Archive for May, 2017

Yet More Pants on Fire

May 31, 2017

It is well known that Don and Ron lie about facts and data with equal alacrity. The critical difference is that Ron is supposed to be a scientist, to whom such things are sacred, and Don is just a glorified estate agent (realtor); a breed which is traditionally only slightly less despised than used-car salesmen. Anyway, as one of our correspondents pointed out, Ron deliberately chooses his moment to sample energy data at Gridwatch so as to put wind and solar in the worst possible light. He does not sample solar at night, so perhaps a little shred of decency still clings to him. Please find below a spreadsheet of wind and solar energy output for this month. Those skilled in the use of spreadsheets would be able to add extra columns which showed wind+solar and (wind+solar)/demand. Unfortunately, spreadsheets are not supported by WordPress and so we have had to upload a pdf instead. This annoyingly obscures the date-stamps, which run from 22.30 on the 1st May 2017 in five-minute intervals. Those who are sufficiently curious will be able to obtain their own spreadsheet from the gridwatch site:

http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/download.php

Mentally add the data, and one sees that the total is far from ‘zero to negligible’, as Ron claims. Whichever way you go, the ‘Civil List Scientist’ is yet again revealed to be a despicable liar; nothing more than a spin-doctor. Over to you, York.

EnergyPlot

May Gridwatch

Two-Faced … SNAFU

May 30, 2017

379(1): Counter Gravitation and the Faraday Cage Gyroscope Experiment

May 30, 2017

This is the first note of the three hundred and seventy ninth paper of ECE and ECE2 theories (Einstein Cartan Evans unified field theory). These papers and books have been prepared since March 2003. This note derives field potential relations (17) and (18) for the electric field strength E and the acceleration due to gravity g. The ECE wave equations for electromagnetism (Eq. (24)) and gravitation (Eq. (41)) are used to define the electromagnetic and gravitational scalar potentials in terms of the scalar curvature R of the ECE wave equations in in Eqs. (34) and (54) respectively. The electromagnetic and gravitational Euler Bernoulli equations are derived from the respective ECE wave equations, and are given by Eqs. (39) and (45) respectively. At the well known Euler Bernoulli resonance the electromagnetic and gravitational scalar potentials can become infinite. This is the key point for counter gravitational apparatus design. Since all forms of energy are interconvertible, an oscillating electromagnetic driving force can be used to produce an infinite gravitational potential.”

Leaving aside the fact that there is absolutely no reputable experimental evidence for ‘counter-gravitation’, and that there is barely a clue (pace the Lense-Thirring effect … which still obeys Newton’s third law) as to how it might be achieved, this is all self-contradictory  … as usual. Who is it who is frequently making statements like this?

  “Bacon’s axiom in a nutshell was that theory must be tested against experimental data that can be agreed upon in different laboratories. So infinities do not reside in the light of natural philosophy. The gymnastics of QED and QCD are devised in the dark recesses of the human psyche to remove inconvenient flaws in theory – these flaws are infinities.”

Oh, that would be Ron – way back in 2010. A logician might well deduce that you, Ron,  are not a ‘Baconian scientist’ nor a ‘natural philosopher’. Gee, who knew? Let us just remind newcomers to our blog that ‘Ron’ is Dr [sic] Myron Evans,  an anti-Einstein crackpot (are not they all) who endorses perpetual-motion and antigravity (and quack cancer-cures) but who is destined to appear for ever on the list of Civil List Scientists … together with such luminaries as Faraday, Herschel, Heaviside … Help us to head off this tragedy by complaining to the relevant UK government departments and royal societies.  There is already an online petition. 

 

Copyright?

May 28, 2017

“378(2): Field and Force Equations for Any Orbit: Aether Engineering

This note shows that the relevant field equations of ECE2 gravitation, Eqs. (13) and (14), reduce to the simple equation (12), which implies Eqs. (22), (23) and (24). Any Newtonian orbit can be aether engineered using Eqs. (27) and (28), with the kappa vector components as input parameters. Any ECE2 retrograde precession can be aether engineered from Eqs. (29) and (30), and any ECE2 forward precession can be aether engineered using Eqs. (31) and (32).”

This is how to do aether-engineering, Ron, if one is mentally challenged.

http://www.keelynet.com/greb/pyramidaether.htm

Did that moron really win a cash prize for perpetrating such pseudoscientific drivel. Schools and schoolteachers are indeed major sources and causes of pupil ignorance. 

Preaching to the Unconverted

May 28, 2017

UFT88 Read at the University of York and PERN

May 28, 2017

York is ranked 129 in the world by Times, 183 by Webometrics, 300 by Shanghai and 451 – 460 by QS. The first petition for its foundation was submitted in 1617 and it was founded as a plate glass university in 1963 following the Robbins Report.”

You do realise, don’t you Ron, that it is somebody at the University of York who keeps making those pithy skeptical comments on the chat page of the ECE Theory Wiki entry. So of course you are going to get ‘consultations’ from there. Just don’t be too proud about it. That probably applies to all of the other ‘academic’ visits as well!

Moonlighting?

May 26, 2017

Is Ron secretly working here?

http://ssuedu.org/administration/faculty/

(click on ‘Professors’). Is this a degree-mill? Just look at the university’s tag-line: “Superior State University, a non profit university for a beter [sic] world”; not that superior, eh?  Or is this just an amazing coincidence? That would not necessarily deter Ron from exploiting it.

Some readers may be baffled by the letters after Ron’s name on the above site. They look, at first sight, as though they might be architectural qualifications. They are in fact fake ‘alphabet soups’ which are handed out by the American Biographical Institute and the International Biographical Association (Cambridge). These are low-life vanity-publishing scams which almost make Marquis look reputable. In fact, the list of faculty at SSE shows a great deal of overlap with this list:

http://www.tgm.mawi.tu-darmstadt.de/dedication.pdf

Isn’t that strange?

Welsh Wiki

May 26, 2017

Ron loves to relate his battle to have himself removed from Wikipedia … from the English-language Wiki, that is. He is not averse to being listed by the Welsh-language Wiki;

https://cy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myron_Wyn_Evans

probably because the entry seems to have been composed entirely by himself. Why does he not draw attention to this further ‘accolade’? Is he afraid that trolls will invade the Chat page?

Happy Birthday Ron!

May 26, 2017

Another year closer to the grave, as they say.

Loony Levitators

May 24, 2017

Previous AIAS / UPITEC Work on Biefeld Brown and Laithwaite

May 24, 2017

Please see the blog of www.aias.us on the following dates:

1) Friday 29th August 2008: I discussed the Laithwaite experiment and the disgraceful treatment he received from the dogmatists – his contemporaries.”

Laithwaite was a crackpot who was rightly castigated for misleading laymen and schoolchildren and for bringing the reputation of the Royal Institution into disrepute. Laithwaite co-authored a book, on inventing, in which he recommended buying up lapsed patents and making the once-unworkable ideas profitable by exploiting new materials. He put this into practice himself and regularly stole the ideas (notably magnetic levitation and linear induction) of others. It is not usually called stealing, and is usually termed ‘development’. It was stealing in his case because he was careful to conceal his sources. He once even took part in a public debate in which he argued that students should be kept ignorant of the history of their field … presumably so that they would not detect his deceptions. Are we hatefully attacking someone who cannot defend himself? Yes and no. One of us argued heatedly with Laithwaite when he was still alive. He had no defence. Laithwaite had many other crank ideas and had several antigravity-crackpot friends. His loony views on spinning-tops pollute the pages of at least one encyclopedia. He claimed that moths communicate by radio; another debunked idea that crept into library books. He backed the idea that all ancient mosaics have a constant (total-size/piece-size) ratio. He even claimed that the 196-palindrome ended quickly (there is still no end in sight). In short, he was the worst pseudoscientist ever to get into a position of academic celebrity.    

“This was a grave miscarriage of justice, later righted to some extent by NASA. ”

Laithwaite was frequently threatened with dismissal for not doing what he was paid to do. So it is doubly odd that he was not dismissed over the Royal Institution fiasco. Perhaps he ‘knew where the bodies were buried’. It was not ‘righted’ by NASA: stop repeating that ridiculous lie. NASA was not interested in his views on spinning-tops. NASA is certainly fond of throwing money at antigravity crackpots (Podkletnov, Fetta); just not at Laithwaite.  

“Our recent UFT papers on the gyroscope (UFT367 to UFT370) go far beyond that discussion using numerical integration by coauthor Horst Eckardt of relevant differential equations, giving the best theoretical insight achieved to date into the Laithwaite effect. ”

There is no ‘Laithwaite effect’. Therefore, by ‘explaining’ it, you prove that your theory is worthless. 

“We achieved this with conservation of energy / momentum, removing a major theoretical obstacle, Laithwaite’s claim of violation of conservation of momentum. ”

You fiddled until you got the result that you wanted … as usual. 

“AIAS Fellow Michael Jackson easily replicated the Laithwaite effect at his home in Texas. There are videos on the blog showing his experiment, and replications.”

No-Bubbles is a clearly deranged person who, among other things, thinks that your crank theory explains the human soul, and who claims that Cartan and Einstein helped the Nazis to build flying saucers (just look at the link which your new loony friends sent to you).  Unless you state clearly that No-Bubbles is ‘on his own’ with regard to that hilarious claim, we shall state at every opportunity that you yourself believe it.

“2) 1st June 2008: I discuss the fact that NASA had claimed to disprove the Biefeld Brown effect by using a high vacuum apparatus to remove ion wind artifact. I also discussed the fact that the Munich group has observed a decrease in weight by rapidly spinning a disk on a weighing machine. Removal of artifact is of course ultra important. This experiment seems to bear a resemblance to the Faraday disk generator (UFT43, a hugely popular paper). A large percentage of the UFT papers are now classics by any standard, some like UFT88 have been read an estimated one hundred thousand times, at the best universities, institutes and similar.”

For the uninitiated: Biefeld was a once-respected astronomer who became senile (we have a contemporaneous newspaper report about his being found wandering and confused in a city not his own). His reputation was exploited by a conman called Brown who claimed that the Faraday-wind effect was antigravity. He was not even original in this: he had stolen the idea from a now-forgotten Irish-Dutch crank (interesting connections: this loony had been educated at the same Bristol school as had ‘death-ray’ Grindell-Matthews, and there is now a professor [sic] at the modern development of that school who believes in the ‘there is no such thing as gravity’ theory of the late ‘Professor’ Viv Pope. That Bristol professor heads a department which is charged with telling the public about science. Hilarious no? No!). 

“We are now in a far better position to understand these effects. I think that the Faraday cage experiment should be carried out in a high vacuum and a thorough literature search carried out initially.”

We have been searching that literature for decades. It is not worthy of the name.

 

Twitter for the Civil-List Twit?

May 24, 2017

Complete Description of Gravity and Counter Gravity

May 24, 2017

I would say that the complete description of counter gravitation is already available in ECE2 theory. It has already been shown that a complete description of energy from spacetime is already available from ECE and ECE2 (UFT311, UFT321, UFT364). I would also say that ECE2 is now unchallenged as the new physics among leading avant garde intellectuals. This is because it is variations on a theme of well known geometry. ECE2 cannot be refuted without refuting the geometry. Dogmatic opposition is not Baconian science, I agree that it can degenerate into something wholly unscientific, but that is outside the rules of Baconian natural philosophy. In other words there is always opposition to any radical advance in human thought. In the case of ECE and ECE2 this opposition has subsided almost completely. The theory has generated twenty two million hits since 2003 from www.aias.us and www.upitec.org from literally all the best universities, institutes and similar in the world, including all the best Swiss universities and CERN. Progress in the manner of Trevithig (steam engine), Faraday, Brunel, and all the great engineers and practical scientists is always the best way to go. Theory must follow experiment in Baconian science. In my opinion we have a theory that is flexible and powerful enough to describe any data. We also reject dark matter, and the latest research on the S2 star does no tuse darl matter, neither does it use Einsteinian general realtivity (EGR) .The ECE2 theory is cpable of describing the S2 star’s orbit. For an introduction to ECE see:”

It occurs to us that telling all of these convoluted lies, day after day, must waste a lot of your invaluable (or do we mean worthless) time. So why don’t you get yourself a Twitter account, like Don’s, and tell the same lies in abbreviated form? You could fit more than usual into each tweet by making your regular readers familiar with shorthand terminology. For instance, instead of ‘avant garde intellectuals‘ just write ‘cranks’. Instead of ‘twenty two million hits since 2003‘ just write ‘random noise’. ‘In my opinion we have a theory that is flexible and powerful enough to describe any data‘ becomes ‘I can fiddle any data’. ‘In other words there is always opposition to any radical advance in human thought‘ becomes ‘Being a crackpot, I take flak’. ‘This opposition has subsided almost completely‘ becomes ‘I am a broken, forgotten, man’. 

For foreign readers: a ‘twit’ is (Urban Dictionary) the kind of person that makes a retarded chimp look smart.

The Don and Ron Show

May 24, 2017

Counter Gravitational Experiments

May 24, 2017

Welcome back to Dr Horst Eckardt. Agreed with these remarks, in general AIAS / UPITEC exercises caution when dealing with experimental data, because we do not want to apply theory to artifact. In Laithwaite’s case his experiment has been replicated two or three times. The work by Horst and myself is probably the most advanced explanation available of Laithwaite’s work, checked with computer algebra at every stage. There is a great deal of international interest in this work. It is essentially already taught at universities using our distance teaching methods at all the best universities around the world. Laithwaite had terrible trouble with the dogmatic establishment of his day, but in the end NASA gave him a contract and his work was replicated. We have proven dogmatists wrong literally hundreds of times. The ECE2 gravitational field equations and electrodynamical field equations have teh same structure, so there is great scope for research on how one type of field affects the other.”

Ron’s ability to lie with breathtaking ease is trumped only by you-know-who. Just look at the expert manner in which Ron confuses the layman by referring to Laithwaite in such a way that it is unclear whether he means Laithwaite’s lies about spinning-tops or Laithwaite’s johnny-come-lately work on linear induction motors (invented by Wheatstone) and magnetic levitation (first adumbrated, and beautifully modelled, by James Clerk Maxwell himself). Note the concealed lie, “in the end NASA gave him a contract and his work was replicated”. This might lead the gullible to think that NASA supplied him with spinning-tops, and he made them levitate. No, the contract was for something completely different: a sort of Maglev railway, set up at a steep angle, which was supposed to launch payloads into space without needing a rocket. Needless to say this was, like all of Laithwaite’s ideas, stolen from somebody else: in this case from the Russian schoolteacher, Tsiolkovski (Arthur C.Clarke also stole ideas from him, when he wasn’t stealing them from Hermann Potocnik, the true inventor of geostationary satellite communication). On the subject of Ron’s new friends, he should be careful what he criticizes now. The Goede company is heavily involved in solar energy, which Ron frequently derides. It is also linked to the sale of commemorative gold medals, and has a nice set of Trump coins on sale right now. However, sectors of the company have been accused of selling overpriced products and of misleading buyers as to their true monetary value. Recall that Ron has been critical of the Telesio-Galilee medals. Still, keep up this loony collaboration, Ron; it all helps to push you beyond scientific redemption.

Oh, that ‘electrical engineer’ [sic] who, say your new friends, will be conducting parallel experiments – would he be, by any chance, local crank Eberhard Zentgraf?