Notes on the Scalar Trail

[Anonymous No.11885554]

So the Thomas Bearden who wrote pic related (https://www.scribd.com/document/228091789/Rodin-Coil-by-Col-Tom-Bearden)) ((pay walled, posting text in next post) on Marko Rodin's polodial vortex coil also wrote this gem for the CIA...
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001900680014-4.pdf

Abstract

The Bohm-Aharonov effect shows that, even in the absence of electrical and magnetic fields, the potentials cause real effects to occur in the field-free regions. Using this principle, beams of pure potential without vector force fields (without E and H fields) may be deliberatly produced and intersected at a distance to cause effects in the interference zone, in contradiction to classical mechanics. These effects are in fact required by quantum mechanics.

Essentially, energy may be produceddirectly and the distant interference site or extracted from it, without energy transmission through space.

Implactions for weapons built on these concepts are given, and several types of such scalar electromagnetics weapons are discussed. The use of the 'cold explosion' is detailed and evidence of its extensive testing is given. The basic mechanism for Soviet weather control over North America is briefly presented and a more extenseive reference is given.

Evidence of massive soviet weaponization of these effects for nearly three decades and of soviet scalar electromagnetics weapons testing on a global scale exists in the open literature. Selected examples and related information are given in the appendix.

May the Name Marko Rodin never be sent to /x/ again!

[Anonymous No.11885582]

Worthy of /sci/ would be considering that the vector potential of the magnetic field, may be considered just as, if not more real than the B field itself

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.2350.pdf

[Anonymous No.11885589]

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255000872_Toward_a_More_Complete_Electrodynamic_Theory

A good time to add a place for moving past guage conditions on EM, and propose a dynamic quantity

[Anonymous No.11885596]

>>11885589
This paper links to a magnetic monopole derivation, which yes, leads back to an Aether hypothesis

[Anonymous No.11885605]

>>11885596
https://arxiv-beta.library.cornell.edu/abs/1006.5026v4

[Anonymous No.11886526]

>>11885554
show me one example problem solved using this crazy Rodin Coil math please
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unqKSfZfzho&list=PLr6U3JfQRaDSITH-XQiZOZL2Ks4FB9ZZa

[Anonymous No.11887492]

>>11886526
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread944540/pg1
I point to Russell P Blakes Letters on the Rodin maths for thought on its application

Other applications at this pdf https://fliphtml5.com/zclp/fvci/basic

[Anonymous No.11888155]

>>11887492
i am sorry man
every decent math theory or tool comes packed with exercises for student to learn and master
this all rodin thing for now is ma fi , get it? , like sci fi but math fiction
it's art, it's stories
it's not proper a math tool
>May the Name Marko Rodin never be sent to /x/ again!
sorry, your wish shall wait for another day
back to /x/ baby

[Anonymous No.11888209]

>>11885582
>>11885589
do you think you're doing some groundbreaking stuff here? vector potentials are covered in every undergrad EM course.

>may be consdired just as, if not more real than the B field itself

bro, all of the fields are mathematical abstractions. One isn't "more real" than any other. see pic.

[Anonymous No.11888291]

>>11885554
>May the Name Marko Rodin never be sent to /x/ again!

Only it will remain so because Marko Rodin never actually explained anything other than a neat math trick. Did he even explain what a "Vortex" is? Didn't think so.

>>11885582
>>11885589
What is a "field"?

[Anonymous No.11888364]

>>11888155
checked, here is your exercises https://documents.pub/document/marko-rodin-coil-vortex-based-mathematics-10-russel-blake-us-patent-fractals.html

>this all rodin thing for now is ma fi , get it? , like sci fi but math fiction
it's art, it's stories
yes, I understand, you insinuate that canoncial maths isn't math fi. zero, irrational, continuous numbers, as if the universe uses Pi... wave equations that have to start at a certain point of a wave or the calculus breaks, 0.999 = 1. I hold the same respect of canonical maths hidden force variable addition.

The rodin maths, to me, provides a step by step guide to a field geometry that is continuous and closed, a mighty feight for only using 9 integers.

>>11888209
Nah man, Just scalar technology and echo's of Tesla keeps popping up in the press,
> Tartary, and Tesla's inspiration
> Highjump and the Thule society
> Death rays, haarps, and weather control.

I resolved myself to dig past the get good grades point of electromagnetism , hence the title, Notes on the Scalar Trail. Vector potentials, in much emag 101, presents it as a mathematical convenience, I thought it was a way to simply abstract the magnetic field into a quantity that runs parallel to the electric charge, but, upon this new deep dive, I realize now that it should be the other way around, it is the vector potential that is the real, physical quantity and the B field is the abstraction to cope with inductance. What i refer here is to the "Primacy of the Potentials"

[Anonymous No.11888367]

>>11888291
> a "field"
This is my central gripe, mathematicians have been divorced from the engineers. Mathematicians are the only ones to consider "a" field, implicitly defining an array of fields. I have learned many different abstract definitions of fields, but now i'm concerned with "the field" the mathematics that mirrors nature the most seamlessly

[Anonymous No.11888430]

>>11888364
You can write the Lorentz force law in terms of vector potential. You measure fields in the real world using Lorentz force. In fact, the way "the" vector potential is defined is arbitrary in the same way potential energy is.
Please elaborate on what you mean by the vector potential being a "real, physical quantity", because if you think that the mathematical tools that we use to describe the universe physically exist, you are deluded.

[Anonymous No.11888516]

>>11888364
sort of meh, about your exercises, i'll read the patent later a bit, i skimmed through it

>provides a step by step guide to a field geometry
please show me a single step or even two
( i think you are in fairy land , and when you check your self for this steps you speak of, you will have none to show me, i am waiting with hope that you are not in fairy land and i will actually see some steps demonstrated by you. )

>you insinuate that canoncial maths isn't math fi
not at all, i am more saying that, math has puzzles/problems/questions bonded with solution/answers, fi math has none of those and has only pictures and stories
show me some problems and answers in rodin maths
till then , /x/ it man

[Anonymous No.11888666]

>>11888516
I refer back to a previously linked paper,
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.2350.pdf
abstract:
> A forgotten experiment by Andre Blodel 1914 proves, as held on the basis of theoretical arguments in a previous paper, that the time variation of the magnetic flux is not the cause of induced emf: the physical agent is instead the vector potential through the term [math]
-\delta\vec{A} / \delta t
[/math] (when the induced circuit is at rest). The "good electromagnetic potentials" are determined by the lorenz condition and retarded formulas.

and from the CIA doc introduction

> However, with the advent of Aharonov and Bohm's seminal paper, it became cyrstal clear that potentials are in fact real entities, and they can directly affect and control charged particle systems even in a region where all the fields and hence forces on particles have vanished.

Perhaps you are an adherent to the pontying theorem. But there is a case where [math]
\vec{E}= \vec{B} = curl A = 0
[/math]
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00792R000500240001-6.pdf

>>11888430

[Anonymous No.11888686]

>>11888666

18 18 8 666
9 9 8 9 9
8

nioce

dude..... fairy tale.... /x/ is calling
stop avoiding with more fairy talk
show me either a single step from your
>provides a step by step guide to a field geometry
or show a single math problem in rodin math

simple ain't it?

[Anonymous No.11888723]

>>11888686
Staying on the computer theme, from
http://www.rexresearch.com/rodin/13-rodinopeningblckhole.pdf

Rodin maths define the longest mean free pathway of least resistance of electric current.

He also claims to be able to predict any missing prime number

the youtube video is already linked to a field geometry above, watch his rules generate higher dimensional toriods where on every node exists a differentialble quantity.

Your obviously looking for something very specific however, this isn't /x/ i can't read minds

[Anonymous No.11888729]

>>11888686

[Anonymous No.11888731]

>>11888686
more slides

[Anonymous No.11888792]

>>11888723
>>11888729
>>11888731
man stop
>Your obviously looking for something very specific
no shit man, how could you tell?

clear as day light, i repeat
show me either a single step from your
>provides a step by step guide to a field geometry
or show a single math problem in rodin math

the pdf you linked doesn't contain a single question/solution, it has only pics and stories

told you before, stop avoiding with more fairy talk
admit it, you aint got an example problem in rodin math, and you can't explain a single step in your
>provides a step by step guide to a field geometry
i really hope i won't have to tell you to /x/ it again in my next reply

[Anonymous No.11888805]

>>11888792
>clear as day light, i repeat
yeah, not resonating at any level for me, alas i try again.

If i linked the correct one it aught to describe a game where knowledge of the topology brings benefit.

What about applications to music? The question could be express the G major scale in terms of rodin geometries, express their reflections in the number groups, what are these chords? Rodin himself embraces /x/, claiming the origin of his work is from the ba'hai religion, of course i'll get /x/ again for mentioning that we're unlikely to be at the historical apogee of man kind, and that the ancient texts have something very important to say about how we apply numbers to the conception of reality

[Anonymous No.11888834]

>>11885554
Are vortex schizos allergic to actual mathematics? Do they think that defining something as the curl or or gradient of something else is actual math? Why are these massive blocks of text never broken up by a single equation like every other E&M paper in existence?

[Anonymous No.11888843]

>>11888805
damn dude, you are having a conversation with yourself

i repeat again:
1. this is what you said
>provides a step by step guide to a field geometry
please show me a single step

2. please give me a single rodin math problem and the it solution

your answer should be:
1.A. here is the step from the step by step guide: the step
or
B.sorry i don't have a step you show you

2.A. here is the problem , here is the solution
or
B.sorry i don't have a problem with a solution in rodin math

is it A or B?

i wish peace upon your soul, brother

[Anonymous No.11888856]

>>11888834
lack of education, guidance
no rigorous practice to achieve even the smallest of abilities

makes me sad a little
like they are caught in the literature web of human fabricated fiction and stories but they think/believe/consider themselves in the realm of science
delusional, and not by their fault

[Anonymous No.11888895]

>>11888834
>Are vortex schizos allergic to actual mathematics
I belive they would call it Newtonian Gematria, and contort a face of slight disgust. lol.

but on a more rigourous tone, I've pondered that statement as well, for all the beautiful geometries of motion in the world, the vortex seems to catch the eyes of those either totally unfamiliar, unable or diametrically opposed to modern mathematics.

Buckminster Fuller, Synergetics
Walter Russell, The Universal One
John Dee, Monas Hieroglyphica
Viktor Schauberger, Various
Nikola Tesla, Numerous quotes attesting the smoke and mirrors of math
Marko Rodin, seems friendly with the math, just doesn't use them.

Miles Mathis seems deeply acquainted with vector alegbra and the related, though I believe I've only scratched the surface.

Something about the vortex, lol

[Anonymous No.11888976]

>>11888843
>A or B
...Alright, I be as rigourous as I can possibly be, at the end you'll probably be underwhelmed, please don't be unsurprised, this isn't /x/ after all.

To first begin to answer your question we must first define what is meant by the term 'field geometry', what is a field, and I'll say it in the best /sci/ i can

A field geometry is set of independent arrays of properties

[code style=js] >;D

/* tests (constraints)
const fieldGeometry = {x: [], y: [], z: []}

// Orthogonality
for (const dimension in fieldGeometry) {
fieldGeometry[dimension].forEach((node) => {
if (node.includes(/* not dimension of current iteration */) {
throw("orthogonality contraint violated, independence must be maintained"
}
})
}

/* Continuity,
* @param your function, domain and range
*/

let params = { function, domain, range, other} // {fn: fn, domain: domain,..}

try {
while x_i < params.domain.xmax {
while x_j < params.domain.ymax {
while x_k < params.domainzmax {
params.function()
x_k++
}
x_j ++
}
x_i ++
}
return "Continuity satisfied, no lumps, bumps, tangents, et al in your method call
} catch (e) {
throw(e, "somewhere your function wasn't defined in the field geometry, is it 0, infinity? sorry just an error here")
}


// Okay we got some tests, now, lets fit an object that will fit through them.

let n = 1000000000 // just punch it in, can we see how strange modern maths is from digital programming, simply setting domain.xmax = n + 1 breaks our field, anyways
let field = {
x: [ Array.from(Array(n).keys())] // [0, 1, 2,..n] note here no zero is described by information, what a double think
y : ...,
z: ...,
}
[/code]

(1/more)

[Anonymous No.11889016]

>>11888976
We see
Now in attempting a programmatic definition of field, we already ran into some central gripes of what led me down this field of knowledge, never mind venturing to every developers favourite land of decimals in a database, and a trello card asking for pixel perfect linear operations, 0.999-1, lol. anyways, We've all worked around it at one point, but what other idea's could be added our field to fit the tests??

Enter Marko Rodin

Perhaps the first tenet of rodin maths, there is no 0, mod 9, 9 is also 0. Actually its Buckminsterfullian, who describes zero as the central point of the cubooctahedron, Bucky saw energetic motion in geometry, and saw in this shape perfect vector compression, a balance of forces. Further historical note places the relegation of zero from the dimension arrays is Greco-Egyptian if I'm not mistaken.

[code style=js]
let n = [n[n.length - 1], 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
// i should break the js larp here, i doubt this would compile, but this is how i would code it, lol.


digital programming, simply setting domain.xmax = n + 1 breaks our field, anyways
let field = {
x: [...n],
y : [...n],
z: [...n], //where n is the js spread operator not so on so forth
}
[/code]

Okay anon, sounds nifty, but my function is 7 + x = 15, how do I code that? how do I pass the continuity test when I only have mod 9?

Up next would be the process of indigging/ digital root/ and the separation to the 124875, 369 number groups to create RodinCypherJs.encode(yourFn))

The point is again, well illustrated in the youtube referenced above, watch how more and more circles are drawn, a vector of length A over the indig of the number provides geometrical interpretation.

Still not satisfied? also consider that rodin maths are a flavour of Tesla's toolkit, which has deeper roots still, again reference to the current events of the day

[Anonymous No.11889395]

>>11888976
>>11889016
ha? what?

this will be my last reply to you,
you seem to ignore my 2. question for the third time

and regarding what you wrote, i assume it's a step in this "step by step guide to a field geometry"
well, i don't get
your addition of js code, doesn't seem to serve any purpose except to tell some little jokes in the middle
you seem to be all over the place, now bukcy is involved too?
wtf is a >Tesla's toolkit ?

i rarely stumble upon such fine whimsical disarray of ideas, well done sir, you played me, yourself, you officially need to fuck off to /lit/, they will appreciate you fiction there

i'll leave you with a final question, i don't have any hopes getting an answer though

how many problems have you solved using rodin math that provided you delight beauty and insight ?

[Anonymous No.11889437]

so as far as I understand it's a way to model wave dynamics using modular 9 arithmetics.

just imagine if someone described how to make a raytracing engine using mod 2 arithmetics (binary) before the computer existed. It's technically possible but it would need a lot of imagination.

That's how I view this whole vortex math thing.

Take a look at this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxuU8jYkA1k

[Anonymous No.11889459]

>>11889437
i think you might enjoy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJGW2UANWRE

please move this discussion to /x/

[Anonymous No.11889470]

>>11889459
the video is not avaiable.

also mod 9 arithmetic is math.

[Anonymous No.11890006]

>>11885554
if you do believe in all of this shit, then why don't you do something useful with it instead of talking to us about it?

[Anonymous No.11890193]

>>11890006
belief hasn't been an element in my logical process for a long time. All language, by virtue of correct grammer, rhetoric and logic, even if spelling the most abject lie, tells a modicum of truth by definition. Especially in 2020, when there is much more incentive to lie about history than to speak its truth (like was even pic related said?)

>useful with it instead of talking to us

Thats the assumption i contend with here, if you've noticed, all this research is like a hundred years old, covered up by a series of academic neglect, and willfull obfuscation. When speaking to Glowie's they continue to repeat the mantra that humanity will blow themselves up, its too dangerous, the genie out of the bottle.

This is the foundation that i crack with every thread posted online, as the concentration of knowledge increases, so does the wisdom to handle its power, maybe one day enough threads will be made so we can have wireless energy, warp drives and bio-harmonic growth systems

[Anonymous No.11891711]

>>11889437
The trouble with this explanation is that ray-tracing has little to do with mod 2 for the most part?

[Anonymous No.11891714]

How the fuck is this schizo shit still up?

[Anonymous No.11891715]

>>11889459
I don't think you want to go over there.

[Anonymous No.11891947]

can someone tell me what posts are bullshit and what is in the realm of possibility. I'm not going to waste my time reading a /xsci/ thread until the nonsense gets filtered

[Anonymous No.11891978]

>>11891947
>until the nonsense gets filtered
but anon, you don't realize, this is the filter
it keeps people who are unwilling to even try to understand from trying to have a conversation on the topic at hand that they have no intention of debating in a good faith manner

tl;dr lurk moar

[Anonymous No.11892056]

>>11891947
I've posted the most robust sources I've can, stick to the hyperlinks, for the most /sci/.

But if i had to reflect and look at whats looking the most /sci/ to me right now, its the work posted here by L. M Hively, in this thread

>>11885589

a recent patent for a scalar antennae by him
https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/eb/4e/fe/c4590d3ddf9c11/US9306527.pdf


Just reading this well written paper now, control-F hively, some incredible thoughts on the matter

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333977851_Unravelling_the_potentials_puzzle_and_corresponding_case_for_the_scalar_longitudinal_electrodynamic_wave

>Consequently, we propose the second directive –confluent with the first – to make the potentials completely independent of one another, resulting in a unique purely “gauge-free” electrodynamics. This novel prescription also closely follows the principle of Occam’s razor, which dictates that a system of scientific knowledge should not introduce concepts or entities that are not strictly necessary, emphasizing the simplicity and conciseness of the model

guage-free electrodynamics, or electroscalars or what ever pops out is a goal here as well