EEVblog #708 - Free Energy - History of Maxwell's Equations

[DROBNJAK]

There was a conference about Aharonov-Bohm's effect on university in Tel Aviv University. Professor Chen Ning Yang, who won Nobel Prize in Physics (1957), talks about controversial castration of Maxwell equations by Oliver Heaviside.

Since 99% of Electrical & Electronics Engineers live in the illusion that Maxwell's equations they are thought at university are 'complete' Maxwell's equations, this might be an eye opener. If not an eye-popper 

History of the Vector Potential

Just to disambiguate, this videos without shadow of doubt, demonstrates that Maxwell's equations that are tough at universities across whole world for more than 100 years are 'censored' or 'crippled' Maxwell's equations. And since Theory of Relativity is derived from 'crippled' Maxwell's equations, Relaitivy is just a special case, nothing more. Notably, Relativity doesn't apply to rotation and acceleration, only to movement in straight line at a constant speed.

And, since we all like experimental proof, and many people here have good instrumentation, somebody might try to verify this:

  emf002x: Measuring the Rhombus Experiment

  emf001x: Quad Loop: Experimental Data

Lab demonstration of Negative Resistance in plain wires, by professor Dr. Deborah Chung, Buffalo, NY:

  Negative Resistance in Conductors


And finally, this is Chen Ning Yang's equation that will most likely change the science as we know it:



Please don't jump on me until you watch the videos till the end.

[Andy Watson]

And ?
May be I missed something but I'm not going to waste another 30 minutes trying to figure out what it was.

[John Coloccia]

Even more free energy bullshit.

edit:
Just to also mention, Lev Vaidman has recently show how to get rid of the potential...again.

[T3sl4co1l]

Ditto. I'm not going to watch random videos unless there's a clear thesis at work.

I was hoping the experiment would shed some light but all it is is a poor experimentalist and some perfectly believable measurements.

Tim

[DROBNJAK]

Even more free energy bullshit.

You call Nobel Prize winner's lecture "bullshit". Interesting and really Audacious.

[Andy Watson]

Even more free energy bullshit.

You call Nobel Prize winner's lecture "bullshit". Interesting and really Audacious.

Pay attention. He didn't call the professor's lecture bullshit. He call the "free energy" bullshit.

[John Coloccia]

Even more free energy bullshit.

You call Nobel Prize winner's lecture "bullshit". Interesting and really Audacious.

I'm calling any link any of this has with free energy bullshit.

For example, I have no idea what that guy measuring yard sticks has to do with anything.

The first video has absolutely nothing to do with free energy, and Lev Vaidman seems to have recently shown that even considering the Aharonoz-Bohm effect, you still don't need the potential to actually exist.

That "negative resistance" experiment also has nothing to do with free energy, even though it says "Energy from the Vacuum" in the title.  Incidentally, do all the kook who make these videos use the same video editing guy, because they all seem to have the same trademark cheesy graphics and dramatic music.  This must be a rule for these kinds of videos, yes?

[EEVblog]

And ?
May be I missed something but I'm not going to waste another 30 minutes trying to figure out what it was.

Yep, I'm not going to bother, the OP is no doubt ready to drag anyone under the bridge who dares enters...

[DROBNJAK]

My posts never implies any "free energy". Title of Negative Resistance video wasn't chosen by myself. But Negative Resistance was demonstrated in an university lab experiment.

This is solely about new meaning Maxwell's equations can get.

[Andy Watson]

My posts never implies any "free energy".

Are you saying that you did not write the title to first post?

[DROBNJAK]

Original Maxwell's equations include "free energy". It is there in the plain sight in the equation derived by Nobel Prize winner.

Are you all smarter than Nobel Prize winner?

Are you all challenging Maxwell?

[EEVblog]

Original Maxwell's equations include "free energy". It is there in the plain sight in the equation derived by Nobel Prize winner.
Are you all smarter than Nobel Prize winner?
Are you all challenging Maxwell?

And dragged under the bridge we get...

[Andy Watson]

And dragged under the bridge we get...

Nah! I'm outta here!

[GK]

And finally, this is Chen Ning Yang's equation that will most likely change the science as we know it:

The first video was uploaded to Youtube four years ago already. When is this revolution likely to begin?

[John Coloccia]

One of these days, I'm going to photoshop Widler's head in there.

[helius]

http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_15.html#Ch15-S4

The vector potential is well known to anyone who has studied QM and there is nothing mysterious or "hidden" about it at all.

[DROBNJAK]

"Free energy" is already well established in official science. Its just a question of packaging.

Packaging is called "Big Bang" theory and it is universally accepted. Big Bang violates low of conservation of energy.

If you are accepting Big Bang theory, than you believe into Free Energy.

Its just a matter of convenience.

[bookaboo]

You know you almost had me believing in free energy but then I noticed your name was in ALL CAPS so now I don't.

[DROBNJAK]

You know you almost had me believing in free energy but then I noticed your name was in ALL CAPS so now I don't.

I do not believe either way. I am just open-minded on subject and I provided highly credible information. There is maths and there are experiments.

Believing is macho stuff.

[rs20]

"Free energy" is already well established in official science. Its just a question of packaging.

OK, so why are you on this forum? Go build your free energy power station and make yourself a billion dollars. You don't need our permission.

[helius]

"Free energy" is already well established in official science. Its just a question of packaging.

Packaging is called "Big Bang" theory and it is universally accepted. Big Bang violates low of conservation of energy.

If you are accepting Big Bang theory, than you believe into Free Energy.

Its just a matter of convenience.

No, there is no violation of the "low" of conservation of energy. In the currently accepted theory of inflation, most of the matter and space in the universe was created by extracting energy from a false vacuum. In physics, you rarely know the total energy of a system. What you do know are the possible energy transfers that can happen. Conservation of energy means that when net energy is transferred out of a system it cannot return to the same state as before. After inflation, the false vacuum was not in the same state anymore, i.e. the energy that was taken from it cannot be taken from it again.

[DROBNJAK]

"Free energy" is already well established in official science. Its just a question of packaging.

OK, so why are you on this forum? Go build your free energy power station and make yourself a billion dollars. You don't need our permission.

Its not question of believing either way.

I've just presented equations by Nobel prize winner and Maxwell himself. Plus, some experiments that seem to support that math.

These are not my ideas and these are not my experiments.

[DROBNJAK]

No, there is no violation of the "low" of conservation of energy. In the currently accepted theory of inflation, most of the matter and space in the universe was created by extracting energy from a false vacuum. In physics, you rarely know the total energy of a system. What you do know are the possible energy transfers that can happen. Conservation of energy means that when net energy is transferred out of a system it cannot return to the same state as before. After inflation, the false vacuum was not in the same state anymore, i.e. the energy that was taken from it cannot be taken from it again.

What you just said is taking "free energy" from vacuum.

So you are supporter of "free energy"?

As long as I find one single open minded person, who is going to look into this without prejudice, I am really lucky!

There is enough authority behind these videos.

[John Coloccia]

[EEVblog]

Its not question of believing either way.
I've just presented equations by Nobel prize winner and Maxwell himself. Plus, some experiments that seem to support that math.
These are not my ideas and these are not my experiments.

You started this thread to troll, it will only go downhill from here.
Please give me an excuse not to lock it...