[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re:longitudinal faster then light paradox (Tesla's WorldElectrical System )
Original poster: "Richard Wayne Wall by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <rwall-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com>
There is no claim this antenna operates in reverse time. Only that it operates
faster than light speed.
BTW, there is no dispute as to the maximum speed of light in a vacuum in three
dimensional space. Speed of light constraints do not operate in the 4th
spatial dimension. This gets back to action at a distance. Read "Newton vs
Einstein" by Peter Graneau. It's an easy read and gives some insight as to
these appearant bizarre phenomena.
Hopefully Chuck will be able to add to these seemingly "magic" phenomena with
his insights into quantum physics. Such as paired photons miles apart acting
simultaneously. Immediate action at a distance. And, the probability of other
Also the poster who thinks the cost is prohibitive to measure the the speed of
light and the speed of transmission of this antenna is just plain misinformed.
It can be preformed at very moderate cost in most moderately equipped labs.
Many on this list could preform at least a quantitative proof, if not a fairly
accurate qualitative proof. Kinda like the race between the tortus and hare.
Just side by side EM and HSLA antennas transmitting a single simultaneous
signal to equidistant EM and HSLA receivers. Which ever signal gets there
first proves the point.
I am attempting to contact the inventor of the HSLA to get more information and
inquire if there are working models. My only fear is that after all the
negativity and closed mindedness exhibited on this list Terry will feel
compelled to kill the thread before someone builds a HSLA or more information
> yes it looks like it would be "easy" to construct, halogen bulb a couple
> coils, power supply, rf input, but if it "does" transmit faster then
> light couldn't i build the receiver today and plan on building the
> transmitter tomorrow, turn it on and i should hear my message that i
> sent tomorrow. right? my point is that what good would a transmitter
> that transmits faster then light be, how would you know when to listen
> for a message because if at 4:00pm i send you a message, then you would
> have to listen for the message at 2:00pm, then you reply at 2:10, then i
> would hear your reply before i send the message. so if i sent myself a
> message at 4:00pm and i always had the unit turned on and listening, i
> would hear my message before i sent it and therefore not need to send my
> message, therefore never send the message in the first place?
> i'm not saying it doesn't work (because i haven't tried it) but i'm
> saying "how would you know that it was actually sending the message
> faster then light other then hearing a message before you sent it"?