense look thats like saying we have to prove bigfoot exists then in the next statement say we have to prove he doesnt exist.Ever heard of anything being proved true by proving something else is not true? This will narrow your options but your no closer to the truth.

After 16:30, it was pointed out that antenna noise associated with mobile phones is potential vortices, which, if they decay, produce heat - Meyl said this is known from what eddy currents do.

Meyl said this heat is not explained by Maxwell's equations because in Maxwell's equations heat does not exist.

So, there is something in between the wave and the heat: The vortex. That means that if these waves are absorbed, which means they roll up into a vortex, maybe, and then you have these vortices, which then decay, you have heat.

But it's not one vortex, it's two, combined, because you always have expansion on the inside and contraction from the outside - just like a tornado.

Great thread star and flag.

Now I don't understand most of the fancy talk what I did hear was Tesla and free energy. So could someone tell me how to make a device that uses this free energy that is all around us. How do I build a tesla coil in my back yard? Somebody somewhere has to know how to get the hidden files on tesla and his work. Anybody work in the CIA and care to hack out some secret files for us? I'm getting real sick of this crap. People are dying in the streets having to choose between eating food for a few days or paying the electric bill, trust me I know this feel. I ate 2 meals in the last 24 hours that's all I can afford, I work full time and am in debt up to my nose. Sorry for the rant but I'm really angry about how the rich are laughing at us from a corner penthouse.
/End Rant.

Mary Rose
But it's not one vortex, it's two, combined, because you always have expansion on the inside and contraction from the outside - just like a tornado.

Meyl said that we know that velocity is important to how big this vortex is, so if this vortex is running over the open sea, it's filled up with water, the velocity is changing, so the potential vortex is getting stronger and bigger and it is more and more contracted, which means it is more and more dangerous. We are able to photograph these vortices. These vortex systems are well-known and well-accepted. The energy of the whole system is constant, but it is changing in size. If the energy is more contracted, it is the energy density that is higher and dangerous.

Meyl said that if you compare this with the electric system, where he has developed the potential vortex, and he has described it in a mathematical way, then again, we have both systems, and we are able to describe these structures. He said that if you have the possibility to describe structures, then you are able to explain what a flashlight is, what a [inaudible] is, what electrical particles, electrons, and other particles are - in contrast to quantum physics, where these particles are all postulated.

Mary Rose
He said that if you have the possibility to describe structures, then you are able to explain what a flashlight is, what a [inaudible] is, what electrical particles, electrons, and other particles are - in contrast to quantum physics, where these particles are all postulated.

Meyl said that quantum physics is unable to say where particles are coming from; they postulate it. He said that if they have postulated a particle, they are not able to derive it from something else.

This is the problem: Quantum physics has everything postulated, and they look for something they can put to this postulation - for example another postulation like quarks - so they try to postulate what they have postulated.

Meyl said that he doesn't need postulation. He said he started by postulating these potential vortices but nowadays he is able to derive them from accepted equations, so he doesn't need any postulation.

He said that if you use accepted assumptions, and you have no mistake in your derivation, then you have to accept the result.

Mary Rose
He said that if you use accepted assumptions, and you have no mistake in your derivation, then you have to accept the result.

Meyl went on to say that this is why the potential vortex has to be accepted.

He said that then we have the possibility to discuss these results because in mathematics sometimes we get results that have no reality in physics. We know this has to be proved.

And he said that's why he started with the work of Tesla to reproduce his work, because Tesla had found things that were not explainable by standard physics.

reply to post by alfa1


That video you posted, though interesting, for some reason does not go beyond 47:09.
Are there any reports from this conference in Stockholm?

Bedlam
reply to post by DenyObfuscation

 

It's expressed as a Laplacian, so you have that scalar term in Mary's early post. It 's a scalar (wave equation ) rather than a (scalar wave) equation if you will.

I get it. Thanks for the reply. Thanks to dragonridr and mbkennel also.

Mary Rose

Mary Rose
He said that if you use accepted assumptions, and you have no mistake in your derivation, then you have to accept the result.

Meyl went on to say that this is why the potential vortex has to be accepted.

He said that then we have the possibility to discuss these results because in mathematics sometimes we get results that have no reality in physics. We know this has to be proved.

And he said that's why he started with the work of Tesla to reproduce his work, because Tesla had found things that were not explainable by standard physics.

Ok your quoting his public relations page but it means nothing. There was nothing that Tesla worked on that cant be explained by physics we are well aware of the principles of electricity. We have had a long time to play with it unlike Tesla where it was still a new invention.Hes attempting to form legitimacy by making claims of continuing the work of a great man. But in truth he has no clue what Tesla was working on because most of the stuff he was working on was destroyed by a fire in his lab. In truth other then his patents and stuff he mentioned in scientific journals of the time not much of his work survived the bankruptcy and fire. So this leaves him with lots of room to speculate what Tesla was working on and giving him the opportunity to make whatever claims he wants. As far as a potential vortex again a non statement.The only potential vortex i can think of off hand involves plasma vortex and i dont think thats what he means because this involves external flows around bodies and discusses the flow of plasma in a frictionless environment.

Mary Rose

Meyl said that quantum physics is unable to say where particles are coming from; they postulate it. He said that if they have postulated a particle, they are not able to derive it from something else.

This is the problem: Quantum physics has everything postulated, and they look for something they can put to this postulation - for example another postulation like quarks - so they try to postulate what they have postulated.

...and then test it against real world results. And it agrees. Over. And Over. And Over.

On the other hand, what's Meyl done that's verifiable and repeatable? Nada.

Bedlam

Mary Rose

Meyl said that quantum physics is unable to say where particles are coming from; they postulate it. He said that if they have postulated a particle, they are not able to derive it from something else.

This is the problem: Quantum physics has everything postulated, and they look for something they can put to this postulation - for example another postulation like quarks - so they try to postulate what they have postulated.

...and then test it against real world results. And it agrees. Over. And Over. And Over.

On the other hand, what's Meyl done that's verifiable and repeatable? Nada.

Very true in fact i missed that little gem you commented on. So hes saying that quarks were made up from a math never mind a research facility that goes by the name of Cern i guess he never heard of it??

Mary Rose
And he said that's why he started with the work of Tesla to reproduce his work, because Tesla had found things that were not explainable by standard physics.

Continuing to listen, I found that there were too many inaudibles for me to deal with.

So instead, I will post a 9 page .pdf file by Prof. Konstantin Meyl on the same topic discussed: "Scalar waves - Theory and Experiments":

Wave equation

By using the Laplace operator the well-known wave equation, according to the rules of vector analysis, can be taken apart in two parts: in the vectorial part (rot rot E), which results from the Maxwell equations and in a scalar part (grad div E), according to which the divergence of a field pointer is a scalar. We have to ask ourselves, which properties has this wave part, which founds a scalar wave?

If we derive the field vector from a scalar potential ? , then this approach immediately leads to an inhomogeneous wave equation, which is called plasma wave. Solutions are known, like the electron plasma waves, which are longitudinal oscillations of the electron density (Langmuir waves).

reply to post by Mary Rose


When I learned electromagnetics, the professor and textbook didn't put in lots of "?" marks in the equations. What's up with that? Maybe it's some PowerPoint crap.

Plasma waves are consequences of the combinations of fluid mechanics of charged particles plus the electromagnetic fields. No surprise you can get longitudinal (and many, many other complex forms of waves) in plasmas once you introduce mobile charged particles---which is completely different from non-existent longitudinal E&M waves in a vacuum which is a myth.

reply to post by Mary Rose


Im not going to take the time to break down his entire equations but two things i see before i would even start. One is hes simply talking about 2 counter running plane waves but seems unfamiliar with them.And secondly he seems to be taking what he calls a scalar wave and subtracting it from a transverse radio wave there isnt enough math here to explain why?? This tells me this was written for public consumption to make his theory seem solid. The other thing i noticed is he assumes his wave propagation to be the speed of light but no information as to why since hes using an equation for a magnetic field???