RE: To the Tesla list from Elihu Thomson regarding Perpetual Motion...(fwd)

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Dave's right, for people who wish to debate the merits of his hypotheses
and theories, it's best done on his list.

Chip

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:19:21 -0500
From: David Thomson <dwt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: 'Tesla list' <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: To the Tesla list from Elihu Thomson regarding Perpetual
    Motion...(fwd)

Hi Kendall,

> I've taken a cursory look at www.16pi2.com.  Again, Colin's 
> comments are appropriate.  There is no mathematical rigor.  
> No discussion of Hilbert spaces, Hermitian operators, or even 
> Shroedinger's equations.  

As this theory is studied, you'll find it produces a different view of
space-time.  This view does not make any claim that modern physics is wrong
(as Colin erroneously claimed), it is merely a different view.  And as for
Shroedinger's equations, the APMs new five-dimensional perspective of
subquantum existence eliminates the need for viewing matter as a probability
function.  It is true that from a four-dimensional perspective quantum
structure appears as a probability function with wave-particle duality.
However, when space-time is understood as a five-dimensional structure
encapsulating circular strings of mass moving perpendicular to the diameter,
a very discrete view of subatomic particles emerges.

What I have done is allowed my perception of reality to bend to match the
facts, rather than try to bend the facts to my four-dimensional perspective
of reality.  This allows me to see subquantum structures as clear geometry,
rather than rely on obtuse mathematical concepts.  Further, all aspects of
physics unites into a single paradigm through the APM.  There is no need for
conflicting and disjointed theories, such as in the present relationships
with Special Relativity, QCD, QED, and QM.  

> At least www.16pi2.com posits a rationale and develops that 
> rationale.  I think that we have very little science to argue 
> from a factual basis many of the things that we do.  In my 
> opinion, we should not be stomping on ideas.  

Thank you, Kendall.  Colin, Ed, Matt, and Gary make it sound like I'm a
fraud out trying to separate people from their money.  Nothing could be
further from the truth.  More than a dozen people have come to me with
proposals for raising large sums of money through private and governmental
grants.  I have turned them all down saying that I need something solid to
work from before I will ask for funds.  I understand how innocent people
start out with big dreams and little stubstance, and how those dreams
collapse in disaster.  I would prefer to take each step on solid ground.
All the funds I receive are from people who donate with no strings attached,
simply because they like what I'm doing.

This theory provides a strong foundation from which to build a better
understanding of the Universe and to develop technology.  There are
literally hundreds of people who already see this, many of them are well
placed academics and professionals.  Even as we speak I am meeting online
with physicists from around the world who want to understand this theory
better.  Many of these physicists are also developing the Electric Universe
model.  It turns out that my work provides the quantum view of electric
cosmology.  Further, my work shows why it is possible to develop two
entirely separate views of cosmology, the inertial view and the electric
view.

I could care less whether people on pupman want to understand the APM.  I'm
on pupman seeking information so I can build devices that push the limits of
physics, as predicted in my theory.  It just happens that high potential,
high frequency oscillators are one way to push these limits.  I laugh to
myself when people say, "he throws in a touch of Tesla for effect."  I can't
help it if Tesla was right all along.  Of course, I also can't help it if
Tesla was too proud to admit both transverse and longitudinal waves could
coexist in electrical phenomena.  Modern engineers make the same error.
Engineers have this misconception that physics is all transverse, or all
longitudinal.  But my theory shows these two separate views of reality are
orthogonal.  They are two separate views of the same thing.  What's more, we
can choose which view we wish to see and exploit nature from that
perspective.  

I appreciate Kendall's one voice of support for new ideas.  I don't care
about the dissenters who would apply their ignorance in a vain attempt to
ruin someone with lies and deception.  I just simply don't care.

Now, as I understand it, this list is for making big sparks.  If people wish
to trash my work, I believe that is off topic, as is discussing the merits
of my theoretical work.  Anybody who wants to learn more about my
theoretical work can join me on 
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslaresearch/

Dave