[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Wireless transmission - is it science?
- To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: RE: Wireless transmission - is it science?
- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:34:52 -0700
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Old-return-path: <email@example.com>
- Resent-date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:35:06 -0700 (MST)
- Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <1b_oNC.A.1ZC.pUvOCB@poodle>
- Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Original poster: "Steve Conner" <steve.conner@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>You seem to be missing a key element. Magnetic pulses in the Aether
>are no more an electric circuit than air molecules bouncing off of
Woohoo! Somebody mentioned the Ae word, it's going to go downhill fast!
Anyway. I'm going to make a few points on the nature of scientific theories
here, using Einstein's theory of relativity as an example. My motivation is
that I don't think anything that is not "science" should be posted to this
A proper scientific theory must be testable, that is to say that it must be
possible to make an experiment whose results can disprove or prove the
theory. In the case of relativity I suppose that was the famous solar
eclipse observation made by Eddington in 19-whatever. Technology has now
advanced a fair bit and every time we use a GPS we are testing the theory of
Also, it must agree with reality. Again with relativity, the equations
reduce to Newton's laws of motion in the case of boring everyday objects
that go a whole lot slower than light speed.
This last point is particularly relevant to us. The existing theory of
circuits and fields, consisting of Ohm's law, Kirchhoff's laws, and
Maxwell's equations*, agrees with reality. When you build a circuit
according to these theories, the circuit does what you expect. It has been
proven by experiment countless times. Therefore, any new theory you
introduce to explain the behaviour of electric circuits (including Tesla
coils) must agree with the existing theory in its domain, just as relativity
agrees with Newton's laws at low speeds.
I read David Thomson's essays on his theory of everything. It seems to agree
with reality as I know it, but as far as I can tell, it is just plain not
testable. He also mixes science with spirituality which is a huge mistake. I
don't mean to say that there is something wrong with religion, but they are
just totally different things. Scientific theories are testable, spiritual
theories are not. Remember, "Thou shalt not put the Lord thy God to the
So David, if you manage to make a tabletop Tesla coil that produces 40 foot
arcs using the 5-dimensional aether flux of an ordinary 9 volt battery, I
will throw myself at your feet, otherwise tough!
*if you were pedantic you might say that Ohm's law and Kirchhoff's circuit
laws can be derived from Maxwell's equations in a conducting medium