[Physics] "Real" time

[James Rose]

Doug,
Fascinating experiments.  Question:  Have you -- or, Can you -- run the same experiments at different -altitudes-, to see if there is a difference in the values generated?
I have a suspicion you will generate different values - because - you are generating effects of interaction with the earth's magnetic field, and the values generated will be different at alternative altitudes.  It would be fascinating to propose and run miniaturized sample runs inside the ISS, International Space Station as well.   Then aboard a 'stationary orbit" satellite, versus on the moon, versus at Legrange points.     (these later locations being for the future to run, :-)  )

Jamie Rose


      From: Doug Marett <dm88dm at gmail.com>
 To: General Physics and Natural Philosophy discussion list <physics at tuks.nl> 
 Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 9:29 AM
 Subject: Re: [Physics] "Real" time
   
Thanks Ruud! 

    What is so interesting to me about it is that the research suggests that magnetic induction can occur without even the counter-movement of a magnet and a conductor, or even a changing magnetic field. Rather, all that is necessary is the rotation of a magnet/conductor together with respect to "the fixed stars". Again, it brings us back to the idea that an "absolute frame of reference" has a physical meaning. 

Doug

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Ruud Loeffen <rmmloeffen at gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Doug.
Congratulations to you. I hope you will gain recognition for your work. It's pretty difficult for me to understand, but it seems to me accurate and convincing. Good luck! Thumps up!👍
Ruud Loeffen
On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 9:22 PM, Doug Marett <dm88dm at gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Everyone,

    Just wanted to share with you my latest research testing one of Einstein's ideas. This is the explanation of the Faraday Paradox / unipolar dynamo.
 The just released Youtube video is here: 

https://youtu.be/c5wgmTGi5pU

Seems that the evidence is in and there are some very strange things happening with magnetic induction! Check it out! 

The part 1 of the video is here, for context: https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=gduYoT9sMaE

Doug

On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Ilja Schmelzer <ilja.schmelzer at googlemail.com > wrote:

2016-10-30 19:30 GMT+01:00, Thomas Goodey <thomas at flyingkettle.com>:
> The above statements are not expressed in space-time terms.

Indeed.  But this does not make them wrong.  I do not doubt that they
can be translated into spacetime language, but see no advantage from
this.  In fact, they become weaker in this way.

>> Another important
>> class is related with causality:  If event A has causally
>> influenced event B, then when A has happened before B has
>> happened.

> This statement is also subject to the same clarification as
> I have given above.

With statements about causality the weakening becomes even more
obvious.  As far as a translation of causal statements into spacetime
language is possible at all, it has to be formulated in a language,
which does not lead into contradictions if applied to solutions with
causal loops, like the Goedel universe.

So I doubt that "clarification" is the appropriate word here.

______________________________ _________________
Physics mailing list
Physics at tuks.nl
http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/ma ilman/listinfo/physics



______________________________ _________________
Physics mailing list
Physics at tuks.nl
http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/ma ilman/listinfo/physics





-- 
Ruud LoeffenPaardestraat326131HC Sittardhttp://www.human-DNA.org

______________________________ _________________
Physics mailing list
Physics at tuks.nl
http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/ mailman/listinfo/physics




_______________________________________________
Physics mailing list
Physics at tuks.nl
http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics


   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20161101/81949c29/attachment.html>