[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

psychoceramics: [m--@m--.com] [Fwd: Aenertia, Aether and Anomalous Aenergy ....] (fwd)

For some reason, this "Millennium Twain" personage keeps mailing me 
about free energy, "aenertial aether" and the like.

 -- acb

-----Forwarded message from "M.Twain" <m--@m--.com>-----

Return-Path: <m--@m--.com>
Received: from mail.hughes.net (mail.hughes.net [])
	by zikzak.zikzak.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA03998
	for <a--@z--.net>; Thu, 25 Sep 1997 08:00:22 +1000 (EST)
Received: from [] by mail.hughes.net
          (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-13727) with SMTP id AAA5773;
          Wed, 24 Sep 1997 14:52:58 -0700
Message-ID: <3429926A--@m--.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 14:21:30 -0800
From: "M.Twain" <muse @ mediacity.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: a--@d--.teilar.gr, ab013@ncf.carleton.ca, abian@iastate.edu,
        a--@z--.net, acrogen@wdi.co.uk, afanasev@theor.jinr.dubna.su,
        a--@n--.com, aj108@cus.cam.ac.uk, ajct@laeff.esa.es,
        a--@p--.com, AHD@STC10.CTD.ORNL.GOV, AKTAS@UNCC.EDU,
        a--@m--.com, alchemy@dial.pipex.com,
        a--@p--.f346.n5030.z2.fidonet.org, alchemy@dial.pipex.com,
        a--@w--.att.net, alexb@leland.stanford.edu,
        a--@t--.net, amitabha@iitk.ernet.in, analogsys@aol.com,
        a--@c--.reduaz.mx, anta@on.br, antiqauto@aol.com,
        a--@s--.stanford.edu, ari@teorel.lth.se, ari@eml.hut.fi,
        a--@s--.backbone.olemiss.edu, arp@mpa-garching.mpg.de,
        a--@a--.com, arussell@beach.utmb.edu, aup@azstarnet.com,
        a--@p--.lanl.gov, aviezen@alon.cc.biu.ac.il, avoice555@aol.com
Subject: [Fwd: Aenertia, Aether and Anomalous Aenergy ....]
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Message-ID: <342872A9.7F2B--@m--.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 17:53:45 -0800
From: "M.Twain" <muse @ mediacity.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l--@e--.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, brin-l@cornell.edu
CC: Newman-L--@e--.com, whitegold@zz.com,
	n--@x--.shore.net, antigravity@primenet.com,
	usa-t--@l--.iex.net, weirdscience@integral.org
Subject: Aenertia, Aether and Anomalous Aenergy ....
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001

Vortex-L and friends,

Free energy, new energy, zero-point energy, cold fusion, filamentary
fusion, cluster fusion, ether, aether, inertia, enertia, aenertia,
energy, aenergy?

Just what are we looking at here?  What foundation of nature?  Whence
the creation of mass?  How the production, where the origin, of energy?

OU, Overunity?  I like that term.  It really spells it out.

Anomolous energy?  Well, sure, but we are beginning to understand its
origins in the ubiquitous aenertial aether.  Thus it is generally not
anomalous at all.

Unlimited Energy?  Infinite Energy?  Primordial Energy?  Massergy?

In concert with the coordination of the Global Aether Workshop
collaboration I suggested the coining or consideration of a new word,
enertia, to replace the outdated (incomplete and mis-associated) terms
of inertia and energy.  As the EMG aether vortex wave foundations of
nature are much vaster than the limited occasions of its 'energetic' or
'mass' forms -- I wished to encouraged the adoption and promulgation of
a term without the old limitations and baggage.

Chuck and Barbara Bennett one-upped me.  They came back with the word
'aenertia' -- which I immediately adopted.

The advantage of the term aenertia is it is clearly associated with the
dynamic aether vortex (aka electromagnetic wave) origin of all known
phenomena -- and being precursor to mass and energy, eliminates the need
to include negative mass and negative energy in our overunity and matter
production equations.  Tentatively I have been thinking of suggesting a
'unit' (the 'alpha') defined as a standard measure of volumetric aether
flux.  It would then be always positive, whether a CCW wave or a CW wave
or a positron or an electron, representing the total available aenertial
flux in the system.  As compared to a true 'energy' equation which would
show the total energy of a positron/electron pair as zero.

Wha cha think?


-----End of forwarded message-----

 andrew c.'. bul+hac?k           "A thousand worlds and every world's a door.
 http://www.zikzak.net/~acb/      The lights go out; I think I think of you,
 -<----------------------->-      But in these times it's so hard to be sure."
                                        ( neil gaiman, "luther's villanelle" )