Where do you want to go?

DistintiDistinti Posts: 38
edited April 2020 in Suggestions & Support
Ethereal Mechanics releases are on hold until the New Math construct is released.

In the Mean time there are other topics/videos that I've been planning/thinking about.

Let me know if any are of particular interest to you.

They are arranged by series

Distinti's World: D
D011: The Greater Good Scam
D012: The Needs of the Many (A Myth)
D013: The Two Party Scam
D014: Saving a Republic: A simple stupid thing that when lost results in the corruption and eventual fall of governments
D015: The Central Panning Myth:
D016: Clockwork Orangutan: Utopia is not possible
D017: The Measure of Wealth
D018: The Ethanol Scam

Distinti University: U
This is a new series of videos to teach Scientific, Engineering and math concepts in what I think is a simpler fashion
These are not numbered and will probably results in numerous videos for each topic.
This is only for topics that would be included at a University -- not for speculation or Conjecture
* Vectors and Matrices
* Wave Mechanics (this provides the foundation needed for the New Wave model of EtherMech)
* Suggest other topics

Rules of Acquisition: ROA
Some rules are their own videos, others are grouped together
roa1 thru 6:
roa7: Popularity is Not proof (renamed from version 1.0)
roa8 and 9
roa10: Theories must mimic observations, not be derived from them (still trying to find a more compact name)
roa11: The Theory Observation Duality (need better name)

Support Videos: S
* Experiments / Demonstrations
* My opinion of (Review of) the contributions of Historical Figures of Science (Tesla, Heaviside, Franklin, etc)

Let me know if you have other suggestions

Just note: My main push right now is the New Math construct, thus video production will be minimal until that paper is released -- so make your suggestions count.



  • LloydLloyd Posts: 35
    edited April 2020
    The Distinti University ideas seem like the most immediately useful.

    I'm starting a Project for Science Reform at http://qdl.scs-inc.us/?top=4741-4760-7749-6226.
    And Charles wants his site there used for improving science and helping science collaboration.

    Robert, what do you think about doing a video on some of the main statements in Miles Mathis' paper, "What is Charge", at http://milesmathis.com/charge2.html? Some of his main statements I think are that the ether is photons, that photons have mass and radius, that the waves of photons are the way photons travel, instead of in straight lines, and that charge is mass. I think it would be very helpful for viewers to hear your comments on such statements, since you seem to have many insights of your own. You might be able to help steer Mathis in a better direction and you might like some of his insights too.

    Comparison of Theories
    I'd like to see comparisons of 3 theories that seem to have the most insights, those of:
    Robert Distinti
    Miles Mathis
    Charles Chandler

    By combining the insights from all three, I think there'd be huge progress in physics, astronomy etc.

    Another theorist that I'd suggest is
    Dwardu Cardona.
  • SebastianGSebastianG Posts: 172
    edited April 2020
    I would like to see:
    roa10: Theories must mimic observations, not be derived from them

    And your opinion about Tesla.
  • tibortibor Posts: 11
    edited April 2020
    I vote for "Wave Mechanics" at first place, "Vectors and Matrices" at second.
    And I wish if you would use the rest of the time for preparing a lot of Ethereal Mechanics videos, so when the New Math will be released, you can quickly release those too. The other topics you listed are interesting too, but in my opinion, not the highest priority now. (Eg.: we can criticize politics, but nothing we can change about it, however, if we had a usable knowledge of physics, we could design a lot of new electronic stuff, design materials on the atomic level, etc.)

    About wave mechanics: it would be interesting to see the correction of the superposition principle. When two coherent waves hit the target on the same surface area, we get an interference pattern, where energy is conserved. But what happens when two coherent waves hit the target in a very small angle?
    - If they meet 180° out of phase, the current superposition principle suggests that energy is destroyed. (Mechanical waves simply bounce back on each other in this case, so the superposition principle is not correct.)
    - If they meet in phase, the current superposition principle suggests that energy is created (doubled), which is clearly wrong too.

    Another thought experiment with electromagnetic waves (IR light): We take a near black body material sheet (A), and we coat it using another material (B) which is transparent in the range of 1 µm - 100 µm, but have a high refractive index (like thermal camera lens). We have a layer of air (C) on this sheet, then another (uncoated) sheet of near black body material (D). Material "A" radiates isotropically independent of direction (but inside of the coating), so some part of the light (emitted in low angles) will be reflected back from the surface between "B" and "C". Sheet "D" also radiates isotropically independent of direction, but inside air "C", and most of this light goes through the surface between "C" and "B", and finally hits sheet "A". If this is all true, then we get a temperature difference between sheet "A" and "D", where "A" will be warmer, "D" will be colder. Thus we constructed a Maxwell's demon, which makes Lord Kelvin angry. So, where is the mistake in this thought experience?

    By the way, I hate in physics and electronics, that everybody measures light sources by wavelength instead of frequency. Wavelength is dependent on the medium, but frequency is the property of the source (independent of the conducting medium).
  • GeorgeGeorge Posts: 11
    edited April 2020
    First thing I'd like to see is a "learners path" set up where we have all of the suggested videos that will get us up from ground zero to where you stand today based on the current videos you've put out. I've found that I don't have quite enough time to filter through and sift out the proper order from all of the video content and so a structured list that get's one to a productive point (productive meaning one who can carry on intelligent conversations with you based on what you've done and where you currently are with the theory) would be so very helpful.

    I really love the "talking hand" approach on the paper because it seems to let you be productive in your output and get more out in a quick fashion, but I too think it might be useful to have a scripted version of your slides that flows more like a book. I'm wondering that if Bridge Officers and Engineers can help in this somehow?

    Personally, when I make videos and tutorials, I usually have a script going in whether mental or written and if we could take the slides with their accompanying notes (not sure if you make your slides this way already or not), that kind of ties everything together, that might be helpful so that we can sit and cogitate on topics that re most meaningful or thought evoking for us...
Sign In or Register to comment.

About Cookies

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.

Learn more: https://www.cookiesandyou.com/