|
|
eyesopen
Joined: 25 Apr 2001
Posts: 663
Location: Nashville TN |
 Sun Sep 30, 2001 11:45 pm
|
 |
|
I'm working on a new version... It will be online as soon as I get it. |
| |
|
|
Delphi
Joined: 17 Mar 2001
Posts: 1571
Location: S. Bossier, Louisiana |
|
Mon Oct 01, 2001 12:39 am
|
|
|
Chem, Help me get "clear" on what you are saying.....are you wondering if some type of weapon aimed AT "something" in the sky caused the "flame-out" dealy,....or, are you saying, you think something ejected from the craft..whatever the craft was...?? Blame it on the full moon or chronic fatigue, but I'm a little extra "foggy" at grasping things today...but the issue is important and I want to delve into it also...what was caught on that video and what occurred! Thanx Chem! ^j^  |
| |
|
|
Delphi
Joined: 17 Mar 2001
Posts: 1571
Location: S. Bossier, Louisiana |
|
Mon Oct 01, 2001 12:58 am
|
|
|
This aspect of the issue is interesting to me as well, as I have been "studying up" on Scalar weaponry, EMP, microwave, laser, etc. and it is fascinating to delve into all the above....CHEM, did you see the "phantom object" in the WTC video that is on the web at http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com and other sites as well...The video is intriguing...hubby and I actually saw the thing, whatever it was, while watching the news live that terrible day. Yes, there is a lot of mysterious and unusual events taking place in our skies and I think we should be ever vigilant! Blessings, Joanne ^j^ ^j^Also, I wonder about the possibility that TPTB will come up with or have, a weapon that will be able to actually "send objects, people,etc." to other dimensions or space and time....Vis A Vis the Philadelphia experiment...who's to say that it hasn't been "perfected" by now, and what a horrible weapon that would be....I'm not saying it has been used yet, but if such exists....some faction would use it eventually...just thinkin and wondering. Would be the ultimate "weapon from hell"! What a fate for whoever or whatever....J. ^j^ |
| |
|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
|
Mon Oct 01, 2001 1:42 am
|
|
|
Chemflame video 2.0 is now up at Mega and it has replaced the earlier footage. Nice work Eyesopen!
It depicts the phenomena that was depicted in the first four frames of the earlier footage and is really something to behold in real-time.
Delphi, forgive my vaugeness, but I am loathe to make any bold pronouncements regarding the technology behind this effect. But yes, I was theorizing that a particle beam weapon aimed at the airframe could result in the observed effect. |
| |
|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
|
Mon Oct 01, 2001 2:41 am
|
|
|
Ripped from a post by msswv123 at Yahoo Chemtrail Internet Research:
Dr. Mounir Laroussi, Research Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering, has received a $109K award from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research for the purchase of instrumentation for atmospheric pressure plasma research for the period April 1, 2001, through March 31, 2002.<<
http://www.eng.odu.edu/webroot/orgs/Engr/colengineer.nsf/pages/e-interaction0323 01
>>Robert Barker, program manager for plasma physics in the Air Force's Office of Scientific Research in Arlington, Virginia is so taken with Laroussi's approach that he thus far has funneled $250,000 into Laroussi's research <<
>>What's intriguing about Mounir's work is the large volumes of plasma he's been able to generate," Barker said. "He's making very good progress in keeping costs and weight low. His approach gives the best power figures for practical, large-volume generation of cold plasma we have to date."
>>Laroussi's process, specified in pending patent applications, is scalable; cold-plasma containers of virtually any size are feasible. No vacuum pumps are required, since the plasma is generated at normal atmospheric pressure.
>>Poke a finger inside Laroussi's tabletop plasma-generating apparatus and all you'll get from the bluish, pilot-light-like ionized gas is a slight tingle. But the harmless sensation is misleading, since it doesn't give a complete picture of plasma's power. Depending on how a plasma is "tuned," or how it is made more dense by increasing its frequency, it could ward off microwave bursts and discharges from ground-based, energized sources of potential damage and disruption.
Swirling in and around one another, a plasma's charged particles interact constantly, giving rise to localized attractions or repulsions. External energy splashing against the plasma --- say, from a potentially disabling, concentrated burst of microwaves, or perhaps even from certain varieties of particle-beam weapons fired from military bases on Earth -- could be caught up within the plasma's complex electromagnetic fields to be dissipated completely or deflected into space.<<
>>"Laser and high-power microwave weapons are on the way; they're almost here. Lasers are fierce weapons. To protect against them, you'd need a very dense plasma, almost a solid. But a good cold plasma could really help out by reflecting or absorbing energy from a microwave-powered war weapon<<
http://www.pmayhem.org/articles/science/000914plasma.html
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Chem11 on 09-30-2001] |
| |
|
|
Delphi
Joined: 17 Mar 2001
Posts: 1571
Location: S. Bossier, Louisiana |
|
Mon Oct 01, 2001 3:45 am
|
|
|
Chem, Mille grazie per il suo aiuto, (Thanx), for the link and the great info.!!! Plasma Physics and Lasers and such...now your talkin...I like to gooble up anything I can read on about all of the above...it dosen't get more interesting then that! Blessings, You are an earth bound Angel! ^j^ Joanne I can see where your thinking is going and it is an interesting, and it looks like, feasible theory. Keep diggin! J. |
| |
|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
|
Wed Nov 14, 2001 7:43 pm
|
|
|
THE PLASMA FREQUENCY:
RADAR APPLICATIONS
Clifford E Carnicom
Nov 05 2001
An analysis now exists to indicate that one of the primary applications of the aerosol operations is likely to involve the advanced use of radar technology for military purposes. Citizens may recall that this application was brought forth several months ago from unnamed sources; this current study substantiates that earlier disclosure through the processes of observation, analysis and deduction. Enhanced electromagnetic propagation of various energy forms, previously undefined as to specific wavelengths or frequencies employed, has been at the forefront of research by this author for some time now.
Although I do not, in any fashion, claim to be highly versed in plasma physics, this field has been an important topic of research for the past year in conjunction with the analysis of the aerosol operations. A plasma is an ionized gas consisting of ions and free electrons distributed over a region in space. The effect of the aerosol operations can lead to no other logical conclusion except that the lower atmosphere itself has been altered to a plasma state. Previous research over a substantial period of time within this site will support this finding. An alternative interpretation of a plasma is that of an electrically conductive gas. In this case, the 'gas' employed is the atmosphere. An artificial ionosphere has been, in effect, created within the lower atmosphere. It may also help to mention that a neon, or fluorescent light, is a familiar visual example of plasma physics.
Within the field of plasma physics, concentrated attention must be devoted to what is known as the 'plasma frequency'. The plasma frequency can be considered as a resonant frequency of the ionized gas. The magnitude of this frequency has highly significant ramifications with respect to the propagation of electromagnetic energy through the ionized gas. Take, for instance, the following elaboration by Richard Feynman, within Lectures of Physics, Vol II:
"This natural resonance of a plasma has some interesting effects. For example, if one tries to propagate a radiowave through the ionosphere, one finds that it can penetrate only if its frequency is higher than the plasma frequency. Otherwise the signal is reflected back. We must use high frequencies if we wish to communicate with a satellite in space. On the other hand, if we wish to communicate with a radio station beyond the horizon, we must use frequencies lower than the plasma frequency, so that the signal will be reflected back to the earth."
A difficult problem facing this researcher is how to arrive at the specific frequencies that are expected to be employed when provided with remote and limited data. Formal authorities and agents of the public welfare, including the national media and environmental organizations, have demonstrated a complete and total refusal to confront the numerous demands by the public for an accounting of, and an informed consent to, the affairs overhead.
In order to arrive at the plasma frequency for the current state of the atmosphere, it is essential to determine an estimate for the electron density of the atmosphere under its current and altered state. The plasma frequency is intimately dependent upon the electron density; it is, in fact, proportional to the square root of this electron density. Determination of the electron density of the lower atmosphere(altered) has been a relatively difficult problem to approach with limited resources and the methods of analysis alone. It is thought that a satisfactory estimate of that electron density level can now be achieved. This work will show itself to be dependent upon earlier sustained research on the subject of particle density estimates within the atmosphere. This work is presented on the page entitled Air Data Scrutiny Now Required presented elsewhere on this site.
As an opening example, let us consider an estimate of the plasma frequency for the ionosphere. The ionosphere is a rather classic example of a plasma state, and is of tremendous importance to radio communications because of the properties of reflection of waves as has been mentioned earlier. There are several forms of equations available that involve plasma frequency determination, e.g., see Introduction to Modern Optics by G. Fowles 1975, Theoretical Physics by G. Joos, 1986, Lectures of Physics, Feynman 1964, Theory of Electromagnetic Wave Propagation by Papas 1988, Optical Physics by S.G. Lipson 1995, The Electromagnetic Field by A. Shadowitz 1975, Physics of Waves by W. E. Elmore 1969 and others.
The form which is most convenient and simple to use at this point is:
wp2= N (qe)2 / (Eom)
where wp is the plasma frequency in radians, N is the number of electrons per unit volume, Eo is the permittivity of free space, qe is the charge of an electron and m is the mass of the electron. The following values are available:
qe = 1.6E-19 coulomb
Eo = 8.85E-12 farad-meter-1
m = 9.11E-31 kgm
A value for N, the number of electrons per unit volume for the ionosphere is available from the University of Leicester, on a web page entitled Ionospheric Physics (valid 08/19/01). It will be seen that representative values for the electron density of the ionosphere range from approximately 1E2 to 1E6 electrons per cubic centimeter. For this example, let us use a rather representative value of 1E5 electrons / cm3.
Using these values in the above equation,
wp2 = (1E11 (e-/m3) * (1.6 E-19coulomb)2) / ((8.85E-12 farad-meter-1) * (9.11E-31kg))
or
wp = 1.78E7radians
and dividing by 2 * pi for cycles/sec
wp = 2.83Mhz.
This value is quite realistic and representative of what is known as a critical frequency ( peak plasma frequency) of shortwave (high frequency) radio communications. Ionosonde measurements (measurements of ionization levels of the atmosphere) typically depict a value as has been determined above; please refer to Basic Ionosonde Theory (valid 07/28/01) for additional information.
The plasma frequency of solid metals can also be determined by these same principles. Electron density within metals is also known, and the plasma frequency of solid metals can also be determined. It is of more than passing interest that the plasma frequency of a solid metal is also related directly to its 'transparency' with respect to the electromagnetic frequencies to which it is subjected.
The problem of estimating the electron density of the altered atmosphere poses several difficulties, as some estimate of the concentration and type of the aerosols which have been injected into the atmosphere will be required.
Readers may now wish to refer to an earlier presentation, where such estimates of particulate concentration levels have been presented. It may be recalled that an extremely conservative approach to this problem was taken, with an end result of approximately 60 micrograms / cubic meter (EPA limit 50 : PM<10) being arrived at through a reasoned analysis and synthesis of observations. In addition, assume a baseline value of 39 micrograms cubic meter from the reference data of the interval 1996 - 1998; this value is taken from an additional study of particulate matter. Assume, therefore, a difference of particulate matter on the order of 21 micrograms / cubic meter from the reference value. Assume for the present example that we are using magnesium as a primary constituent of the aerosol particulate matter.
In a manner similiar to R. Feynman, within Lectures on Physics Vol II, subsection entitled, Low Frequency and high-frequency approximation; the skin depth and the plasma frequency, let us assume that there is one free electron per atom within the particulate material under analysis. This now leads to an estimate for N as:
N = ((60E-6 gms / m3 ) - (39E-6 gms / m3) * 6.02E23 (Avogadros No.)) / (24.3 gms / mole of Mg)
N(estimate) = 5.20E17 electrons / m3
Notice that this estimate is significantly higher than the magnitudes expected within the ionosphere itself.
Determining the plasma frequency for this electron density, we have:
wp2 = ((5.20E17 e- / m3) * (1.6E-19)2) / ((8.85E-12) * (9.11E-31))
which leads to an estimate of the plasma frequency of the altered atmosphere of:
wp = 4.06E10radians
or
wp = (6.46E9)Hz
The significance of this frequency value is that it represents the upper end of radio waves, i.e., radar waves within the electromagnetic spectrum. Based upon the earlier discussion, it is therefore expected that the altered atmosphere medium is conducive and beneficial to the reflection, propagation and/or the ducting of radar waves(as well as lower frequencies) over long distances. This strongly suggests that a significant application of the aerosol operations may well involve that same enterprise, i.e, the propagation of radar waves (as well as lower frequencies) over extended distances. There are numerous military and electromagnetic propagation applications that become evident from this finding. Any modifications to this presentation will be made as is appropriate.
Clifford E Carnicom
Nov 05 2001
|
| |
|
|
3T3L1
Joined: 08 Mar 2001
Posts: 1344
Location: Lubbock, Texas |
|
Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:37 pm
|
|
|
Nice equations. I'm not sure what this proves about the purpose of chemtrails, though. |
| |
|
|
toxdoc
Joined: 17 Jan 2001
Posts: 23
Location: Williamstown, KY,USA |
|
Wed Nov 14, 2001 9:22 pm
|
|
|
I think what Mr. Carnicom is trying to imply is that efforts are being made to alter tropospheric ionization for the propagation of radio transmission in the low kilohertz range. Temperature inversions and atmospheric water are probably the greatest factors in this. Addition of radio-reflective or radio-absorbtive "metal salts" would not increase but, likely decrease signal propagation due to scatter if nothing else. To learn more about the effects of atmosphere on radio propagation these are 2 good sources. http://www.qsl.net/kc0dmh/propagation.html http://www.tpub.com/neets/book10/40c.htm |
| |
|
|
3T3L1
Joined: 08 Mar 2001
Posts: 1344
Location: Lubbock, Texas |
|
Wed Nov 14, 2001 9:37 pm
|
|
|
I think what Mr. Carnicom is trying to imply is that efforts are being made to alter tropospheric ionization for the propagation of radio transmission in the low kilohertz range.
Right. ("The effect of the aerosol operations can lead to no other logical conclusion except that the lower atmosphere itself has been altered to a plasma state.") But what is his proof that this is happening?
Your hypothesis about decreasing rather than increasing propagation sounds right to me. Wouldn't it make more sense to stabilize the ionosphere rather than trying to modify ion concentrations in the lower atmosphere?
[Edited 1 times, lastly by 3T3L1 on 11-14-2001] |
| |
|
|
toxdoc
Joined: 17 Jan 2001
Posts: 23
Location: Williamstown, KY,USA |
|
Wed Nov 14, 2001 10:52 pm
|
|
|
Right Miss 3.
The idea of turning the atmosphere into a plasma is way off. What he is conveniently ignoring is the incredible amount of energy needed to generate a plasma at S.T.P. Maybe, just maybe some high energy lazer could generate a small, local effect but it would'nt last; picoseconds would probably be a couple of magnitudes too long.
Read more: http://www.plasmas.org/
[Edited 1 times, lastly by toxdoc on 11-14-2001] |
| |
|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
|
Sat Nov 17, 2001 1:06 am
|
|
|
I think there is a definate connection between negative-ion plasma research and CT related phenomena. We know that SF6 is being used in advanced ion propulsion systems. And eyesopen's video that is the subject of this thread depicts something that fits the description of the microwave plasma shield being developed to a tee... |
| |
|
|
3T3L1
Joined: 08 Mar 2001
Posts: 1344
Location: Lubbock, Texas |
|
Sat Nov 17, 2001 5:34 am
|
|
|
I think the question is, Chem11, is it practical to try to generate and maintain a plasma in the lower atmosphere? It seems to me that there would be too much matter around, and it would simply soak up all the ions. If you could generate a stable layer of ions at a high altitude, that would seem to be a more feasible approach.
My other question is, has Mr. Carnicom actually measured an increase in ion density in the lower atmosphere, or is he discussing theoretical possibilities? I admit, I can't discern which is true from the material you quoted, so any explanations are welcome. |
| |
|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
|
Sat Nov 17, 2001 9:44 am
|
|
|
Well, I wish I has some of the research that I had accumlated on this very subject at my fingertips, but unfortunately this information resides on a computer that is now a couple thousand miles out of my immediate reach.
Honestly, I'm way out of my depth here but I can tell you that the military is experimenting with generating plasma fields for applications ranging from advanced propulsion to visual invisibility to microwave weapon shielding. My own feeling is that the advanced radar applications being discussed are only a small part of the larger picture.
I think if you re-read Clifford's report, a lot of answers will present themselves. For instance;
"An alternative interpretation of a plasma is that of an electrically conductive gas. In this case, the 'gas' employed is the atmosphere. An artificial ionosphere has been, in effect, created within the lower atmosphere. It may also help to mention that a neon, or fluorescent light, is a familiar visual example of plasma physics."
I think the point that Mr. Carnicom is trying to make is that the atmosphere is being altered to make it more electrically conductive. Could this increased conductivity be related to the 'fluorescent light' observed in Eyesopen's video? I don't know, but something sure as hell is... and isn't the result of any afterburner.
Everything I've seen on the subject seems focused on creating a plasma field a good deal smaller than, say, our entire atmosphere, but I'm certainly willing to entertain the possibility that atmosphere has been altered enough to be more conducive to creating such a field on a smaller scale.
"It is of more than passing interest that the plasma frequency of a solid metal is also related directly to its 'transparency' with respect to the electromagnetic frequencies to which it is subjected."
A somewhat enigmatic and thought-provoking statement. Transparent to what? Radar? Perhaps other wavelengths? This is heading back to Scalar EM and it's getting late so we'll save that one for later...
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Chem11 on 11-17-2001] |
| |
|
|
3T3L1
Joined: 08 Mar 2001
Posts: 1344
Location: Lubbock, Texas |
|
Sat Nov 17, 2001 3:19 pm
|
|
|
Sadly, when Mr. Carnicom does one of his scientific articles, you can assume it's wrong and work backward from there to figure out why he is wrong in that particular instance. Just like the guy at CTTUSA who said that, by definition, any trail that lasts longer than 5 minutes is a chemtrail--his ignorance gives all of us a black eye.
Let's grant him this, Chem:
It may also help to mention that a neon, or fluorescent light, is a familiar visual example of plasma physics.
But what do neon and flurorescent lights have in common? That's right, a glass tube. It keeps the plasma in and the atmosphere out. Otherwise the abundant gases of the atmosphere would interact with the plasma, and the plasma would be gone. As I understand it, plasma can be produced and maintained in an open system at very low pressure, but (once again) that would describe the ionosphere, not the lower atmosphere.
Anybody who actually understands plasma physics is welcome to jump right in...
[Edited 3 times, lastly by 3T3L1 on 11-17-2001] |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page Previous
1, 2, 3, 4 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:37 am
|
|
|
|
|
Login
