Anti-grav, overunity, and time navigation: The answer.

[OZfZO]

The Unified Wave Ratio Sequence Theory:

The 4th dimension is a mass 1:2 time ratio built on 22/7 (3.14285714~).








Between these 3 images, you'll understand Tesla's theory. This is a ZERO SOLVED equation. Meaning the equation is self-solving.

This is the code to the matrix. No less.

[EVS]

Carl Sagan 4th Dimension Explanation

This is probably what you are referring to:

Fourth Dimension: Tetraspace

[url=http://teamikaria.com/hddb/classic/]http://teamikaria.com/hddb/classic/

Your theory is quite remarkable, I suggest you present it to researchers at your nearest university. Seriously!

EVS

[OZfZO]

Carl Sagan 4th Dimension Explanation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan

This is probably what you are referring to:

Fourth Dimension: Tetraspace

http://teamikaria.com/hddb/classic/

Your theory is quite remarkable, I suggest you present it to researchers at your nearest university. Seriously!

EVS

Thanks EVS!! I'm in the process of trying to contact Robert Zubrin, I believe this can help his case for Mars greatly!

Welcome to a new age of science, the key to remember all of this (Mass 1:2 Time) 1 mass 2 time is overunity, it's also time travel, it's also a gravitic wave property. Gravity cannot exist without time and this proves it.

And Sagan is my inspiration, "If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". 

Just the same, yes, this is scientific proof of tetraspace.

Check this out.




I'll have you note, appropriate tetraspace coordinates -1,1,-1,1 or any combination, duality is key in a wave sequence.

And here's the appropriate equation: r(θ) = a 240 sin 3.14285714θ * 2  (We've dubbed this "The Arcturus Code")




This one speaks for itself!

# Two magnetic housing units for the dual micro singularities
# An electron injection manifold to alter mass and gravity micro singularities

Just like John Titor's time machine. 

[The Leviathan]

Over Unity!!!

[OZfZO]

Yes! Precisely Leviathan!! Precisely!

[OZfZO]

I've also proven that phi can equal infinity and zero.

r(θ) = a/phi 360*-360/360 theta (90*φ) 12^6 (-180/φ) 6^-9/3



r (theta) = b*phi^6 (360^60)^3 ----------(Solutions: A = 0, R = 0, Theta = 0, golden ratio = 0)


Coincidence?

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=r%28%CE%B8%29+%3D+a%2Fphi+360*-360

r(θ) = a/phi 360*-360

[tomi]

Has anyone discussed Torsion fields and those ideas yet with relation to the drones?  Maybe some here have been discussing this concept but I've not recognised it as what I'm reading now.

But I've just learned about this concept from watching a video from Dr. Len Horowitz and doing some follow-up reading like here:
http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_5_11_2.html

It seems interesting to tie into this drone saga, but is this part of what has been discussed here before?  Science brains please enlighten me here.  Thanks!

[onthefence]

But I've just learned about this concept from watching a video from Dr. Len Horowitz and doing some follow-up reading like here:
http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_5_11_2.html

The text in that link sounded a bit too good to be true

"Torsion fields can be generated, detected, switched on and off ..."

Scientists would grab onto any real repeatable proof and run experiments. At first glance, this looks like a secret society that simply brags about results without offering evidence.

The Wikipedia entry is not too favorable:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torsion_fields

" ... a pseudoscientific concept ... disbanded in 1991 when their research was exposed as a fraud and an embezzlement of State funding"

[tomi]

Read the Wikipedia write up too before making my post here.  The background of Dr. Len Horowitz and articles like this:
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0501017v1
made me think it might be relevent to ask about. 
Actually I'm surprised that Torsion fields haven't been mentioned yet.
Still as you say, it might all be pseudo-speculation regarding their concept.
However... I haven't a clue what all of this means, but one of the co-authors to the document above is also co-author of these papers:
http://arxiv.org/find/gr-qc/1/au:+Pereira_J/0/1/0/all/0/1

[onthefence]

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0501017v1

Thanks for the link to yet another theory of matter.
Far too technical for me to judge its validity, but I'd donate a dollar  (via a science tax grant) for them to come up with proof. However, it seems they've already been given a chance in Russia.

[EVS]

Theories are ways of pretending how things work, explaining them is a challenge, proving them is hard, really hard!

And bears the reward in itself!

OverUnity: Can't be done.

I will be pleased if it can be proven that such a thing as "free energy" exists.
This is what "overunity" suggests.

I suggest you all write down your test results. Someday it might be proven true.

Enjoy,
EVS

[tomi]

To make things even more difficult see this article:

Annals of Science
The Truth Wears Off
Is there something wrong with the scientific method?

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/13/101213fa_fact_lehrer?currentPage=all

[tomi]

Hi EVS,

As I said, I watched a video of Dr. Len Horowitz (who might be a fruitcake, hard to tell) describing the effect of this field on DNA and then did light research, became impressed by titles on published papers I couldn't hope to interpret, assumed that this theory was based on tetrahedrons.. somehow..
But free energy wasn't what I researched, tetrahedrons and fields..but not free energy.  But you may understand these terms where I can't hope to in the articles.  Which is why I posted about it so the scientific brains could take a look.

[EVS]

To make things even more difficult see this article:

Annals of Science
The Truth Wears Off
Is there something wrong with the scientific method?

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/13/101213fa_fact_lehrer?currentPage=all

Hi Tomi,

You actually have a point here. Only, we have to add, that if a theory can't be proven it lies in the origin of the starting point, meaning understanding the reliability of the question/experiment before entering the process of proving it either true or false. It sometimes needs more than one paper or process to be certain the result of this is the true one. And even then it always will be questioned. That's the way the world works, I guess. Or simply human nature. When a new era begins, some old points of scientific nature often are questioned. I'm quite sure there will be a very new and different understanding in a hundred years from now, how it all came about, the Universe and all - new findings, new theories to prove.

And, I suppose when you look at it this way, then we can't be sure (at any time) that our calculations are finite. Classsical
research, Newtonian and Einstein leaves little to go for, only a few exeptions might lead to why this "decline effect" sometimes appear.

For many scientists, the effect is especially troubling because of what it exposes about the scientific process. If replication is what separates the rigor of science from the squishiness of pseudoscience, where do we put all these rigorously validated findings that can no longer be proved? Which results should we believe? Francis Bacon, the early-modern philosopher and pioneer of the scientific method, once declared that experiments were essential, because they allowed us to â??put nature to the question.â? But it appears that nature often gives us different answers.



Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/13/101213fa_fact_lehrer#ixzz1Acq3Lc5d



Such anomalies demonstrate the slipperiness of empiricism. Although many scientific ideas generate conflicting results and suffer from falling effect sizes, they continue to get cited in the textbooks and drive standard medical practice. Why? Because these ideas seem true. Because they make sense. Because we canâ??t bear to let them go. And this is why the decline effect is so troubling. Not because it reveals the human fallibility of science, in which data are tweaked and beliefs shape perceptions. (Such shortcomings arenâ??t surprising, at least for scientists.) And not because it reveals that many of our most exciting theories are fleeting fads and will soon be rejected. (That idea has been around since Thomas Kuhn.) The decline effect is troubling because it reminds us how difficult it is to prove anything. We like to pretend that our experiments define the truth for us. But thatâ??s often not the case. Just because an idea is true doesnâ??t mean it can be proved. And just because an idea can be proved doesnâ??t mean itâ??s true. When the experiments are done, we still have to choose what to believe. ♦



Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/13/101213fa_fact_lehrer#ixzz1Acr2y17u

EVS

[EVS]

Electromagnetic Over Unity Power Plant

This uniquely configured rotating machine generates additional torque on the shaft when rotated through the magnetic field. Combined electrical/heat output exceeds input energy by over 40 percent.
EBM (Energy By Motion) Overunity or perpetual motion labeled as impossible. This single device will threaten all other forms of energy, oil, coal, even solar. the uses of this device are endless, generating endless electricity with no fuel. A similar device is being made into a car engine, smaller devices can power a house forever for free with zero emissions. A very small magnetic motor will run endlessly to charge an electric car.

I have no additional information on this video other than what you see within the video. The posting of this video is to explore the possibilities of cheap or perpetual energy. There are people who are violently opposed toward this video and for some reason attack people on this blog as if it is a threat to their world.

The opposition is that these devices contradict every law known today. Ok we got it!!! There are those that follow laws because they are trained to do so, then there are the free thinkers who want to see if they can find ways to alter what is considered reality of today or alter existing laws. People that come here to merely harass will be blocked, please allow the dreamers to dream and the inventors to invent.

http://www.gammamanager.com/index.html
--o0o--
True or false? 

EVS