Phe:CSC 0.78615:0.70711 Horiz:Vert Fractal Splitting Ratio From a 2:1 Cone

Please accept the attached file for information download containing a re-derivation of Pi and the solution for the curvature of space-time.

Welcome aboard OSE!

This package will take me some time to digest, but on the surface it looks very encouraging.  Thank you kindly for posting it.

And don't be :(  There are some who will listen.

I read and looked at everything in your package.  The one thing that stands out to me more than anything else is the discrepancy of Pi.  I have thought for the longest time, you simply cannot integrate with a delta.  For any delta you chose, there is always something smaller.  What this means is all the engineering formulas that are derived from integration are inaccurate at best and possibly completely wrong.  Any transient conditions that may exist within those deltas are completely ignored.  And we know delta has been used for time, distance, energy, force, most everything imaginable.  When looking for transient conditions, a delta in an integral is completely the wrong way to do it.  In summary, it's no big surprise why we do not have energy systems that power themselves.  With the kind of math used to develop the energy systems we do have, it's a wonder they function at all.

Quote from Matt Watts on November 9th, 2014, 08:51 PM

I have thought for the longest time, you simply cannot integrate with a delta.  For any delta you chose, there is always something smaller.

IMO, that reflects nature. Universe->galaxy clusters->galaxies->solar systems->planets & their moons->atmosphere/crust/core->molecules->atoms->electrons/protons/neutrons->quarks, etc.

Quote

What this means is all the engineering formulas that are derived from integration are inaccurate at best and possibly completely wrong.

The question is, how accurate does it need to be? That is the difference between math and engineering. For engineering the figures need not be more accurate than what it is possible to build.

Quote

With the kind of math used to develop the energy systems we do have, it's a wonder they function at all.

I've been thinking the same for some time. My years of studying Tesla's work has shown me that what he was doing was mimicking natural phenomena: wireless energy transmission is how the sun transmits energy to the earth; millions upon millions of volts in a spark gap discharge is how lightning occurs, etc.

Someone (I think it was Eric Dollard) said "mother nature doesn't do math". Take that as a given and it follows that she doesn't do Euclidean geometry either. Look around you. What looks "natural" and what looks "man made"? Straight lines, near perfect circles, triangles, cubes, etc. are man made. Natural objects don't fit that model. What does fit her objects is fractals - self similar reproduction from smaller to larger scales. The veins in a leaf look similar to the branches of a tree and the limbs of a tree look similar to the roots. The sun, planets and moons of a solar system look similar to our current model of an atom.

My belief is that Phi is the closest we have to a basis for man made mathematical constructs of nature. The clearest example is the structure of a nautilus sea shell. When you start running fractal models of Phi and its derivatives they produce some very, very interesting 3D models that seem to have, to my eyes at least, an inherent instability which could explain the nearly infinite variability of nature's designs.

How to translate that into engineering is, however, beyond my abilities. My gut feeling is that it is only a matter of perspective but that change in perspective changes everything. Like a picture with two images entwined and you can see either - young or old woman?

Don't apply your analytical mind to the enigma of Pi/Phi/Phe.

Just roll with the calculations.

http://tube.geogebra.org/material/show/id/291299
Phe Geometry Shown In Scale from a Square in Geogebra

http://vortexspace.org/vortexmathcom/reference/Phe%20Geometry%20Shown%20In%20Scale%20In%20Geogebra.pdf
http://vortexspace.org/vortexmathcom/reference/Calculations%20in%20Excel%20of%20Phe%20Geometry%20for%20Geogebra%20Algebra%20View.xls
http://vortexspace.org/vortexmathcom/reference/Phe%20Geometry%20Shown%20In%20Scale%20In%20Geogebra.svg
http://vortexspace.org/vortexmathcom/reference/Phe%20Geometry%20Shown%20In%20Scale%20In%20Geogebra.ggb

Looking into fractals, I found the following. One of the things about fractals is you can have fractional dimensions. That absolutely torqued my brain until I found this video.

How long is the coastline of Britain? Other good info also.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yE4d7O17wE

Quote from thx1138v2 on May 19th, 2015, 08:36 PM

How long is the coastline of Britain?

Same as the perimeter of a snowflake.   ;)

So imagine what the capacitance is of a "natural" capacitor plate...

Quote from Matt Watts on May 19th, 2015, 10:26 PM

Same as the perimeter of a snowflake.   ;)

So imagine what the capacitance is of a "natural" capacitor plate...

That's an interesting observation that points out what I posted earlier in this thread about perspective.

It's the dielectric that holds the charge in a capacitor so the plates have negligible capacitance. And the volume of the dielectric determines the amount of charge possible. But if you look at that perimeter of the plate you'll see it's just limits of the contact area interface between the plate and the dielectric. So look at the other way or from the dielectric's point of view.

Here's another one I just ran into. When we think of our solar system we think of the planets orbiting around the sun in circles or ellipses. While that's true, it's only a part of the picture because the sun is revolving around the center of the galaxy so the planets are actually describing solenoids through space. Again, perspective. I immediately thought about those solenoids joining in a circle around the galaxy to form a toroid but that doesn't ever happen because the galaxy is also traveling through space so the ends of the solenoids being described never return to the place where they started at the beginning of a revolution. And all of the stars that have planets are all doing the same thing. And all of the moons around planets.

All of which just makes the point that this is way more complicated than can be explained by Euclidean geometry.

The guy that made these animations first thought of them as vortices but soon realized they were helicies. Interesting animations. Some of the orbits aren't exactly correct but that's not the point. The point is perspective.

our solar system is a vortex

Solar System 2.0
 

I'm not sure if its is the volume of the dielectric (in the case of a water capacitor) that determines the capacitance. From what I've read thus far it appears its the interface of the water and stainless tubes ( or whatever metal is used), its referred to as the double layer interface. I'm not 100% sure about this, would be interested in any studies into this.
Perhaps one simple way to determine if its the interface between water and metal where the capacitance resides would be to compare a high surface area interface to a low surface area interface of same material.  I was thinking of using carbon fibre tow ( high surface area) to see what capacitance value it has compared to metal in a tube of water.

Quote from brettly on May 31st, 2015, 01:21 AM

I'm not sure if its is the volume of the dielectric (in the case of a water capacitor) that determines the capacitance. From what I've read thus far it appears its the interface of the water and stainless tubes ( or whatever metal is used), its referred to as the double layer interface. I'm not 100% sure about this, would be interested in any studies into this.
Perhaps one simple way to determine if its the interface between water and metal where the capacitance resides would be to compare a high surface area interface to a low surface area interface of same material.  I was thinking of using carbon fibre tow ( high surface area) to see what capacitance value it has compared to metal in a tube of water.

I think the total ohm-ic  resistance of this device is another way to look at it..

Quote from brettly on May 31st, 2015, 01:21 AM

I'm not sure if its is the volume of the dielectric (in the case of a water capacitor) that determines the capacitance. From what I've read thus far it appears its the interface of the water and stainless tubes ( or whatever metal is used), its referred to as the double layer interface. I'm not 100% sure about this, would be interested in any studies into this.
Perhaps one simple way to determine if its the interface between water and metal where the capacitance resides would be to compare a high surface area interface to a low surface area interface of same material.  I was thinking of using carbon fibre tow ( high surface area) to see what capacitance value it has compared to metal in a tube of water.

Different materials will have different dielectric constants but generally speaking the charge is held in the dielectric. Interesting things happen at the interfaces of different materials. A thermocouple generates electricity from heat and it's basically just two different materials in contact with each other. The composition of the materials can be engineered somewhat to give different response ranges.

Here's a video showing the charge is in the dielectric.
dissectible capacitor