- See the past four years of presentations for the step by step of how I derived this in physical evidence from studying witness marks in NOVA, LION, Hutchison, VEGA etc. experiments. I was sent the Zvirblis paper by one member in the Russian CNT & BL community when I appealed them for their opinion on my findings. The paper was sent without comment. I translated it and translated the mathematical proof after finding that paper independently.
The vacuum flux loops can harness photonic energy including that from e+ and e- annihilations in the Dirac sea (zero point energy harvesting)
- When that gets above a critical threshold, its interaction with ordinary matter leads to vacuum decay of baryonic matter. For instance protons. This converts protons for instance in to light and leptons. After essentially proving based on physical evidence, that the closed pointing vectors mesh into thin shell structures that consume, disrupt, transmute and transport ordinary matter, a reader of RemoteView.ICU called Chris Scott sent me on 10th June 2022 a 2009 US Department of Energy funded paper by Fryberger. I list the relevant papers here.
On Saturday night into Sunday 13th Jun 2022, I read it and some of the linked papers, and realised that by 2009, Fryber had come to the conclusion that Ball Lighting and other luminous objects must have a thin shell that is coherent, made of self-organised tori of tori and that these lead to vaccum decay of baryonic matter by way of E and M phantoms that should be detectable by FluxGate magnetometers.
The net result is that a free floating Ball Lightning will be a current source that converts up to 90% of the 1GeV of energy from Proton decay into light and leptons.
It is much better to have this in a low pressure gas as it will produce a more controlled energy flux.
One could use probes to extract the electricity, however, these would be prone to consumption by the coherent matter if it gets too energised.
Very small amounts of stimulation will be able to push these Exotic Vacuum Objects past the threshold where they will self-sustain for a period of time producing electrons and light from vacuum decay and zero-point harvesting.
Brilliant and nFascinating presentation. Thank you, Bob. So, now we can see people/organizations already have figured out vacuum engineering, and seemingly forgotten it, again? Like reinventing the LENR wheel over and over. Well, between Fryberger and Zhverblis/Nevesky we've got some darn strong ammo now to challenge the 3D version of physics that's so prevalent in the last few decades.
I was certain this was understood in certain circles by January 2017, I made that clear in Early March. I had enough evidence to convince me then.
What I learned up to that point was what I predicted at the foundation of the MFMP. If we just demonstrated physical, repeatable realities, then if there are any that have seen this before, they will come out of the woodwork and announce it.
When we had our 'Gamma' event in 2013, many people came out of the woodwork to claim the same or similar observations and EarthTech Texas offerred help. It took till 2017 for me to find out they had been set up by Hal Puthoff.
When we saw Thermal Neutrons in GS5.2 - likewise people reported the same thing.
So, what I see is, right at the point Dr. Matsumoto is saying his nuclear transmutations and more are caused by the technological equivalent of Ball Lightning and the rules change to prevent him publishing in Fusion Technology. We have J Roth from the US Military publish how ball lightning would be the path to Fusion and the US DOE funded D. Fryberger explaining Ball Lighting. Then, subsequent to the 1999 observation of BL like objects in superconducting cavity, we have Fryberger again finding that he has to extend his theory to vacuum currents. He makes a prediction that E and H fields should be detectable, even through metals - that looks like a CYA -
On the one hand I feel he must have seen the Zverblis/Nevessky paper, on the other hand, I did not see these works before, yet I derived the notion of fractal EM clustering and scale invariant structures that are able to entirely assemble and disassemble matter based on physical marks in several systems. It was only after I found structures that could have caused those strikes marks and shared that with the Russian community, did I learn about Zhvirblis and then find myself the Nevessky paper, and only after translating them and releasing them, was I pointed to the 2009 Fyrberger paper which led me to the 1994 paper, which in combination tell a very similar story albeit directly linked to Ball Lightning and not a technological equivalent.
So, as I have said many times, if you care enough and think enough, it does not matter where one is in the universe, this will be found sooner or later and understood and it will always be the same thing.
It's f****g unbelievable because the basic rules of academic scholarship and research are too cite other researchers who are relevant to your work. It's a must. You can't pretend like you discovered it yourself and yet it seems everyone out there besides MFMP are ignoring Matsumoto, Shoulders, Bostick, Hutchison, and Russian/Soviet research. It's like all these Air Force and DOE funded researchers are ostriches with their heads in the sand. A bizarre type of amnesia affecting only BL/cold fusion research. And Google with all their resources can't reproduce what you and your volunteers have accomplished? This is all very suspect. Will have to ask Hal P. next time I see him at a conference, we've talked several times about the remote viewing and UFO programs but this hasn't come so far because I didn't know the right questions until I started watching your channel. Anyways, thanks for the detail in your response above. (BTW, mentioned the Fryberger papers to a friend last night and her response to the acronym MLOs was, "Oh, so they've come up with yet ANOTHER name for BL?".)
Bob, here's another NS article about plasmonics where this quote really stands out:
"Because surface plasmons compress electromagnetic energy into this tiny volume, they create an intense electric field that holds the key to their many applications." Yes, it's light, not charge clusters, but sounds a lot like an nTor to me.
ALSO: I'm trying to pull some strings with a friend at NASA for your flux-gate magnetometer. I've placed a request. It may or may not be a longshot? I'll let you know when I hear back: they work the guy about 100hrs/week.
I am not good with things I can't see. Sure the unipolar arc I can see, and it plays music, but what is it good for?
About claimed devices that were never replicated or disappeared. They are interesting, however, there are many that have spent a long time studying these things and it has collectively led to nothing.
"but what is it good for?" -- I could say the same thing about your Hutchison samples!!!!
-It's a proof that most/all the Tesla conspiracies were true, first of all.
-It's a demonstration of impulse currents, cold electricity, radiant energy, and (i think) a hint about the monopolar force that underpins the phantom: the third electrodynamic force, vacuum.
-Its the active component in many lost/extant plasma medicine devices, such as the Lakhovsky & Priore machines, both of which seem to be evidenced. Theres another machine I won't mention here due to a nebulous fabricator & proprietor....
-It's a demonstration of fractal forms within electricity (see larger picture) and therefore an observational connection to the fractal-ness of the N-Torus, and likely a clue.
-Its a hint to read "Secrets of Cold Electricity" by Peter Lindemann for an ever bigger list of what it's good for.
-It can be exploited for over-unity, and this was apparently achieved by Tesla, and the process is explained in Lindemann's book.
-If the above statement is true, then its also an (apparent) disproof of your statement that EVOs are causal to all exotic energy phenomena: you'd have to change it to instead say "most".
"About claimed devices that were never replicated or disappeared": please clarify this question, im not sure which devices you're referring to.
Thanks as always Bob. It's always a treat to hear from you.
It isn't something I invented, it is his description of a naturally occurring structure. My recent work has been to build on the work of John Hutchison and Ken Shoulders and where possible to add more clarity on repeatable physical evidence and if relevant, robust mathematical support. John started on their journeys in 1979 - present and Ken 1982 - 2013.
About claimed devices that were never replicated or disappeared"
Do you mean DePalma's N-Machine? I actually don't know much about it - it seems that's Peter S's forte.
BUT
Tewari did produce video evidence of a similar design producing energy gains, its still available on youtube, and his peers are present, reviewing it, and impressed, in said video.
If you weren't referring to the N-Machine (which peter, not I, brought up) then I'm really at a loss which devices you're referring to.
You asked me to look at the comments, I was addressing the comments.
I've seen some media/video(s) on Tewari, I thought it was interesting. If it worked, then he should be wealthy, even if he used it to pump water for people in his homeland. People may have been impressed, but did it lead to anything? If not, why not?
Our replication of Celani, in part, lead to nearly 12 million euros for universities and companies across Europe to research LENR in the Horizon 2020 program. Literally, organisations who's members mocked me - London Imperial College and Brno Technical University in the past are recipients of these funds now.
Go read the Vesperman report.... I have a handy summary:
Energy Invention Suppression Case Statistics Number of Energy Invention Suppression Incidents:
- Number of Energy Invention Suppression Incidents – 95
- Number of Dead, Missing, or Injured Energy Inventors, Activists, and Associates – 20
- Number of Energy Inventors and Associates Threatened with Death – 32
- Number of Energy Researchers and Associates Imprisoned or Falsely Charged – 5
- Number of Incidents of Energy Invention Suppression by the United States Government, Patent Office, Central Intelligence Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Marshals, Army, Air Force, Navy, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, Defense Intelligence Agency, S.W.A.T. Teams, National Security Agency, U.S. Postal Service, Department of Energy, Department of State, Securities and Exchange Commission, Food and Drug Administration, Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, Internal Revenue Service, Rural Electrification Administration, White House, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Small Business Administration, and Canada’s Royal Canadian Mounted Police – 59
- Number of Inventions Classified Secret by U.S. Patent Office – 5000
- Number of Incidents Involving Oil Companies – 9 Names of Companies, Banks, State Agencies, Private Groups, and Universities Involved with Energy Invention Suppression – Standard Oil, Zapata Petroleum, Atlantic Richfield, Exxon-Mobile, Shell Oil Company, General Electric Company, Yakuza, California Air Resources Board, Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, Wells Fargo Bank, Ford Motor Company, General Motors Corporation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Queen of England, Kollmorgan, World Bank, Rockefellers, Carlyle Group, and Bush Family .
~ History Of 'New Energy' Invention & Suppression Cases, by Gary Vesperman
SPECULATION: it seems that the music-playing monopolar arc may be a macroscopic version of the electron.... a flux sink (to counterspace) -- or at least analogous
I would respectfully disagree about it being a macroscopic versions of the electron. A free electron, a very stable particle, if it is that, will be in a minimum energy state (excluding its kinetic energy), the unipolar arc does not look to be coherent or in a minimum energy state - if it was it would not be continually changing form. Instead it is very dynamic.
A soap bubble in free space is a minimum energy structure.
Yes, you're quite right here bob. I was foreshortening this thought much too much. Let me try again and tell me if I do better:
It's a macroscopic manifestation of the underlying vacuum force that constitutes the electron, that usually doesn't like to appear on macroscopic scales.
Hows that?
Recall my background is software, and amateur electrodynamics. Not professional scientist! :)
In a related but different work, i think well-documented, Dollard did achieve 'wireless' transmission from... was it Vegas to San-Fran? with only 1%? signal loss - clearly not inverse square. Also this was the Wardencliffe technology.... i THINK Borderland Science Foundation may have the records for this.
BUT IT DOESNT PLAY MUSIC SO I DIDN'T SHOW IT TO YOU
Hi all, I was thinking can we form the shape of bagel coils shown above around a plasma ball? These plasma balls have a mini Tesla coil in the centre providing lots of electrons and ions that could then hopefully be formed into an EVO by the influence of the bagel coils concentrated magnetic field. These plasma balls are also filled with a mixture of noble gases and some have Xenon inside which I seem to remember is considered favourable for EVO formation.
Also I found this interesting in a video on plasma balls, the spark from such a small battery powered Tesla coil seems to affect the camera equipment......https://youtu.be/nnCuhQTllRU
Maybe - there is a blue ocean of opportunity to research - having the right LR combinations will be critical as Zhvirblis notes that some variations will have no closed Poynting vectors and will be useless.
A brilliant relation to the Platonic Solids. This maybe relates to the dodeca-icosa nesting fractal? The (presumably?) 'other' 3d fractal, besides the phantom?
John Littlemist asked the question.
"Could someone please explain in layman's terms what is the anomaly with these toroids?"
Here was my answer:
It produces closed Poynting vectors of flux energy in the dirac sea that is not dependent on physical matter. See
- Zhvirblis (1995), "Chemistry of Life" peer-reviewed Journal for conceptual aspects - https://remoteview.substack.com/p/the-bagel-game?s=w#details
- Nevessky (1993), "Electricity" peer-reviewed Journal for generalised mathematical proof - https://remoteview.substack.com/p/electromagnetic-fields-of-current?s=w
- See the past four years of presentations for the step by step of how I derived this in physical evidence from studying witness marks in NOVA, LION, Hutchison, VEGA etc. experiments. I was sent the Zvirblis paper by one member in the Russian CNT & BL community when I appealed them for their opinion on my findings. The paper was sent without comment. I translated it and translated the mathematical proof after finding that paper independently.
The vacuum flux loops can harness photonic energy including that from e+ and e- annihilations in the Dirac sea (zero point energy harvesting)
- When that gets above a critical threshold, its interaction with ordinary matter leads to vacuum decay of baryonic matter. For instance protons. This converts protons for instance in to light and leptons. After essentially proving based on physical evidence, that the closed pointing vectors mesh into thin shell structures that consume, disrupt, transmute and transport ordinary matter, a reader of RemoteView.ICU called Chris Scott sent me on 10th June 2022 a 2009 US Department of Energy funded paper by Fryberger. I list the relevant papers here.
https://remoteview.substack.com/p/o-day-light-and-leptons?s=w
On Saturday night into Sunday 13th Jun 2022, I read it and some of the linked papers, and realised that by 2009, Fryber had come to the conclusion that Ball Lighting and other luminous objects must have a thin shell that is coherent, made of self-organised tori of tori and that these lead to vaccum decay of baryonic matter by way of E and M phantoms that should be detectable by FluxGate magnetometers.
The net result is that a free floating Ball Lightning will be a current source that converts up to 90% of the 1GeV of energy from Proton decay into light and leptons.
It is much better to have this in a low pressure gas as it will produce a more controlled energy flux.
One could use probes to extract the electricity, however, these would be prone to consumption by the coherent matter if it gets too energised.
Very small amounts of stimulation will be able to push these Exotic Vacuum Objects past the threshold where they will self-sustain for a period of time producing electrons and light from vacuum decay and zero-point harvesting.
Updated EVO Reactor Rebuild Project:
https://baronarcanus.substack.com/p/stanley-meyer-memorial-project-manifesto-2fa
Coming along nicely
And if it's coming along nicely, then why do my stats say you've yet to open it?!?!?!
Are you gas-lighting me, Bob? Do you WANT your shampoo replaced with NAIR? :)
I have at least 3 browsers.
Stat's don't work that way!
:@
Maybe it's just delayed, though. It does say it may take 'up to an hour' to propagate the stats.
"OMG, Bob Greenyer just commented on MY post!!!! I'm NEVER washing this screen again!"
~ A regular fanboy.
Brilliant and nFascinating presentation. Thank you, Bob. So, now we can see people/organizations already have figured out vacuum engineering, and seemingly forgotten it, again? Like reinventing the LENR wheel over and over. Well, between Fryberger and Zhverblis/Nevesky we've got some darn strong ammo now to challenge the 3D version of physics that's so prevalent in the last few decades.
I was certain this was understood in certain circles by January 2017, I made that clear in Early March. I had enough evidence to convince me then.
What I learned up to that point was what I predicted at the foundation of the MFMP. If we just demonstrated physical, repeatable realities, then if there are any that have seen this before, they will come out of the woodwork and announce it.
When we had our 'Gamma' event in 2013, many people came out of the woodwork to claim the same or similar observations and EarthTech Texas offerred help. It took till 2017 for me to find out they had been set up by Hal Puthoff.
When we saw Thermal Neutrons in GS5.2 - likewise people reported the same thing.
So, what I see is, right at the point Dr. Matsumoto is saying his nuclear transmutations and more are caused by the technological equivalent of Ball Lightning and the rules change to prevent him publishing in Fusion Technology. We have J Roth from the US Military publish how ball lightning would be the path to Fusion and the US DOE funded D. Fryberger explaining Ball Lighting. Then, subsequent to the 1999 observation of BL like objects in superconducting cavity, we have Fryberger again finding that he has to extend his theory to vacuum currents. He makes a prediction that E and H fields should be detectable, even through metals - that looks like a CYA -
On the one hand I feel he must have seen the Zverblis/Nevessky paper, on the other hand, I did not see these works before, yet I derived the notion of fractal EM clustering and scale invariant structures that are able to entirely assemble and disassemble matter based on physical marks in several systems. It was only after I found structures that could have caused those strikes marks and shared that with the Russian community, did I learn about Zhvirblis and then find myself the Nevessky paper, and only after translating them and releasing them, was I pointed to the 2009 Fyrberger paper which led me to the 1994 paper, which in combination tell a very similar story albeit directly linked to Ball Lightning and not a technological equivalent.
So, as I have said many times, if you care enough and think enough, it does not matter where one is in the universe, this will be found sooner or later and understood and it will always be the same thing.
It's f****g unbelievable because the basic rules of academic scholarship and research are too cite other researchers who are relevant to your work. It's a must. You can't pretend like you discovered it yourself and yet it seems everyone out there besides MFMP are ignoring Matsumoto, Shoulders, Bostick, Hutchison, and Russian/Soviet research. It's like all these Air Force and DOE funded researchers are ostriches with their heads in the sand. A bizarre type of amnesia affecting only BL/cold fusion research. And Google with all their resources can't reproduce what you and your volunteers have accomplished? This is all very suspect. Will have to ask Hal P. next time I see him at a conference, we've talked several times about the remote viewing and UFO programs but this hasn't come so far because I didn't know the right questions until I started watching your channel. Anyways, thanks for the detail in your response above. (BTW, mentioned the Fryberger papers to a friend last night and her response to the acronym MLOs was, "Oh, so they've come up with yet ANOTHER name for BL?".)
Yet another name.
Bob, here's another NS article about plasmonics where this quote really stands out:
"Because surface plasmons compress electromagnetic energy into this tiny volume, they create an intense electric field that holds the key to their many applications." Yes, it's light, not charge clusters, but sounds a lot like an nTor to me.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17823924-800-bright-new-world/
Hi Simeon,
Thanks, but I cannot see more than the start of these articles.
What's the best way to send you PDFs?
Bob, just looking at articles I cut out from New Scientist over the years and here's our friend Anatoly Klimov at the center of an article about plasmas from 2000. Hello! https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg16822624-000-plasma-magic/
Thanks Simeon, I'll check it out, I remember reading about this approach to reducing air resistance.
God has always had 1000 names.
@Bob: I wanted to convey this to you as well, could you please read the comments here:
https://baronarcanus.substack.com/p/the-electromagnetic-phantom-as-a/comments?s=w
ALSO: I'm trying to pull some strings with a friend at NASA for your flux-gate magnetometer. I've placed a request. It may or may not be a longshot? I'll let you know when I hear back: they work the guy about 100hrs/week.
Thanks.
I am not good with things I can't see. Sure the unipolar arc I can see, and it plays music, but what is it good for?
About claimed devices that were never replicated or disappeared. They are interesting, however, there are many that have spent a long time studying these things and it has collectively led to nothing.
"but what is it good for?" -- I could say the same thing about your Hutchison samples!!!!
-It's a proof that most/all the Tesla conspiracies were true, first of all.
-It's a demonstration of impulse currents, cold electricity, radiant energy, and (i think) a hint about the monopolar force that underpins the phantom: the third electrodynamic force, vacuum.
-Its the active component in many lost/extant plasma medicine devices, such as the Lakhovsky & Priore machines, both of which seem to be evidenced. Theres another machine I won't mention here due to a nebulous fabricator & proprietor....
-It's a demonstration of fractal forms within electricity (see larger picture) and therefore an observational connection to the fractal-ness of the N-Torus, and likely a clue.
-Its a hint to read "Secrets of Cold Electricity" by Peter Lindemann for an ever bigger list of what it's good for.
-It can be exploited for over-unity, and this was apparently achieved by Tesla, and the process is explained in Lindemann's book.
-If the above statement is true, then its also an (apparent) disproof of your statement that EVOs are causal to all exotic energy phenomena: you'd have to change it to instead say "most".
"About claimed devices that were never replicated or disappeared": please clarify this question, im not sure which devices you're referring to.
Thanks as always Bob. It's always a treat to hear from you.
From Baron, with love.
The Hutchison samples are:
- great paper weights
- Indelible records of anomalous effects
- keys to the process
- interesting physical artefacts that one can muse over
- photogenic subjects
As regards to EVOs, I agree with Ken Shoulders statements from 2010 on their potency.
https://steemit.com/dtube/@mfmp/nzssv2y3
https://steemit.com/steemstem/@mfmp/kenneth-radford-shoulders-extras-transcript
It isn't something I invented, it is his description of a naturally occurring structure. My recent work has been to build on the work of John Hutchison and Ken Shoulders and where possible to add more clarity on repeatable physical evidence and if relevant, robust mathematical support. John started on their journeys in 1979 - present and Ken 1982 - 2013.
About claimed devices that were never replicated or disappeared"
Do you mean DePalma's N-Machine? I actually don't know much about it - it seems that's Peter S's forte.
BUT
Tewari did produce video evidence of a similar design producing energy gains, its still available on youtube, and his peers are present, reviewing it, and impressed, in said video.
If you weren't referring to the N-Machine (which peter, not I, brought up) then I'm really at a loss which devices you're referring to.
You asked me to look at the comments, I was addressing the comments.
I've seen some media/video(s) on Tewari, I thought it was interesting. If it worked, then he should be wealthy, even if he used it to pump water for people in his homeland. People may have been impressed, but did it lead to anything? If not, why not?
Our replication of Celani, in part, lead to nearly 12 million euros for universities and companies across Europe to research LENR in the Horizon 2020 program. Literally, organisations who's members mocked me - London Imperial College and Brno Technical University in the past are recipients of these funds now.
Go read the Vesperman report.... I have a handy summary:
Energy Invention Suppression Case Statistics Number of Energy Invention Suppression Incidents:
- Number of Energy Invention Suppression Incidents – 95
- Number of Dead, Missing, or Injured Energy Inventors, Activists, and Associates – 20
- Number of Energy Inventors and Associates Threatened with Death – 32
- Number of Energy Researchers and Associates Imprisoned or Falsely Charged – 5
- Number of Incidents of Energy Invention Suppression by the United States Government, Patent Office, Central Intelligence Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Marshals, Army, Air Force, Navy, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, Defense Intelligence Agency, S.W.A.T. Teams, National Security Agency, U.S. Postal Service, Department of Energy, Department of State, Securities and Exchange Commission, Food and Drug Administration, Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, Internal Revenue Service, Rural Electrification Administration, White House, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Small Business Administration, and Canada’s Royal Canadian Mounted Police – 59
- Number of Inventions Classified Secret by U.S. Patent Office – 5000
- Number of Incidents Involving Oil Companies – 9 Names of Companies, Banks, State Agencies, Private Groups, and Universities Involved with Energy Invention Suppression – Standard Oil, Zapata Petroleum, Atlantic Richfield, Exxon-Mobile, Shell Oil Company, General Electric Company, Yakuza, California Air Resources Board, Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, Wells Fargo Bank, Ford Motor Company, General Motors Corporation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Queen of England, Kollmorgan, World Bank, Rockefellers, Carlyle Group, and Bush Family .
~ History Of 'New Energy' Invention & Suppression Cases, by Gary Vesperman
Next thing you know, you'll be answeriing me in rhymed verse.
no,
it's not my flow
Playing music.
</trolling>
SPECULATION: it seems that the music-playing monopolar arc may be a macroscopic version of the electron.... a flux sink (to counterspace) -- or at least analogous
I would respectfully disagree about it being a macroscopic versions of the electron. A free electron, a very stable particle, if it is that, will be in a minimum energy state (excluding its kinetic energy), the unipolar arc does not look to be coherent or in a minimum energy state - if it was it would not be continually changing form. Instead it is very dynamic.
A soap bubble in free space is a minimum energy structure.
Yes, you're quite right here bob. I was foreshortening this thought much too much. Let me try again and tell me if I do better:
It's a macroscopic manifestation of the underlying vacuum force that constitutes the electron, that usually doesn't like to appear on macroscopic scales.
Hows that?
Recall my background is software, and amateur electrodynamics. Not professional scientist! :)
In a related but different work, i think well-documented, Dollard did achieve 'wireless' transmission from... was it Vegas to San-Fran? with only 1%? signal loss - clearly not inverse square. Also this was the Wardencliffe technology.... i THINK Borderland Science Foundation may have the records for this.
BUT IT DOESNT PLAY MUSIC SO I DIDN'T SHOW IT TO YOU
Hi all, I was thinking can we form the shape of bagel coils shown above around a plasma ball? These plasma balls have a mini Tesla coil in the centre providing lots of electrons and ions that could then hopefully be formed into an EVO by the influence of the bagel coils concentrated magnetic field. These plasma balls are also filled with a mixture of noble gases and some have Xenon inside which I seem to remember is considered favourable for EVO formation.
Cosmic Dave is working on this test.
Also I found this interesting in a video on plasma balls, the spark from such a small battery powered Tesla coil seems to affect the camera equipment......https://youtu.be/nnCuhQTllRU
does the use of aluminium tin foil
at the time have any bearing on this??
I mentioned in 2017 how several authors had drawn a parallel between EVOs and Plasma balls.
https://youtu.be/lr7LtY3LmhQ?t=1480
I think it will have, yes.
Excellent, great to hear that, well done Cosmic Dave...🙂
Maybe - there is a blue ocean of opportunity to research - having the right LR combinations will be critical as Zhvirblis notes that some variations will have no closed Poynting vectors and will be useless.
"Closed Poynting Vectors": A tell-tale sign of something disparate, much greater, and maybe even -----CENSORED FOR SCIENCE------
A brilliant relation to the Platonic Solids. This maybe relates to the dodeca-icosa nesting fractal? The (presumably?) 'other' 3d fractal, besides the phantom?