CHAPTER 84                    INDEX TO OTHER PAGES


  1. The cunning among men have it that you can calculate the speed of light with mars mellows, or with a chocolate bar in a microwave oven.

  2. These think to be smart but hardly so.  First - is their wording, they are talking about light while dealing with microwaves.  As then light for its longest length is 700nm, a microwave is about ten million times larger, 1-cm being 10 million nanometers.

  3. And so the mentioning of the word "light" is wrong be it ignorance or intentional, since if these are cunning enough to find the length of a microwave inside of a microwave oven, these ought very well know that these waves in comparison to light are far removed from one another.

  4. Secondly, is their vocabulary in finding the speed of something, since with a chocolate bar or anything in a microwave oven the only thing that one will find is a rough inaccurate estimate of the wavelength of that particular frequency and nothing more, absolutely nothing more.

  5.  As then they use a computation to find a speed of that wave, that in itself is fantasy along with the deception about light on a microwave level.

  6. Thirdly, it is vain to by the hot spots in a microwave cavity discover the wavelength on which that oven operates, since - as they well know and admit - how the frequency on which that microwave (supposedly) operates is clearly listed on it. 

  7. To therefore find the wavelength of it, all one has to do is to divide it into the constant of magnetic, that as everyone knows, -  for it is a law by them, is 300.000 km/sec. 

  8. For do not these themselves conclude how; The velocity of a wave is its frequency times wavelength?

  9. Nor is there an error in that law of nature, but it's reference is always to the real velocity of any and all magnetic waves, to what is called the constant in velocity, the unwavering 300.000 km/sec. (Vc)

  10. And thus to come to the real and factual length of those microwaves, if the listed frequency is 2.45 gigahertz (2.45 billion) And if we extend the constant from kilometers into millimeters that is from 300 thousand to 300 billion (300.000.000.000), the 2.45 billion into 300 billion is 122.45 mm, or 12.245 cm.

  11. The half length of that microwave thus is 6.122-cm, and never at all 6-cm. When therefore these come to a distance of 6-cm, they are out of line, since of course a ruler on some food is never as accurate as calculating the same.

  12. But who is to show them a better way? And so why are these persons practicing this folly when by their own lips they do know of a better way? 

  13. Is it because they are  glory seekers, making themselves appear as if they are smart, when in fact they are not so?  For as they then go into a computation for the speed of it, they are more blind than a bat.

  14. I claimed "ignorance", because their problem lies in correlation, to correlate two or more factors at any one instant of time.  That yes, and the fact that without having an amplitude to work with - there is no way to calculate any kind of relative velocity.

  15. When someone with an airplane makes his way from Los Angeles to New York in a straight path that would be the fastest way, and for the example take 10 hours at the speed of 300 miles per hour.  

  16. But this person goes by a weaving formation, he makes his stopovers at Salt Lake City, then Dallas Texas, and from there to Chicago, and a few other cities out of his direct path.

  17. How fast therefore did this person travel when instead of 10 hours it for the longer route took him 30 hours? His average speed is 100 miles per hour even though his true velocity was 300 miles per hour. So it is that the factual velocity of light is always the 300.000 in any one second.

  18. But since it goes by a sine formation, its distance in time, properly known as its relative velocity, must be computed by however much it moves sideways from a straight trajectory. That side tracking then is the amplitude for the width thereof.  Wherefore their claim for a velocity, is no more than fantasy.

  19. And for us to factually find the velocity of a microwave the listed frequency of which is 2.45 gigahertz, having a length of 12.245 cm, we as yet are in need of an amplitude.  If then we utilize the diameter in the circumference at 0.0484 cm, -- as shown in page 80 here, it being a multiplication of what we established with light.

  20. The calculation is as follows 12.245 plus 0.0484 is 12.2934-cm, And that into the 300.000 comes to some 24.403. that then multiplied by the nominal length of 12.245-cm comes to a relative velocity of 298.818 km/sec.

  21. That particular wave now if drawn out on paper would be about the thickness of a heavy pencil line 12.2 inches long. with a circular area of 0.0484 cm, which is about 0.019 of an inch.

  22. And so what did our amateurs come up with? Most give it as 6 cm on any kind of food x2 x 2.45 billion the result of which is 29.4-billion = 294.000 km/sec.  But how very wrong thus this is since;

  23. No:1  The constant is always an unwavering 300.000 km/sec, and that is in a straight line, and only in a straight line.  No:2  The 2.45 billion is simply the number of events (or stop-over) in any one second of time. 

  24. If then for every 6.122-cm it took a side-road, and coming back by 6.122-cm to its straight trajectory again, how fast did it really travel for distance in time? 

  25. Obviously we must know the aspect of its sine formation, as I did in the above calculation arriving at 298.818-kn/sec. 

  26. And so it is not your chocolate measure times 2, but the real and proper length in the calculation thereof. since the length of 12.2448 times frequency will again come to 300.000 in km.

  27. Since then some may be upset with me since I accused them of ignorance, these have duly earned if not for this simple question of them to their pupils in -- how close they came to the speed of light?  And quoting to them the figure of 299.792 km/sec, while of course "that" can only come to 300.000 (in km)

  28. This shows not only their failure in the sciences, but in vocabulary, and in mathematics as well as in correlation of any two or more factors, and how easy it is for them to play with conceit.

  29. Yet these people have no idea that what they conclude as proper is in fact conceit, like the Preacher said; "They do not know that what they say and do is evil." 

  30. How therefore thinking to have a velocity by a mere wavelength with the use of a microwave, whereby to arrive at nothing more than a fantasy, while simple mathematics would have given them the right answer.

  31. Nor are the manufacturers of these microwave ovens to be excused, since by specifying their units to operate on 2.45 GHZ, is not correct, nor is it true, it is a lie.  It should state that it operates on a 12.245 cm wavelength, for that is the true definition.

  32. I venture to say that these microwaves at the 12.245 cm wavelength operate on a frequency of but one percent or less from what is stated.  One percent then being 24.5 million frequencies, I do not believe that any unit operates at even that frequency.

  33. And the next illogical thing that students learn from them is that the speed of light is 299.792.458 meters/sec.  For that fails to specify a wavelength of which there are more than 3 thousands in the octave of light alone.

  34. That velocity is not meant as any speed of light in anything but only in space, another fallacy of man - as if in space all waves travel by only a single velocity. How ignorant to acclaim that it is common law for people to walk on two legs, except when they are out of town, then they walk upon one finger.


  1. And now to come to the cause by which our food does not heat evenly within the cavity of a microwave oven we are to learn a few things.  Nor am I alone in knowing how and why that is so. Along with the infamous there are also those among us that do have a better knowledge in the sciences.

  2. Those that speak of the bobbing sine wave as if by that scenario the food is heated more at some places with a half wavelength spacing between them - are easily defeated, and for that we will use an illustration figure 84-1.


  1. The reality of a chocolate bar is about 1 cm or more in thickness, while the diameter of any microwave by which it bobs up and down or sideways, or turns - as it really does, - is but a fraction of that thickness, wherefore 20 or more of such waves can fit one on top of the other within the thickness of that bar.

  2. As thus the wave moves from 12 O'clock to B to C be it sideways, or circular around the tube, it - at every point along the entire wavelength makes contact with the chocolate, wherefore if the heating was by it - then all parts of that bar would at all times heat evenly.

  3. And so that theory is out the door and into the trashcan. 

  4. Then in order to explain the standing wave grid with its hot spots as it has been properly concluded by many others that do have a proper knowledge in the sciences, I must take you on a rather lengthy journey.

  5. As a first, we must understand how wavelengths are produced, and at what rate of. For our microwaves we quote a frequency of 2.45 billion events per second. But that is not necessarily the real frequency, it is merely the figure of how many 12.245 cm wavelengths will fit into a length of 300.000 km.

  6. The real frequency of any wave is by what number they are produced in any one second of time.  If thus our electricity with its slow rotation of no more than 3600 RPM is capable to multiply that rate in revolutions impacting upon a magnet by a factor of 1000, we will have a number of events to the tune of 3.6 million (3.600.000).

  7. The unit may thus produce 3.6 million wavelets at 12.245-cm in length every second in time.  And 3.6 million into 2.45 billion is 680. Meaning there is an open spacing of 8,333.4-cm between each and every wavelet. Or, a single  wavelet comes only once for each 680 possible options.

  8. And how then did we come to 2.45 billion?  It is by mathematics, and by mathematics alone that we come to that figure, in how many apples of a certain size may fit within a barrel of a certain size.

  9. If with our slow rate of electricity we are to produce 2.45 billion events per second, those 60 cycles of our electricity must multiply the events by a factor of 40.8 million.  

  10. It is then, and only then - that we will have a continues sine wave formation - with 2.45 billion events for every second in time. And that my dear reader no man can perform in any which way.

  11. For these things do not occur, not even the sun is sending forth its light and all other waves but by increments, by a specific rate of.  If only 1 in a million is too much volume from the sun to hurt our eyes, how will we endure if they came 1 in a thousand, like the brilliance of an atomic explosion guaranteed to blind you?

  12. I of course am using examples, not accurate figures, so don't get me wrong. But do not deceive yourself as if all waves are produced on a continues basis - one connected to the other. 

  13. Any and all sine waves must be produced, and in order for those to come to any specific length there must be cut-off points, a start and a finish, if not so then there would be no wave at all. The very ideal of waves by lengths-of is due to increments, that in turn come by a rate of revolutions in which cut-offs made be made.

  14. This is just a basic simple way to explain how waves are formed. You must come to the realization that when we discover a wave having a length equal to 12.245-cm, we came to its frequency only by mathematics and our knowledge that the constant in the velocity of all magnetic waves is arbitrarily set at 300.000 km/sec.

  15. And so by dividing the length into the constant (Vc) it comes to 2.45 billion - as a possible (or rather mathematical) frequency, and I shall repeat it to say - only as a "mathematical" frequency, not ever the real events per unit in time.

  16. But we still have not come to the real reason as to how and why the food in our microwave ovens does not heat evenly.  And to repeat what has been said by many before me.

  17. It is by and in the standing wave formation that exists within the cavity of that oven, which as such produces hot and colder points as the waves link up with one another being bounced back and forth between the walls of the cavity.

  18. To the left here below is an illustration of standing waves on the order of centimeters as it presents itself within a microwave oven. Next to it is an illustration of ice crystals that by comparison may be viewed as a standing wave with its high and low points.


  1. No my dear reader it is not without good reason that I make a comparison of these two illustrations, but in order to make it understood I must continue my lengthy review.

  2. We might start out with illustration Figure 84-1 again where a single wavelet is from 12 to B, to C.  If then another wavelet is bounced to come upon this first wavelet with its 12 O'clock point connecting upon 3 O'clock or 9 O'clock it will not be reinforced with it since these two are then a quarter of a turn from one another.

  3. But at 12 O'clock and at 6 O'clock these will be reinforced, or connect if you will, since the 6 O'clock point is essentially the same as the 12 O'clock point, seeing it can connect upon B, or C as easily as upon 12.  B then is the same as the 6 and C as 12.

  4. This is also true for two waves that seem to be intertwined illustrated by figure 84-2. The solid line wave is at point 12 with the broken line wave at point 6 in the circle of their movements.

  5. The crossover in the middle between 9 and 3 is not really a crossover, they are simply on opposite sides of the circle. These as such do not connect but pass in like direction of one another along the same line of movement.  If they were in opposite direction of movement they might cancel each other out.

  6. Or if in opposite direction of rotational movement they - on one and the same line - could come to interfere with one another also to their demise.


  1. Our illustrations here are stationary and two dimensional, whereas the real wavelets are continually moving and turning at the rate by which they were produced.  And so the question remains as to why they connect at half lengths?


  1. The answer in a nutshell is - because waves are half-lengths, they are never full lengths but by computation only. In all reality all waves are so by their so called half lengths. And remember how I said; "So called."

  2. And so you see how I got you already lost in this physics, for at this point you have no idea as to what I am talking about, and I will have to do some explaining in order to make myself understood in a way that you may understand it along with me.

  3. For I know that here we have come upon something that no man has any inkling of, but if he is willing to stay with me and pay due attention at my every word he may be enriched as I am enriched from the Father of all creation.

  4. Think clearly now, why is it that I so often said that light or any wave is not by lengths but in their angular moments?  

  5. And how is light refracted by a prism? Or let me rephrase it to ask-  by what part of a wave do the blue color ones refract more than the red colored ones?  Angular moments!  Is that not the answer?

  6. It will not be as some have it by and a change of velocity, for while that does occur, velocity is not the cause. I made this clear on other pages, (79) wherefore do not believe the amateurs living by a fantasy, nor can I emphasize upon this too much.

  7. The blue for their shorter so called length travel by a shorter, or sharper angle to their line of movement than the red waves, wherefore of course these blue ones must and will take a shorter turn when struck upon the face of a prism.

  8. And so what is that angular moment that as such is the true reality of any wave?  It mind you is its half length, or seen as a half length as well as computed by a half length.  Here then in order to better clarify myself we need again an illustration like Figure 84-3.


  1.  The angular moment of any wave is always from X to Z after which in essence it turns to go into the opposite direction towards R. If this is visualized upon a treaded rod it comes to a groove once around the rod, or simply one turn of its rotation,

  2. But that single turn as it appears - is by two directions as well. For here again ask yourself this question - by what part this so called wave refracts itself upon a prism? 

  3. If we answer saying; "Its angular moment." We are hitting the nail squarely on the head. That angular moment then happens to be the coordinates of X, Y, and Z. that as such comprises to be the so called half length of the wave.

  4. X to Y is the diameter, with Y to Z the length, that as such comes to X, Z as the line of that angular moment. The angle and/or degree of refraction for this wave upon air or water or any prism is the X, Z, by X,Y,Z.

  5. Think clearly now how it is not by any whole length, for then there would be two different angles, the X to Z, and Z to R. And which way should this wavelet refract itself upon a prism?  

  6. If you could slow down the speed of these waves to 1-cm per second you would see an angular moment no longer than half the length of a full turn around the circumference turning itself around a maze of atoms. You would then no longer designate it as a wave.

  7. For it is in and by its rotation that each single wave is numbered by a twice measure of its true length, since of course for each single turn that angular moment must pass by a full circumference, and/or as we might say, a twice measure of its angular moment.

  8. The wave will always arrives as XYZ upon the face of any change in density for which cause when out of the normal it will change its direction of linear movement.

  9. If then the other half of the wave (Z to R) were also a very real part of that wave - that wavelet would then present two angles of refraction, two different angles by which to refract. 

  10. And obviously the second would cancel out the first, or visa versa, and there would be no refraction nor therefore would we ever see the colors by any prism, nor any red sky in the morning or evening.

  11. And to insert a factual statement; If waves did not rotate they would never refract, nor therefore disperse in its colors.

  12. It of course is equally as much in the whole circumference of the wave to operate by its single angular moment by which it moves and refracts, yet since that angle is but in its given moment it registers itself singular in the passing of its diameter, therefore it shows itself by what we call half lengths.

  13. In order to pass a full length it must pass its diameter twice in the circumference of its path.

  14. The people that deal with antennas ought to know that a full wave antenna is never a good idea, half-lengths or even quarter-lengths are better all because a wave is never anything more than its half computed length.

  15. The reality of a wave as seen by half-lengths may then equally be interpreted for quarter-lengths.  And why is that so?  It is because of angular moment, for once the impulse has made its start and is a quarter way out around the circumference it will continue so for the full half, after which it in all essence goes into the negative.

  16. Are you still with me now? If so, realize that the area of this and any wavelet beyond Z, from Z to R is mere gingerbread, it is not only negative, but essentially none existent.  For if you had a train of racecars  the length of but one/eight of the circular area of their track, that one/eight by their continues movement may be found anywhere around that circle.

  17. For a fact thus we must understand and realize that a wave is its angular moment, with nothing less and nothing more. As then the angular moment of a wave is always - concluded - by its so called half length, all waves consists of only half lengths.  And that there are no such things as full wavelengths.

  18. Did I lose you, or are my definitions taking hold?  I know that I am repeating myself to hammer this into us that waves are angular moments and nothing more nor less than angular moments.

  19. Nor can any angular moment be regarded like; Figure 84-3 -- X to H, or from M to H.  No, it must always be from X to Z, no less, no more. If it were any more or less than XYZ would not exist, nor be the factor of its refraction, be it air water or a prism.

  20. The length of any wave as we have it does not reside anywhere in the real world, but only in the realm of mathematics, and as such we have need of it - but only in that realm of mathematics. 

  21. Look at the illustration figure 84-3 with the wave as X-Y-R, when therefore it comes upon the face of a prism which way is it to refract? Is it XYZ, or RYZ, or both? The illustration shows two angles in opposite of one another in that single wavelet.

  22. Which one of these is thus the real one by which that wavelet will turn in refracting upon the face of a prism? The answer here is that we are missing the point. The whole of the wave is but a single angle by a single direction, since it is like unto thread around a bolt, or grove upon a drill-bit.

  23. And as such it is that this wavelet comes upon the face of a prism, and as such it always turns into but one direction. By the many illustrations shown, and in reality as well, the blue is to the right with the red to the left thereof.

  24. That is of course from a left hand perspective, for as the rainbow turns to a right hand perspective the position of the colors are reversed.  And why is that so? It means that however it may be viewed it still turns to but a single direction, that it will always turn by the XYZ, as the single angle and direction of refraction.

  25. To therefore again repeat the question, as to how and why this is so? It is because the angular moment rotates into but a single direction of rotation, that as such presents but a single angle.

  26. Have I now lost you?  It is obvious that no drill-bit can turn clockwise, and counter clockwise both at the same time. The wave therefore presents itself with but a single angle by virtue of its single direction of rotation.

  27. And that angle is always by its half wave computed measure, therefore also I said how waves in all reality are angular moments, they are -- the angle by which they move into a rotation.  With these words then I am hitting the nail square upon its head. 

  28. And notice how I said "computed" measure, and that computation - for its angle of - is always one full measure of its diameter into the circumference. It can never be more than that, but it can be less. (Also evident from quarter wave antennas)

  29. Since then that angle comes to the half length of any wave conception, it is a mere deception on our part to call it as such.  It in all reality is not a half-length at all, it is the full and complete wave angle, it is the angular moment. 

  30. Therefore also did I say; wave "conception" adding the word conception, since that is what waves are, simply a conception of us, rather than truth, or reality.

  31. If I say that it is the "complete wave," I am correct as well as deceptive, correct in that it is complete, but deceptive by calling it a wave, since it as such is not a wave but nothing other than an angular moment rotating around the atoms in nature as it moves forward.

  32. Waves as such are nothing more than - a way to go, or the way by which they appear to move. For never at all does light or any magnetic angular moment move by a weaving formation.  It moves by rotation, that as such appears like unto a wavy line.

  33. If we could see the atoms or molecules around which they move about we would no longer call it a wave but a rotating entity. You therefore - can - visualize what cannot be seen with the naked eye.

  34. If somehow we could reverse the rotation by which these so called waves turn, the blue upon our prism would likewise turn into the other direction from where it is normally seen. Consequently we observe how the turn in refraction is by angle as well as direction of rotation.

  35. If for the example those angular moments were without rotation, it would refract both ways, as in no way at all, one to cancel the other. Without its rotation light could not very well be dispersed for its individual colors.


  1. I of course am wrong in this heading to state that we have a "New wave in physics." What we really have is a new or better understanding of the phenomena that we call waves.  Waves that are not at all waves but by their tracking only.

  2. Man has the habit to interprets things by their appearance, like light behaving as a sine formation, since indeed these do appear that way, but that does not necessarily mean that they are that way.

  3. If with your car you zig zag your way to the market, it is not that you are a sine formation but only your path of travel appears as a sine formation.

  4. Does that along with the foregoing explain it better?

  5. I know that I am introducing a whole new realm of physics, since I am introducing nature as it is by the factors and the evidence that it displays unto us. 

  6. I therefore am not anything like man's physicists, even as I am not anything like man's rulers, nor as his preachers, all because my origin is not the same as theirs.

  7. When man's astronomers look for red or blue shifts in the light from the heavens upon their spectral plates, they are reading half lengths, never at all any full length. These astronomers now may be fully ignorant of this fact in nature, but then they are ignorant of most everything else in the heavens.

  8. When we observe a blue sky, and a red sky in the morning, as well as evening, it is by the refraction of light entering the greater density of our air, blue turning sharper than the red. This very same thing occurs when the light of a star passes through the atmosphere of the sun that to our observation appears to be bending the light of that star.

  9. And correct we are, wherefore you better bury this blind bat called Einstein who never in his life learned anything factual in the nature of the sciences. A most stupid person to have knowledge of a red sky in the morning, as well as having seen light passing through a prism, then to credit that refraction of light to some gravitational cause.

  10. Light bends as it goes into water, all because it not only goes by half lengths, but are half lengths  rather than full lengths, since it goes by and are angular moments. And yes I will repeat it, to say angular moment, and again angular moment, so that reality may take hold of us.

  11. A reading of my pages 80 and 81 will serve the reader as it compliments the things spoken here. Or shall I look for even more examples towards the ideal of half wave coordinates? 

  12. When you point a radar gun at a police car to see by how many miles he is exceeding the speed limit, these radar waves have a nice open area through which to pass and return. In that case there is no cause for them to bounce up to one another, but in the confines of a small oven this becomes an altogether different story.

  13. At the speed of at least six times around the world in a single second these microwaves within the square of the oven have nothing better to do but to bounce up and down against one another at a rate that to us is astronomical.

  14. That whole small area of that oven thus becomes literally filled with angular moments and no way to go. As therefore these come to link with one another - a distortion takes place by which a whole grid is formed.

  15. The whole as such becomes like a grid, a grid with no way to go, wherefore as such it becomes what we call "A standing wave." In all reality it being a standing wave grid.  

  16. But this is too simple is it not? Or not clear enough. But then ask yourself where upon that angular moment any other angular moment may make its connection? We showed it by Figure 84-1 in the circular how two groves upon any drill-bit cannot be joined unless they line up with one another, and by that I mean to line up perfectly.

  17. It then being obvious how any one full length can connect with another full length, yes indeed so, but here again this can only occur when these two line up with one another perfectly, and I do mean perfectly. 

  18. We must remember how each single one of these wavelets, or angular moments as they factually are, are at all times in a rotational mode, and at that a very high rotational mode. To therefore link up with one another, it is not that one will say; Okay I will slow down a little so that we can link up.

  19. No, they must be at exactly the same point within the circumference in order to link. But there is an alternative, namely that they exist as ANGULAR MOMENTS, and this time I capitalized it, so as to make us think.

  20. At point Z in the illustration figure 84-3, our angular moment - for whatever it may be worth - has come to a borderline from which in due essence it - by appearance - is to take on another direction, instead of going downwards it must now go upwards.

  21. Sneaky is it not, since as we all know that point Z is simply a continuation of a movement and/or direction around a circle. Yet it has this difference and/or advantage if you will - that if a movement (another wavelet) is near to it, or jammed into it, the direction of the movement of this first wavelet can and may join with that of the second.

  22. And that all in itself may turn into many words how that takes place, a subject that for the moment I will forego upon except in principle.


  1. It all boils down to "conductivity", and at that, "directional conductivity". These angular moment are after all magnetic movements, as coordinates transposed by magnetic power, like if two magnets are near to one another these will likewise join their lines into one.

  2. In this case with a wavelet bounced up to area Z, with their moments in rotation being alike, these will join, which is not the case if it were at point N, since the angular moment at that location is not alike with that of the second.



  1. And so we have finally come to what in general is best known as Magnetism, that I for its reality termed Conductive movement into directionally conductive movement. And to somehow show the reality thereof, I re-entered the illustration of how all things are held together by grids, like the one of water when it is frozen.

  2. How or why do you think there are these open areas in it? They are there because all the atoms in the circular fashion around it are projecting a like polarity towards it. That like polarity then in the center of these open areas are movements in opposite direction of one another.

  3. And like all magnets will draw themselves away from each other when the direction of their movement is in opposite, so the open areas come to be.  But by the same token when movements are in the same direction of one another they will cling to one another. That is how these atoms form these grids, and there are many different arrangements of such grids by and with the many different elements.

  4. And if you my reader are still woozy from the poison of man's scientists with their atoms as solar systems consisting of many different parts - you may not be able to grasp the truth, and you are bound to die and be put on the wayside, the poison having taken its intended affect upon you.

  5. But there is an antidote, I for one am an antidote if you are willing and also able to take it, for without it you will not come to the realization of how and why there are hot spots within the cavity of a microwave oven, nor to any understanding in the nature of nature.

  6. I do not commend myself since my knowledge is a gift unto me from the Most High Judge, the God of all creation, but it warrants you to listen to my word since I was taught of the very One who created all that integrate nature.

  7. If at all you wish to learn something of nature, then forget your masters and forget your teachers, and abandon much of what these have taught you, and come with me that you may learn from the One great Master of all the sciences.

  8. Everything in nature for its fundamental movement is magnetic, and why then should you exclude the atom? Or why should you exclude waves? Find something fundamental in nature in which there is no magnetism, and you will be the first to have found something new.

  9. Do not your old scientists, - wrong as they are in most fundamentals, - have at least this to their credit, to list all waves as magnetic.  If then these old birds proclaim it as a fact, why will you not believe me when I also proclaim it as a fact?  

  10. But does it really get through to you to think of waves as coordinates on the move by magnetic movement?

  11. For while the old ones acclaim that nothing at all can travel faster than the speed of light, yet have the gall to acclaim how some light from some stars is traveling at nearly twice the speed of light. And when a star moves at 4 km/sec they have the gall to acclaim that it travels at near 4000 km/sec. (Page 80 as reference)

  12. So you see how these old birds cannot even add 2 plus 2 to 4, nor correlate two factors at once for their correct outcome, all because the poison has done its job, it has blinded them to the point that they by any means are unable to see.

  13. It then is not for you to be so contradictory within yourself, or else I will have to call you as well by the term of bird-brain. Nor is that unjustified from me since - seeing how by their own word they know better, conclusively they are pronouncing their own judgment.

  14. Will you now accept my word, and come to realize how all fundamental movement in nature is magnetic, the reality of conductive movement into directionally conductive movement?  If so, you will be blessed. If not, you might as well leave off here, for then there is no hope for you.


  1. But we still have not come to the real reason as to how and why there are hot spots in a microwave oven. The first logical conclusion is that these waves are bounced up to one another creating that so called standing wave, or wave grid.

  2. But that in itself does not create the hot spots, the hot spots occur at the head of the waves. Think clearly and answer yourself this question; At what part of a drill-bit is the work done? Where are the cutting edges of a drill-bit?  They are at the very tip, or as we said at the head of the wave.

  3. Our wave then is like a drill-bit for as it moves forward it rotates. The head of each wavelet, or angular moment is the most forward part of the Y-Y-Z coordinate. Figure 84-4 is an illustration to that effect.

  4. And that most forward part as it by deflection and reflection is bounced up against others, is not only in a straight line but at ninety degree angles as well.  Many of these waves then are canceled out by one another, but with a continues supplies it does not seem that way

  5. When for example two of them are head on by a ninety degree, both of them are boring, for while they are terminated as soon as they have made their single turn - that boring act continues by the continues supply of new ones.  Each wavelet lasts for only a tiny fraction of a millisecond.

  6. That boring of which I am speaking is their rotation upon the atoms and molecules that reside within the circumference of their rotation, and that terminates them, for these waves act just as light acts.

  7. Light as it strikes the ground by its rotation increases the movement within and upon the atoms so struck.  At any time when a wave passes the atoms and molecules of any substance it does not agitate them.  This is obvious with the earth how it is heated from the ground on up.

  8. The same is true in our microwave ovens, it is at the point of termination where the commotion takes place. And since these are forced into what appears as a standing grid of waves, the heating, or agitation, or increase of general movement (as it really is), only takes place at their heads.

  9. A wave is like a boring tool, or like a pencil writing a circle, its purpose by design is to add or increase the rate of movement by its circular movement. And the instant that it does that wavelet is terminated, it no longer exist, unless by the coordinate upon which it is struck it is selectively remitted.

  10. As then the tip of a drill-bit is its cutting end, it is in conjunction with the rest of the drill-bit.  For with the wave as soon as its tip makes contact upon that which it cannot pass - the rest of that angular moment follows to - in all essence - draw a circle. (or half circle - partial circle)

  11. That circle thus is a rotating movement causing an increase in the general movement of the substance. With our solar panels it creates another circular movement called electricity. In our microwave ovens it raises what is best known as the general movement of things, that in relative terms is known as temperature.

  12. If thus by Figure 84-4 we look at the whole length of such a wave at idle, just as its point is in contact with a potato, all of the rest of the  wavelength noted "P" is just passing, it is only the tip at "C" touching our potato.  Then in slow motion the rest of that wave moves in tracing its circle upon the potato, boring into it.

  13. And so here again what part of that 6.122-cm is performing the work? It's the leading edge, and that leading edge is re-supplied by the remainder of those 6.122-cm to form its circle upon the potato.

  14. And wherever that circle of movement is drawn upon there is ground zero for the increase in movement.  Each wavelet then after having traced its circle is essentially terminated. There are variances but let us leave them out.

  15. Since then at high speed and high frequency new waves are brought in doing the same thing over and over, the potato is getting all worked up by one circular bite or pulse after the other raising its internal movements.



  1. One bite from a piranha won't kill a man, but with many of them voraciously consuming the flesh, he will soon be gone. So our potato is quickly heated for the many boring tools raising its adrenalin.


  1. Lengthy is it not by which I am teaching this, and yet what choice do I have in order to bring out many factors leading to the same end? One can correlate many factor simultaneously, but I can only write them down one at the time.

  2. If then the previous does not explain all that we wish to hear, it does in a way provide us with some evidence as to how and why there are hot spots in a grid of wavelets. Therefore also I was bound to introduce this reality that like all things of a magnetic nature these are likewise directionally conductive.

  3. Then there is the expansion and/or contraction of all such waves, and no less for them to refract, that as such interprets into a change in direction. The refraction of any wave then is not due to any change in density except when it arrives out of the normal.

  4. The air then being heated within the oven where the temperature is not the same at every centimeter there is a refraction of the wavelets as well as compression and expansion.  All that along with the chaotic changes in direction by which these wavelets are being bounced back and forth, with many of them nullified and new ones send in.

  5. It is rather astronomical or a miracle that a grid of such waves may be held within the small confines of the oven, and that these are able to fully maintain their angular moments, that as such interprets into keeping by their half lengths. All this by the natural reaction and formation of directionally conductive movement.

  6. But there is more to this, for remember how light readjust itself at the slightest change in distance between atoms either expanding or being compressed, and/or refracted into a change of direction?  It is by this that on a hot day we observe that apparent water on the road.

  7. And how by any mirror without any lapse in time it takes a turn into the opposite.  And how for any change in density its velocity also changes. These factors tell us that waves are extremely susceptible to the medium in which they travel.

  8. And that these so called half waves can turn to connect or be redirected at nearly any angle.

  9. The angular moments thus, - as the new and proper name for all wave phenomena, - is not something that travels on its own independent of its surrounding, but quite the opposite.

  10. Its forward momentum may be driven by the 3M, the magnetic entity, but it does so by encircling the media in its path, and not only that - but it makes contact upon each of them, or as we might say - it is duly susceptible to the spacing of each of them by which their length and velocity are regulated.

  11. Pass light through air at any normal temperature, and by heating a segment of it the light will instantly be expanded for length and increase in velocity, as well as take a change in direction for those waves arriving out of the normal.

  12. Interesting is it not how these angular moments are so susceptible to the atoms of the medium as if they were an integral part of it. And of course they were born of it, but as these angular moments appearing more like straight lines than angles pass over and around these atoms at such a tremendous velocity how they react to even the smallest change in the spacing of these parts.

  13. And the only reason that these as nearly straight lines still maintain their angular formation is because - they are passing around atoms and/or molecules.  For the average microwave it is around billions of atoms in their diameter alone.

  14. A 122-mm wave now is not made by atoms nor by molecules, but by impulses upon a large volume of such parts, like as when in a pool by suddenly pushing upon the water by the whole width of that pool we create a large water wave.

  15. With microwaves we utilize a volume to drive a specific indent into the always residing magnetic lines of movement. This in comparison to an electrical generator instead of driving angular impulses upon the magnetic lines we twist them by a full circular movement, the rotation of the armature.

  16. And thus let us ask ourselves this question again, how or why these wavelets, the angular moments of them always seem to connect end to end and never by any middle?  We could answer it by playing with two magnets, or we could say - because waves are angular moments.

  17. And no angular moment is as such an angular moment unless it has its angle, and that angle must always be fully across in the diameter by which it travels. 

  18. By illustration figure 84-3 it is X to Z, no more, no less. Or it can be M to N, but then we are to turn our tube a little so that in the illustration M and N span the entire width or diameter of its travel.

  19. Or it can be Z to R, but then we are to turn that tube around by one half so that Z-R, again appears as X-Z.  No matter thus how you look at it, or situate it, the half wave is and must always be the XYZ. it cannot be any other way.


  1. I wish as yet to bring our attention to something that we are able to count for revolutions per unit in time, namely our electrical current that as a waveform turns by a rotation equal to 60 revolutions per second.

  2. And for it our generators are given the right amount of RPM by which it will maintain those 60 cycles. And/or it can also be regulated with transformers since "Turns equal turns, and compensates for turns."

  3. Conclusively the resultant, namely our electricity, rotates by that rate at which it is or was produced. When therefore we hold a magnet next to that rotating magnetic force it will be pushed and pulled to and from that magnet by the rate of 60 cycles, (120 volt) which is 3600 RPM.

  4.  If however we take a 12 volt battery and place a magnet next to its conductor, the rate of revolutions should be 12 times each second or 720 RPM.

  5. If then 120 volt is equal to 3600 RPM, what may be the RPM of a 240 volt circuit? It will still be 3600-RPM since the 240 is nothing other  then 2 -120 volt circuits facing each other. Or the Y system at 360 that will read only 208 volt yet still maintain the 60 cycle settings, or the Delta system with one high leg.

  6. A magnetron now creates waves in their length by resonance, and to resonate is to move back and forth, a one way and the other.  And for this cavities are used.  If by a magnet you alternately keep turning a positive and negative front to it, you will obtain a resonance to whatever rate of revolution you are accomplishing that feat. 

  7. For a continues wave of an angular moment now by which a full length of 12.245-cm may be obtained, you will have to do so 2.45 billion times each second. But in bringing the resonance higher and higher to reach a back and forth movement to the tune of 2.45 billion, you may possibly be generated much shorter waves then the 12.245-cm.

  8. You may instead be producing such that are a thousand times shorter instead of the 12.245-cm waves that you intended.  Your rate of resonance need not necessarily conform to 2.45 billion, to have 4.9 billion individual movements within any second of time.

  9. I doubled it since each single factor of something that resonates has two distinct movements, a back and a forth movement, wherefore the rate of such movements must always be times 2. 

  10. As then any length of a wave also requires a diameter by which its is transposed, and the angular moment proceeds by a circumference of that diameter into the length of it, it comes to a three dimensional concept rather than two dimensional, and diameter is times 3.14.

  11. And it - by virtue thereof must likewise be computed three dimensionally, and not two dimensionally as the experts in the sciences currently have it. These persons should not be allowed to act as police officers, for with their radar guns if one is moving at 3 MPH he will be fined for going 300 MPH.

  12. Evidence of this is on page 80, how it is imperative that the velocity of any wave is to be computed by its three dimensional concept, anything else is wrong, and very wrong.  We then may be equally wrong in thinking that with a resonance or oscillation of 2.45 billion we are producing wavelengths to the tune of some 12.245-cm.

  13. The 12.245 cm wavelength may compute to a frequency of 2.45 billion, but it is not necessarily produced by an resonance of 2.45 billion.  With the rate of 2.45 billion we may be producing  wavelengths to the tune of 0.02-cm or shorter still, which when these are computed to a number in frequencies comes to 15 trillion.

  14. This does not mean that we have placed 15 trillion 0.02-cm lengths end on end to pass within one second of time, but with our intended 2.45 billion events there may be only 1.225 million full back and forth movements as the number of waves produced in that one second of time.'

  15. Thus within the 15 trillion possible there are but 1.225 million of them on line, that is 1 in 12,244 that could fit within the line.  And so we have an 0.02-cm wavelength proudly acclaiming that it has a frequency of 15 trillion.

  16. But are we correct, or do we make ourselves out for liars? It is a lie to say that with this 0.02-cm wave we have a frequency of 15 trillion, since in fact we only produced them 1 in 12,244  possible lengths.  The frequency therefore is 1.225 million, with a possible of 15 trillion.

  17. We must also have a correct understanding of the terms resonance and oscillations, two terms that I often use, and I wish to explain what they mean, or what I mean with them. 

  18. To resonate is to move back and forth by a straight line, while to oscillate is to move back and forth out of a straight line to move by and in a the circular or epileptically.

  19. If we take our common light-bulb, the electricity at its 120 volt rotation has a push pull relation to the magnetic atoms of that thin wire at the rate of only 60 times each second, and yet these atoms are able to thereby produce wavelengths as short as 400 nm.

  20. How therefore at that slow push pull scenario are these atoms to come to such - as we see it - high rate of frequencies? the 500-nm wavelength by computation into the constant comes to some 600 trillion events, or frequencies as it is commonly called.

  21. Do therefore the atoms of that tungsten element produce 600 trillion events each second of time by which at night we may read a book?  Hardly so, for if - by example - we received but ten thousand of these per second in time we can already read our book.

  22. But how is it of the atoms of that tungsten element to resonate or oscillate at a rate so high and yet so minute to produce these 500-nm lengths while the instigator has but a revolution of no more than 3600 RPM? 

  23. The answer lies in their size as well as their own moment of rotation. The electricity may be pushing and pulling on the atoms themselves, but that is on the atoms and molecules as a whole, and not directly on the rate at which they normally spin, since the push pull is to and at the polar regions, at which also their axis of rotation is found.

  24. As therefore the electricity is driving the atoms to a frenzy - the speed of their so called internal movement is raised much higher, evident in the fact that they turn red hot, or white hot, temperature being a degree of movement.  

  25. The factor by which the electricity thus multiplies the rate of movement upon the atoms, can be very high. And there are still other reasons that for the moment I will forego upon.

  26. As then the electricity is cut off and on at 60 times each second, so your light bulb is turned off and on at 60 times each second.  Point an RPM Counter to it and it will read 3600 RPM.

  27. Nor is it absolutely necessary that the conductor of any electricity becomes red hot if and when we increase the rate at which the electricity itself is to rotate. Evidence of this is with our high voltage power lines, and how these are mounted so far from any other metal.

  28. For as the electricity is made to turn faster and faster so it expands its field of force. Nor is this a factor of electricity alone, but of all magnetic force, inclusive that  of atoms in their rate of spin.

  29. By applying a rotational magnetic force upon the metal within a light bulb we are applying our means in and upon the atomic level. And at that level, or magnitude, very short wavelengths may be produced, since these are likewise produced on the same narrow scale - the diameter of which is slightly greater than the diameter of these atoms.

  30. When we apply our means on the molecular level, the diameter being much greater, so also the lengths will be. It is not that we as such are making nor producing sine formations, just as with our half mile train of cars upon highway 66 we are creating, or producing a road, the highway itself.

  31. What we produce are nothing more and nothing less than angular moments that for their onward movement appear as sine formations. Any and all angular moments then are instigated by a combination of two factors into a third. No wave therefore is ever a sine formation, its way to travel upon is the sine formation.

  32. A resonance or oscillation are as such the impacts upon a rotating or spinning movement whereby to create distinct moments into the angular. And that angular is as such born forth upon the ever present 3M, the magnetic movement at a velocity to the tune of 300.000.000 meters/sec.

  33. A 1-cm wave therefore cannot be produced on the atomic level, nor even on the molecular level, nor can light waves be produced on the molecular level or anything greater thereto. All things have their magnitude, and as such will abide by it.

  34. A 1-cm wave goes around billions of atoms, and it took the combined effort of billions of atoms to produce it, how therefore does man in his vain imagination conceive that such a thing can be produced by a mere electron, by some minute part of an atom that does not exist in the first place?

  35. It is an absolute fact that no wave is ever any full wave. If they were they would not show up as half waves in any microwave oven. That oven thus serves us for evidence.

  Next page