Reciprocal System #496 "Basic Properties of Matter" ch15-Electrical Storage D [Thomas Newsome]

Transcript

all right hello everyone and welcome to my channel this channel is for educational purposes and uh we take a look at some great theories of everything from the past ancient and modern and um you know show how they work and um try to help you uh employ them in your own life in order to help you with your paradigm shift or awaken to 5D Consciousness to um fill out your holistic [Music] worldview and um you know any other benefits that you might be able to glean from these today is our 496th video that we've done on the reciprocal system of theory from Dewey B Lars and Mr Larson worked as an engineer in Us in the 20th century uh he died in 1990 and um for the 60 years prior to that he was working out his reciprocal system in 1959 he articulated his two fundamental postulates after many many years of research and and uh inductive reasoning uh he boiled it all down to two sentences about how he believed the universe operated uh and in doing so became um one of the Pioneers to uh attempt to build a universe of motion not a universe of matter not a universe of energy but a universe of motion and larsson's poates read the first postulate is that the universe is composed entirely of one component motion existing in three dimensions in discrete units and with two reciprocal aspects space and time and then larsson's second postulate is basically what he uses to derive his the theoretical Universe he takes his first postulate and kind of plugs it into the second postulate um and so you know in my mind the first postulate is almost infinitely more important than the second postulate um but the second postulate reads um the universe conforms to the relations of ordinary commutative mathematics its primary magnitudes are abs abolute and its geometry is ukian so Larson takes his ideas about this universe of motion and he plugs them in to um a universe that is you know uh operates on the basis of math and geometry and logic and uh it spits out Larson's theoretical Universe what the universe would look like if Larson's postulates were correct and then in a lot of lot of his subsequent research lson Compares his theoretical Universe with the empirical Universe of Legacy science um what the uh Army of scientists had uh come up with in terms of all their laboratory EXP experiments and uh scientific tables in particular so in this book here that we're looking at um that we will be looking at today uh for uh and that we have been looking at for a while is called basic properties of matter so this book is on chemistry and it talks about many of the basic properties of matter such as electric charge the melting point the compressibility the specific heat these kind of properties um that uh are possessed by all kinds of um matter atoms compounds um and they all you know have been tested in the laboratory you know what is the melting point of you know um silicon and they come up with a value from the laboratory Larson comes up with an equation for the melting point of silicon and then uh Compares his results that come strictly from Theory no testing no laboratory you know no Army of scientists to do a battery of tests and uh have billion dollar grants in order to conduct such things and Larson um in many cases is really able to reproduce the um scientific tables strictly from Theory um you know within 1% or even sometimes one/ tenth of a percent of the actual values or the laboratory tested values in many cases Larson is correcting that them because they in some cases like with compressibility the uh laboratory science scientists are um not able to really make terribly accurate predictions or or or measurements and so they admit that they're okay well um we we can't uh really measure this more than within 10 or 20% of the actual value but Larson's theor thetical values cut right through that and so in many cases larsson's values are uh you know more trustworthy than the Legacy scientists that um have um taken up Millions if not billions if not trillions of dollars of our taxpayer money and um you know over the course of Centuries with thousands and if not hundreds of thousands of scientists all uh lined up to um participate in this and this one dude with no resources and no help is able to reproduce what they can do so you think he's probably on to something okay now if you want to uh go deeper into larsson's Theory into the fundamental postulates and what the ramifications are what they really mean what does it really mean to be a universe of motion and um where do these three dimensions and these discrete units and the two reciprocal aspects space and time I'll fit in you want to watch uh any of my first 474 videos on this subject uh I kind of go into these matters at least you know for 20 minutes or so um to kind of give you at least the once over so that you are um you know a little bit up to speed when we get into the reading now today in this video I'm pretty much going to assume that you're kind of up to speed enough to uh at least have some of the basic questions answered and uh we're going to read right from chapter 15 which is on um uh electrical storage and uh we've been reading this chapter a few days uh this uh so we are hopefully going to finish it today or or at least get close to the end now in this chapter um Larson is having trouble because uh you know in Larsson system everything is made out of motion and motion is is made out of space and time and so all of our fundamental quantities our relationships of space and time and can be described exclusively in space-time terms and so that's where he gets H derives his units from for example speed speed is a kind of motion speed is um you know the car is moving 15 M an hour 15 miles of space in one hour of time that is space over time space over time is speed and all of our other scientific quantities are also fractions with space or time as the numerator and time or space as the denominator such as matter matter is time to the thir power over space to the thir power energy is time over space acceleration is space over time to the second power force is time over space to the second power and so on now in this chapter lson identifies Electric capacitance uh the MKS unit for that is the farad and he identifies the farad as um s uh which is also the unit of electrical um of of the electron the electron is a unit of space in Larson system the electron is uncharged it can take a charge but in its natural state it is uncharged and it is a rotating unit of space just like everything else in Larson system it is a kind of motion the electron is a rotating unit of space it can take a charge a charge electron is a rotating unit of space but a charge is a rotational vibration uh rotational vibration would look like that and um so that is what a charge is most uh scientists believe that an electric charge is simply an electron you know give an electron to matter and it becomes charged but uh in Larson system it is give the motion that is a rotational vibration to matter and it becomes charged including the electron you can also put a charge on an electron but in its natural state elect an electron or electric current is simply space electric current is space over time um the speed um whereas the electric charge is a unit of energy time over space and so in Larson system he deres that um electrical capacitance is simply s but uh some of Larson's Associates disagreed with that attribution and uh this guy Dave proposed that capacitance is actually s the3 over T and Larson has spent the last several Pages uh trying to justify his s and I don't know that he was actually aware of the possibility of using S to the3 over T but if he does if he had done that uh the s to the 3/ T seems to uh satisfy every equation perfectly whereas in Larson system the S it it it works some of the time but some of the time it doesn't work and Larson ends up um kind of trying to wiggle out of it by claiming that there are two forms of the kulum which is supposed to be the unit of electric char charge capital Q um but Larson has to come up with a capital Q and a lowercase q and he plugs in lowercase Q into several of the uh classical equations in order to um balance them out uh SpaceTime wise and uh he does it to his own satisfaction but it definitely does not satisfy me and um uh he I'm I'm not saying that he's right he's wrong for sure but um that's the question I have so that's what we're moving forward with um I think he just identified permitivity and that we're going to go forward uh uh looking at permitivity uh which is kind of like the uh resistance um to uh forming an electric field um again we have to keep in mind the fundamental distinction between the electric the electron and the electric charge those are two different things one of them is units s the electron and one of them is units t/ S one of them is involved in electric current s overt and the other one is static electricity okay permitivity is of importance mainly in connection with non-conducting substances or dielectrics if such a substance is inserted between the plates of a capacitor the capacitance is increased the rotational motion of all non-conductors contain contain motion with space displacement it is is the presence of these space components that blocks the translational motion of the uncharged electrons through the time components of the atomic structure and makes the dialectric substance a nonconductor nevertheless dialectric like all other ordinary matter are predominantly time structures that is their net total displacement is in time this time adds to the time of the reference system and thus increases the capacitance from this explanation of the origin of the increase it is evident that the magnitude of the increment will vary by reason of differences in the physical nature of the dialectric in as much as different substances contain different amounts of speed displacement in time arranged in different geometrical patterns the ratio of the capacitance with a given dialectric substance between the plates to the capacitance in a vacuum is the relative permitivity or dialectric constant of the substance the dialectric constants of most of the common dialectric substances Class A dielectrics as they are called show little variation at low frequencies under ordinary conditions this indicates that permitivity is an inherent property of the substance a consequence of its composition and structure rather than of its relation to the environment this is consistent with the theoretical explanation given conventional theories of dialectric phenomena are based on the premise that these phenomena are electrostatic in nature it should be understood however that all theories which depend on the existence of electric charges in electrically neutral materials cannot be other than hypothetical furthermore conventional science has no comprehensive electrostatic theory of dialectric as expressed by WJ Duffin quote it is important to realize that calculations of fields due to and forces on uh calculations due to and forces on charge distribution are performed on a model and the results compared with experiment um and then he goes on different models are required to account for different sets of experimental results in the model that is applied to the capacitance problem it is assumed that positive asterisk and negative asterisk charges exist in the electrically neutral dialectric and Larson uh if you haven't been listening Larson uses this asterisk to indicate that he's using the conventional terminology in Larson system the negative charge is actually positive and the positive charge is actually negative but those go against the conventional um nomenclature so he uses the asterisk to uh indicate that he's using the uh conventional nomenclature okay um so positive asterisk and negative asterisk charges exist in the DI electrically neutral dialectric that quote small movements of the Char charges have taken place in opposite directions end quote and three that these movements produce the polarization which we believe takes place end quote as this statement by duffen concedes there is no direct evidence of the polarization that plays the principal role in the theory the entire model is hypothetical clarification of the dimensions of the quantity known as permitivity eliminates the static charges from the mathematics of the electrical storage process and thereby cuts the ground out from under all of the electrostatic models the customary mathematical treatment is carried out in terms of four quantities the displacement d the polarization P the electric field intensity e and the permitivity um which is AB abbreviated with uh some letter that I'm not familiar with but it looks kind of like an e uh written a little bit um in half lowercase and half uppercase but it's basically EO um these quantities the investigators tell us are related by the expression P equals D EO e we have already seen in earlier in this chapter that the SpaceTime dimensions of D are 1/ s and those of permitivity EO are s^2 / t the dimensions of the quantity eoe are then s^2 over T * t/ s 3r uh which he didn't tell you that um has already been determined in this chapter electric field intensity and that comes out to be 1 / s it follows that the dimensions of P polarization are also 1 / s just like display bement D we thus find that all of the quantities entering into the dialectric processes are quantities related to the electric current the electric quantity s the capacitance s in Larson system s in Dave system and the rs2 system in general s the3 / T the displacement 1 / s the polarization 1 / s and the quantity eoe which likewise has the dimensions 1 / S no quantity with the dimensions of charge t/ s has any place in the mathematical treatment so it does sound like that is a step in the right direction because in Larson system uh all of this that has to do with capacitance is uncharged electrons and so there should be no place for the charge t/ s in any of these equations um now that this seems to be uh this is far more palatable to me than um what he came up with just a few pages ago uh when dealing with um compass in general although he's still making this other attribution uh one of the complications that occurs is that um for example with permitivity and also magnetic permeability the uh value for it is often very close to one and so it doesn't show up in equations because it it's it seems like it's almost invisible um and I believe in in larsson's treatment here it doesn't have any units um dimensionless so it's very it's kind of like a phantom um so okay uh continuing on um the language is that of electrostatics using terms such as as polarization displacement Etc and an attempt has been made to introduce electrostatic quantities by way of the electric field intensity e but it has been necessary to couple e with the permitivity EO and to use it in the form of eoe which as just pointed out cancels the electrostatic dimension of E electric charges thus play because that's what permitivity does permitivity is the resistance to forming an electric field electric charges thus play no part in the mathematical treatment but I'm not totally convinced of that because is is the electric field charged uh uh okay a similar attempt as you can tell I'm not any type of expert on this I'm a I'm a historian and so you know I'm doing the best I can here trying to present a topic that I think is vitally important not really so much just for the purposes of understanding electricity and magnetism larsson's reciprocal system is a theory of everything so what he finds in one field is analogous to what he's going to find in another field and so I feel like it is important to uh look at his Works in several different subjects electricity magnetism chemistry we've already looked at his stuff uh a lot of stuff on Atomic physics uh some stuff on astronomy metaphysics religion economics we're going to be looking at um and so uh you need to be in my opinion to to get a broad well-rounded approach of all the different things that the reciprocal system can do or at least the ones that Larson looked at um because it can it can be plugged into any Theory so what you're really trying to do is look at the analogies look at the connections look at the methodology so that you can uh once you learn the theory that you can apply it to whatever subject you would like to apply it to okay back to Larson a similar attempt has been made to bring the electric field intensity e into relations that involve the current density here again the electrostatic quantity E capital E is out of place and has to be removed mathematically by coupling it with a quantity that converts it into something that has a meaning in electric current phenomenon the quantity that is u ized for this purpose is conductivity symbol uh Omega um no uh I don't know my Greek letters very well maybe that's row e either way it's some Greek symbol uh SpaceTime Dimensions s the 2 over t to the second the combination um uh conductivity times uh electric field intensity has the dimensions you know s^2 / T ^2 * t s 3r = 1 s t these are the dimensions of current density like the expression eoe previously discussed the expression um of the um electric field intensity times the conductivity has a physical meaning only as a whole thus it is indistinguishable from current density the conventional model brings the field intensity into the theoretical picture but here again it is necessary to remove it by a mathematical device before the theory can be applied in practice in those cases where the electric field intensity has been used in dealing with electric current phenomena uh without introducing an offsetting quantity such as conductivity or permitivity the development of theory leads to wrong answers for example in their discussion of the theoretical basis of Ms law uh blay and blay say that quote when electric field strength e acts on a free particle of charge Q lowercase Q the particle is accelerated under the action of force end quote and this quote leads to a current increasing at the rate of uh di Uh current over DT um equals n times the quantity lowercase Q ^2 / M um the quantity * e end quote where n is the number of particles per unit of volume the SpaceTime dimensions of this equation are 1 / St T * 1 / T = 1 / s 3r * s^ 2 * s 3r over T 3r * t/ s the 3r thus the equation is dimensionally uh balanced but it is physically wrong as the authors admit the equation is quote clearly at variance with the experimental observation their conclusion is that there must be quote other forces which prevent the current from increasing indefinitely this fact that the key element of the Orthodox theory of electric current the hypothesis as to the origin of the motion of the electrons is clearly at variance with the observe facts is a devastating blow to the theory and not all of its supporters are content to Simply ignore the contradiction some attempt to find a way out of the dilemma and produce explanations such as the following when a constant electric field e is applied each electron is accelerated during its free path by a force um of minus lowercase e e uh which I don't know what that is um but at each Collision it loses its extra energy the motion of the electrons Through the Wire is thus a diffusion process process and we can associate uh a mean a mean drift velocity V with this motion end quote but collisions do not transform accelerated motion into steady flow if they are elastic as the collisions of the electrons presumably are the acceleration in the direction of the voltage gradient is simply trans transferred to other electrons if the force uh EQ lowercase Q actually existed as present day electrical Theory contends it would result in accelerating the average electron the authors quoted in reference 54 evidently recognize this point but they fall back on the prevailing confidence that something will intervene to save the moving charge theory of the electric current from its multiplicity of problems there must be other forces that take care of the discrepancy no one wants to face the fact that a