The Non Linear Plasma Reactor

[TimFox]

Nikola Tesla's inventions and promotion of polyphase alternating current was a great step forward in electrical engineering.
Like other geniuses, some of his work late in life was not so fruitful.  https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2012/05/18/nikola-tesla-wasnt-god-and-thomas-edison-wasnt-the-devil/?sh=4adf64b71a21
Newton spent too much time at the end of his life interpreting the Book of Daniel--some think this was a result of inhaling too much mercury.
Einstein's famous failed late work was the development of a Unified Field Theory.

[Simon]

The standard model thinks the sun is a gas, when it clearly has a surface that is clearly liquid. Thats some pretty poor physics by anyones standards.

Um yes and no, there is a point deemed to be the surface, in the same way the earths atmosphere has an agreed limit even though particles may be found higher you have to set a threshold somewhere. but you are babbling nonsense anyway.

[RJSV]

Yeah, MK11, My buttons, too, they get pushed, approximately in proportion to how badly I call (him) out.  Which, in my view, is GRIFTERS territory: As long as (we) shut-up, let'em spew far and wide...
   I believe, we, or this forum in general, could be judged, in public, by EITHER how we 'kick em out' in a great big (mob) rush...OR, by the degree of wisdom and tolerance on display.  I'd like 'the world' to see a great 'blog spot', that, obviously, endures some troubles, in balance, and takes action, in balance.
   In that spirit, we are neither 'wimps', nor 'chumps', but don't respond as bullies, either.
Ok, now I'll put my (fake) priest's uniform back on (lol).
   One boss, once said, "It's only words, man..."

[RJSV]

My 'only' regret, is I've mis-spelled a name: Sorry Mk14,
about that.

   OP, it's not the technical basis, it's more that (you) cover for that disaster of a set of mis-spoken TECH terminology, abuse of context, it's that you directly violate the standards laid out, for polite, discourse.
You could be talkin 'TIME MACHINE' design, as long as leave out the personal attacks.  You're lucky to be here today...as obviously and continuously you deliberately violate that first rule, of courteous treatment, a display, really, a display that says you are valued here, even if it's a Levitating Time Machine that looks like Marilin Monroe.  (Actually, I'm making that part up...)

[bdunham7]

So in short before tesla invented AC current the established professors believed it to be perpetual motions, sound familiar?

Another silly fabrication.  Tesla didn't invent AC current.  Early dynamos all had AC current internally, something their builders fully realized because they used the commutator to rectify it.  AC current and systems were already extant while Tesla was still in school in Graz.

Tesla notably supposedly invented the AC induction motor and polyphase power, although there were contemporaries with competing claims. He was a bright, inventive engineer but not anything like the lone voice in the wilderness that he is sometimes imagined to be. These inventions were not universally ridiculed, but rather quickly adopted and developed by George Westinghouse, whose company had already adopted AC generation and distribution systems.

[abquke]

Maybe a more apt personality to refer to is Philo Farnsworth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philo_Farnsworth. He did not go through the "conventional" educational system but learned and built intuition about electromagnetics buy repairing and building electric motors. Eventually he worked on nuclear fusion device https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor using electrostatic containment of plasma while high energy ions are injected.

Point is he used real electricity and real magnetism to build real things. He didn't sit around talking while waiting for physics to change to suit him.

[TimFox]

My personal hero from that era is C P Steinmetz, who came to the US as a deformed political refugee, worked for General Electric, and helped put electrical engineering on a sound mathematical and physical basis.

[PlainName]

it's that you directly violate the standards laid out, for polite, discourse.
You could be talkin 'TIME MACHINE' design, as long as leave out the personal attacks.

Let him who casts the first stone, eh. I think if you bother to check back through the thread you'll find the OP isn't the most prolific, or even more than minor, source of ad hominem pronouncements. OTOH, can you point to any one of your posts that's been even slightly polite?

[antenna]

It's one thing to discuss theoretical (even impractical) ideas, but portraying those ideas to be rooted in science and successful experimentation while offering no proof in hopes of swindling people out of money, polite can be tossed right out the window.  And as for the forum rules... to allow such attempts to scam and intellectually mislead people persist, those mods better look the other way when a few negative things are said.

[abquke]

There's utility in having a record of someone's non-answers and unprofessionalism that will appear along with (if not higher) than their site in a search engine.

[antenna]

Furthermore, if this site would offer an unfollow or ignore option, I would have taken it.  However, that is not the case, and when you force people to be reminded of the nonsense by keeping the threads that fall off the pcb popping up in their unread replies, guess what.... Someone is gonna fire a few shots eventually.  That's the price to be paid by designing this site to operate the way it does.

...@abquke, there is no utility in having a record of anything here simply because most people hide behind enigmatic user names.  If I start spewing gibberish and scamming people, then start a company, do you really think comments from "antenna" will affect that company?  Probably not.

[PlainName]

force people to be reminded of the nonsense by keeping the threads that fall off the pcb popping up in their unread replies

There is an unnotify option on every thread page if you're contributed. Then you don't get notified of subsequent activity in the thread.

[antenna]

force people to be reminded of the nonsense by keeping the threads that fall off the pcb popping up in their unread replies

There is an unnotify option on every thread page if you're contributed. Then you don't get notified of subsequent activity in the thread.

Thats good to know, thanks!  And at one time I was about to do that and went to log in just to find out that I was banned (somehow) for spam.  It took over a month to be able to log back in (probably longer, I gave up on this site for a while after that).  When I get more comfortable in the idea that won't happen again, I will consider monetarily contributing.   

[RJSV]

   OP, ;. One suggestion, thanks to Ron An. and Bill Ca.:

   You get yourself, a GIANT vacume tube, early 1940's type, preferably with a PLATE ELECTRODE cap, up top.
Next, a small'ish project box with 2 switches.  One switch, of course,  an ON/OFF toggle.
   Of course, will need a tube socket, mount that sucker dead-center...Maybe even, need a little bag of sand, to stabilize your 'OffOscillator', ...maybe even put a Dymo-Tape legend:.    "OFF-OSCILLATOR". (Thanks, Ron and Bill).
   Then, you 'chat em up', (hitting on, your favorite opposite type).  Bear with me, here, I've got PRONOUN LAWs to evade...Just kidding, as California doesn't have any 'Pronoun Speech' laws...But I have to evade some kinda law, maybe it's gonna be: some new law...
I'm voting for a 'Pocket Protector Wearer's Protection Law'.
OK no, but, with all these new California Laws, some international WEB sites might have headaches, someone like me can only speculate.  I mean, we might be stuck, for a while, with all kinda unpleasant.

[Nonlinearplasma]

Nikola Tesla's inventions and promotion of polyphase alternating current was a great step forward in electrical engineering.
Like other geniuses, some of his work late in life was not so fruitful.  https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2012/05/18/nikola-tesla-wasnt-god-and-thomas-edison-wasnt-the-devil/?sh=4adf64b71a21
Newton spent too much time at the end of his life interpreting the Book of Daniel--some think this was a result of inhaling too much mercury.
Einstein's famous failed late work was the development of a Unified Field Theory.

Hi Tim, Tesla's later idea may have not been fruitful. Although what path would he have taken us down had he been well funded by the patent he gave up the royalties too? I believe that was an unfortunate mistake that cost humanity a great deal. The words he left behind (to me) shows a genius beyond that of any other man in history.

If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have the key to the universe.

In terms of understanding the Plasma Universe, this to me meant that if you use a clockface to plot the trajectory of multiply helical waves travelling in parallel and say that 3 is 90° around the axis, 6 is 180° and 9 is 270°. Then you say: the sine wave of the electric field is between 12 and 6 o'clock and the magnetic field is between 3 and 9 oclock. This mean that 12 is positive or north and 6 is negative or south. While 3 is north in the magnetic field and 9 is south. The the value of positive or negative depends on which side is closest to you so we have a small issue already that needs clarify because north and south cant change.

This is going to get long, i do apologize.

The 1st thing we notice is; that in the magnetic field 3 and 9 are always next to each other if the 2 waves are travelling in the same direction and the pattern repeats regardless of which location the particle is at around the wave. This is why 2 parallel current attract, because the opposite pole is always next to each other. Obviously travelling in the opposite direction the 2 9's are opposite and they repel. (NON LINEAR PLASMA)

The 2nd thing we notice is; if we rotate our view around a helical wave we see them spin down at 3 oclock and up at 9. While the 2 observers looking end on at the wave view it as clockwise in the direction of travel and anti clockwise look at it coming toward you.

The 3rd thing we notice is; when the 2 perpendicular observers view an ion or electron wave peak spin around, at 9 o'clock the observer looking across from the 3 oclock position views spin down while the observer outside of 9 has spin up. When at 3 o'clock the particle is spinning down for that observer and up for the one looking across from 9 o'clock. (use a mirror and spin a ball)

The 4th thing we notice; 2 observer rotating with the particle, 1 above the axis but below the particle and 1 outside, view the spin direction as opposite constantly, if our observer is orientated head clockwise then at 9 and 3 the particle is spinning up for the outside observer and down for the inside.

The 5th thing; to the 2 observers in the same orientations 12 is positive and 6 is negative for the electric field. In the magnetic field the 9 is positive for 1 observer while the 3 is positive for the other. While for the rotating observers the particle remains at the same height above the axis and the negative moves around always at the opposite location.

The 6th thing; to the axis of rotation, or common axis between the magnetic field and the electric field of the wave no negative value exists to this observer, for now lets call him the one eyed monster. Only height above the axis can be calculated from his position but he always views the underside of the wave (negative or electrostatic force or a south pole). That's why our current understanding of gravity has no replusive force.


This all means that; what is positive to 1 is negative to another, but when one views north the opposite cant views south because that was predetermined, and when orientation is flipped so is the direction of spin but not the value or field.

When considering a toroid, the clockfaces turns around due to the change in direction of travel, to the same stationary observer. 3 remains on the outside and 9 on the inside. Yet 12 and 6 stay put. This means South poles faces each other to the center of the toroid for the magnetic field, which is correct if we wrap maxwells straight wave around the toroid. Since we valued that location as negative we have 2 negatives facing each other above the polidal axis of the toroid. Hmm Maxwelll we have a problem, we have a new one eyed monster and he has 2 negative values above him, he cant be the same as the last 1 eyed monster who couldnt see negative, that are still some how above him, Do 360° of negative waves to the first 1 one eyed monster become positive to the second, and then does it matter if they add or multiple? They did not oginate from his axis and he view the wave peak. He still cant view negative from all angles.

-1×-1=?  Im no mathematician but an exponential wave peak makes it sound like them bad boys multiple. I will refer you to multi graphs already posted mapping the strength of the energy from a coil. That is why we find a Z pinch at the center of a toroid or a pole at the center of a coil. The polidal axis....vs  the equatorial axis. (posted by someone who found it elsewhere) i did make graphics on this that you are welcome to go look at again. Everyone kept asking for maths and i told them specifically, there is no negative to a wave in 3 dimensional space and everything is a rotating wave in a 3 dimensional universe.

I could go further down this path into quantum mechanics, its long enough i know but i seen some other cool Tesla quotes that i want to add.

All that was great in the past was ridiculed, condemned, combated, suppressed — only to emerge all the more powerfully, all the more triumphantly from the struggle.

Let the future tell the truth, and evaluate each one according to his work and accomplishments. The present is theirs; the future, for which I have really worked, is mine.

I don’t care that they stole my idea …  I care that they don’t have any of their own.

So astounding are the facts in this connection, that it would seem as though the Creator, himself had electrically designed this planet…

What one man calls God, another calls the laws of physics.

I perfere to believe in the good in people, its time to get rid of the one eyed monster, and bring back GOD.
Maybe it just means looking at things from more than 1 perspecfive in life and in physics. If this makes any sense to anyone then i look forward to your replies and i hope you will support the idea in anyway you can. It doesnt need to be money, sharing and debating it elsewhere is the backbone of what science is suppose to be about. If you cant do that, then can you at least give the character assassination a miss. They are accusations that couldnt be ignored and quite frankly any man that would not stand up for himself after being called a bot and a liar is to weak to even be an inventor. They wouldnt survive the failures and i can tell you that solo sailing teaches you a lot about not giving up.

If you dont understand and want to, all i can suggest is going back and looking at all the graphic starting with the helical wave coordinates; understand the magnet and the electromagnet; how the exponential wave peak is induced into the conductor as a wave though the windings at 90° and figure out how Maxwell used the frame of reference for the moveable observers. The larger the angle of the trajectory, the greater the resistance. To achieve superconductivity the atomic structure must allow for the 1.1° trajectory. I cant make it any simplier im afraid so i hope you get it eventually because a double helical toroid creates superconductivity and the z pinch is the exponential wave peak of that energy, it naturally forms with a quadrupole. You dont need to believe me because im going to power the future with it and you will see it. It will be more fun and a lot faster if i get help. You could use it as an oppertunity to see if you're goverment really give a shit about the climate.

[MK14]

I've spent some time, reading (or skimming some bits) the 11 page thread, here:
https://forum.cosmoquest.org/forum/the-proving-grounds/against-the-mainstream/3694697-can-mhd-create-everything-fusion-cant

It seems to have improved my understanding, as to what is going on here.  Basically, the OP seems to have strong ideas, with alternative (non-mainstream) Physics/Science theories on various stuff.  Unfortunately, the OP also seems to not be especially good at communicating these theories.  They (OP) tend to create these huge walls of text (word salads), various diagrams/pictures, and sometimes reference links, which don't make a lot of sense, to people with mainstream scientific knowledge.  The reference(s) also, usually/sometimes do not particularly support the OPs claims, very well, either.

On the one hand, I appreciate people thinking outside the box, and challenging various scientific theories, with various alternatives.  Without which, over the centuries, we would be dealing with Earth/Wind/Fire and a flat Earth in 2022, etc.

What seems to be especially problematic, is that the OP (e.g. in the linked to thread, above), usually doesn't answer questions.  Those questions, would help people understand the claimed theories better, and allow a more realistic discussion to take place.

TL;DR
The OP's alternative science views, on the one hand, could be useful, at least for getting scientific discussions to take place (but this isn't really the right forum for it).  But their relative inability to clearly explain what the heck these theories are, their apparent inability to accept/answer questions, around it, and their (possibly on purpose, I'm NOT sure), being unclear on what they are really trying to claim.

E.g. They seem to fail (here at least) to explain that, they think the sun is NOT powered by fusion, that the Moon doesn't create the Earths tides, that free energy machines (perpetual motion machines), are perfectly possible, and power the sun.  If I have correctly understood, the various sources I used, so I could be mistaken, on what they really think.

Some claim they are disappointed by the OP's lack of even rudimentary science skills/knowledge, and inability or refusal to present mathematical and/or other more down to earth scientific information, about their claims.

[Nonlinearplasma]

It so easy in person. This is really difficult, i figured it would be easier but the people that it triggers have strong beliefs on the mainstream and therefore fight to defend it rather than enquire. I stayed clear of question that make things more complicated such as laws of physics like theromdynamics. Because these laws are true and work, right up until there is no resistance. V=IR kinda gives a big red flag in the math.just because it produce no voltage doesnt mean there is no power in the rotating current.

Of to bed, cheers for reading the other forum. It was difficult there to and they shut it down and most dont even allow it

The MHD paper was the prove i needed, it came out to late. It was a test run to see what questions would be asked. You cant make answers involving differential equations in a few minutes. I figured out the suns magnetic change during the solar cycle from that discussion so i considered it a massive win.

[bdunham7]

I stayed clear of question that make things more complicated such as laws of physics like theromdynamics. Because these laws are true and work, right up until there is no resistance. V=IR kinda gives a big red flag in the math.just because it produce no voltage doesnt mean there is no power in the rotating current.

You toss off inanities like that, revealing your complete lack of the most basic understanding of  high-school level physics and then expect...what?  Plenty of intelligent people have thought about thermodynamics and superconductivity before you arrived to point out what you must assume are glaring flaws in 'mainstream' science.  But instead of you bopping around and not answering any questions ever, how about you stop right there for a moment and explain what you think the problem is with the laws of thermodynamics regarding circulating currents in a superconductor?  How do they stop working?

[Nonlinearplasma]

I stayed clear of question that make things more complicated such as laws of physics like theromdynamics. Because these laws are true and work, right up until there is no resistance. V=IR kinda gives a big red flag in the math.just because it produce no voltage doesnt mean there is no power in the rotating current.

You toss off inanities like that, revealing your complete lack of the most basic understanding of  high-school level physics and then expect...what?  Plenty of intelligent people have thought about thermodynamics and superconductivity before you arrived to point out what you must assume are glaring flaws in 'mainstream' science.  But instead of you bopping around and not answering any questions ever, how about you stop right there for a moment and explain what you think the problem is with the laws of thermodynamics regarding circulating currents in a superconductor?  How do they stop working?

If we try and use the electrical laws derived from Maxwell's equations to calculate the energy or power of an electromagnetic waves around a toroid (the electric field and magnetic field). We know there is current because its rotating charge and a magnetic field is being produced. So we can work out the current with our invisible clamp meter and we know the resistance of a superconductor. We dont gnerate electricity energy with superconductors but a plasma superconductor does generate energy. Lets say we measured 1000A around a toros that has a resistance of zero. Mathimatically it cant generated "voltage" which is a measure of amplitude above the axis. Since anything multiplied by zero is zero. The same goes for all other resistance calculations. The magnetic field is produced by current and therefore power or energy cannot be zero, but it is mathimatically, this can be confirmed by calculating the combined wave value of a 3 phase system to the star point. All waves equal zero, but they dont and they also have a rotation value aka the right hand rule. This is because the wave cancelling effect of Maxwell's equations using a 2D framework is only true to its own central axis in 2 dimensions. Any second axis like the poloidal axis of an electromagnetic coil measures an exponential wave peak, we called the pole of the coil, or polidal axis of the coil (north/south), which is actually a Z- pinch to all waves. South being the force of the wave trough and north the force of the wave peak. This force produced by energy on the axis does not equal zero.

The power of the plasma reactor is determined by density of charge, as is gravity in a star or planet. Density and mass are almost identical, thats why the models almost worked, until it reached superconductivity plasma and they required dark matter.
 

[Zero999]

I've spent some time, reading (or skimming some bits) the 11 page thread, here:
https://forum.cosmoquest.org/forum/the-proving-grounds/against-the-mainstream/3694697-can-mhd-create-everything-fusion-cant

It seems to have improved my understanding, as to what is going on here.  Basically, the OP seems to have strong ideas, with alternative (non-mainstream) Physics/Science theories on various stuff.  Unfortunately, the OP also seems to not be especially good at communicating these theories.  They (OP) tend to create these huge walls of text (word salads), various diagrams/pictures, and sometimes reference links, which don't make a lot of sense, to people with mainstream scientific knowledge.  The reference(s) also, usually/sometimes do not particularly support the OPs claims, very well, either.

On the one hand, I appreciate people thinking outside the box, and challenging various scientific theories, with various alternatives.  Without which, over the centuries, we would be dealing with Earth/Wind/Fire and a flat Earth in 2022, etc.

What seems to be especially problematic, is that the OP (e.g. in the linked to thread, above), usually doesn't answer questions.  Those questions, would help people understand the claimed theories better, and allow a more realistic discussion to take place.

TL;DR
The OP's alternative science views, on the one hand, could be useful, at least for getting scientific discussions to take place (but this isn't really the right forum for it).  But their relative inability to clearly explain what the heck these theories are, their apparent inability to accept/answer questions, around it, and their (possibly on purpose, I'm NOT sure), being unclear on what they are really trying to claim.

E.g. They seem to fail (here at least) to explain that, they think the sun is NOT powered by fusion, that the Moon doesn't create the Earths tides, that free energy machines (perpetual motion machines), are perfectly possible, and power the sun.  If I have correctly understood, the various sources I used, so I could be mistaken, on what they really think.

Some claim they are disappointed by the OP's lack of even rudimentary science skills/knowledge, and inability or refusal to present mathematical and/or other more down to earth scientific information, about their claims.

I have tried to take the original poster seriously but he appears to be ignorant of mainstream physics/science theories, which harms his credibility. He lost me when I asked him if he was familiar with the traveling wave tube amplifier and he responded with no, but here's a picture of the atmospheric circulation.

I disagree about this not being the right forum. I've found this place to be ideal for discussing scientific theories and being an engineering forum, it's more practical, rather than purely theoretical.

[Nonlinearplasma]

I have tried to take the original poster seriously but he appears to be ignorant of mainstream physics/science theories, which harms his credibility. He lost me when I asked him if he was familiar with the traveling wave tube amplifier and he responded with no, but here's a picture of the atmospheric circulation.

I disagree about this not being the right forum. I've found this place to be ideal for discussing scientific theories and being an engineering forum, it's more practical, rather than purely theoretical.

So do i, i think someone will get it because some havent given up yet.

The atmosphereic circulation has ions in it that generate electric and magnetic fields. We need to know the value of more than 1 wave at a time. Thats way loops and nodes form, waves only cancel out in 3 dimensions to their own axis.  What happens between the hadley and ferrel cell induces a second wave called a low or high pressure system @90°. That process isnt in the models and is considered coriolis effect. That matters and the graphic is really easy to see if you study it.

Consider each "travelling wave tube" of charged ions as an electrical coil. Its just a big plasma transformer inducing secondary currents between waves.

I wasnt ignoring questions, im trying to follow the learning process it was for me. In person i can bounce of someone's knowledge of the natural world. This is much harder to do with multiple people because some go to fast and jump straight to the end. Like differential equations. How can you explain the sinusoidal nature of the math without understanding it is a 2D repersentation of a 3D helical wave first.

It all falls into place eventually when you realise im not saying the other theories are wrong. Im unifying their terminology inside a different mathimatical framework that removes the negative from the equation for 3 dimensional helical waves 

[Nonlinearplasma]

The simpliest way to put it is this

Tha amplitude of the wave around a toroid in a plasma transformer is gravity. Voltage is is a measure of gravity in the plasma universe. To the center point the wave always attracts, but not to every observer in every orientation and therfore not always to each other.

This is why coulomb's repels and attracts depending on direction of the waves to each other.

Any observer with an outside perspective views the positive and negative of both sides of the toroid and they apear to cancel out but the effects dont and are termed gravity. We measure the wave as the magnetic field which is alway perpendicular to the surface pulling the plasma in our bodies to it. Thats why water falls and rotates, while getting smaller as it accelerates. The density is increasing because of gravity and thus is gravity, the control of densty. A measurement of Mass within a certain Volume all controlled by light electricity and magnetism, each a 3 dimensional wave in different mediums, as Tesla said..

[MK14]

I have tried to take the original poster seriously but he appears to be ignorant of mainstream physics/science theories, which harms his credibility. He lost me when I asked him if he was familiar with the traveling wave tube amplifier and he responded with no, but here's a picture of the atmospheric circulation.

I disagree about this not being the right forum. I've found this place to be ideal for discussing scientific theories and being an engineering forum, it's more practical, rather than purely theoretical.

This forum, does seem to get the odd scientific thread (such as Chemistry), from time to time, and I agree.  Some apparently knowledgeable folks, often come in and give nice answers.  But there are strongly scientifically oriented forums, which I would have thought, are better places, as a higher percentage of the forum people, are Physics experts.
But you are right (I don't disagree), that this forum, seems to cope with a bewilderingly wide range of subjects (Electronics, Computing, Engineering, Science, etc).

It is unfortunate that as you say, there is an apparent issue as regards "ignorant of mainstream physics/science theories".  But that issue, doesn't necessarily mean that a new theory/idea/invention/concept they come up with.  Is (for that reason alone), wrong and/or should be ignored and/or shouldn't be discussed etc.  But it does create significant doubts, as to the validity/viability/robustness of any such theories.
TL;DR
Almost all the time, the fundamental laws, don't change.  But just extremely rarely, they do.  E.g. Einstein's law of relativity, and fundamental changes as things approach the speed of light.  The speed of light being a thing, and fundamental limit, etc.  Which in the past, was a 'new' theory, which became widely accepted, in time.  I.e. it was against, what is commonly called Newton's classical Physics, or similar.

In electronics, Ohms law, gets into difficulties with non-Ohmic devices, such as diodes and filament lamps.  I.e. Ohms law is fine, as long as you don't try and measure the resistance of a (non-Ohmic device, such as a) diode or lamp, for use under all conditions.

I think the "ignorant of mainstream physics/science theories" issue you mentioned.  Is a big part of why, significant communication difficulties, have arisen in this thread.  Even for a wildly new, controversial theory.  It should still predominantly or fully obey the basic accepted laws of Physics, except where it is changing the boundaries of it.  Such as discovering non-Ohmic resistances, for the first time.
The OPs attempts at dodging such issues/questions, I think only made it worse, not better.

EDIT:  Shortened a bit.

[Nonlinearplasma]

The maximum speed of light is super conductivity of the wave. Resistance in a coil of wire is built up in a motor from 1 wave running into the back of another or itself which ever way you look at it, increasing the amplitude of the voltage. MK14 your not far from understanding. Nothing worth doing is every easy. Trust me this is worth putting the effort in to it. Communication skills are a skill set i havent mastered as well as other because of how i think. I wish i was a Jordan Peterson with articulation of language but im not. But we electrical folk understand how to measure energy under a wave (move that saying to energy around the wave and you understand 3 dimensional motion) and you nailed the think right there.

[MK14]

Communication skills are a skill set i havent mastered as well as other because of how i think. I wish i was a Jordan Peterson with articulation of language but im not.

That is an important skill, in many areas/walks of life.  But not everyone is good at it.  Some tasks, such as writing software which is only ever worked on by the author, and other things.  Are not too badly off, if the person doesn't have the best communication skills.
I suspect, that in many cases, even if the person involved is convinced, it can't be improved.  Communication skills can be improved.

In some cases, unfortunately/sadly, it can be very difficult, or somewhat not possible, to understand the thing in question.