The Other Side of Midnight - Richard C. Hoagland - Live Chat Thread

[Anthony Barnett]

Night Jim Bob....

[Kevin Sorbo]

(I move my face away from the mic to breath.)

Hahaha topnotch reference.

[expat]

Here's a primer on the Accutron, if anyone's interested.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Torsion_field#The_Hoagland_version

[astroguy]

Here's a primer on the Accutron, if anyone's interested.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Torsion_field#The_Hoagland_version

And how to design a proper experiment using one.

[astroguy]

Try this vodka.  It should fit the recipe....due to the geometry of the bottle. 

That is a very neat bottle.  I don't drink, but I'd buy that for the bottle.

[Yorkshire pud]

That is a very neat bottle.  I don't drink, but I'd buy that for the bottle.

Inspired by Moon arcitecture. Seriously.

[astroguy]

Inspired by Moon arcitecture. Seriously.

It looks like they have a distributor in Denver.  I may try to stop by when I pick my parents up from the airport next week.

[ziznak]

That is a very neat bottle.  I don't drink, but I'd buy that for the bottle.

That bottle actually was originally a normal shaped bottle.  It only obtained the shape you see after it was passed through some highly resonant torsion fields... cmon astro you can tell us all about the validity of torsion physics can't you?

[astroguy]

That bottle actually was originally a normal shaped bottle.  It only obtained the shape you see after it was passed through some highly resonant torsion fields... cmon astro you can tell us all about the validity of torsion physics can't you?

Yes, I could tell you "about" the validity of "torsion physics."  As in, it has no validity.

[chefist]

Has anyone caught the series "Manhattan"? Pretty good actually...

[ziznak]

Yes, I could tell you "about" the validity of "torsion physics."  As in, it has no validity.

"HOW DARE YOU MR. ROBBIN'S!?!?!?"

and right here in the Hoagland thread... jeez!!!

[Anthony Barnett]

"HOW DARE YOU MR. ROBBIN'S!?!?!?"

and right here in the Hoagland thread... jeez!!!

Yes how very very dare you ..... 

[Anthony Barnett]

Has anyone caught the series "Manhattan"? Pretty good actually...

Is it a HBO series? what it about??

[chefist]

Is it a HBO series? what it about??

It was on WGN TV...it's about the Manhattan Project...

[Anthony Barnett]

It was on WGN TV...it's about the Manhattan Project...

About the nuclear program in the early years??

[Anthony Barnett]

About the nuclear program in the early years??

Art Bell's guest is an Exorcist.... funny as we watched Linda Blair in the Exorcist on Sunday Night... it's still one of the best movies alongside Jaws 1...

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

Here is one of several difficulties I have in understanding Hoagland's scientific method.  Perhaps you touch on this in your podcast, astroguy, but I haven't reviewed it yet.

Apparently, the thinking goes that the tines of a tuning fork act like a very short-arc pendulum.  Therefore they are in rotary motion.  Therefore they are affected by the torsion field. 

The Accutron sets time by a small tuning fork that resonates at 360 Hz.  This turned out to be the most accurate way to measure time in a watch before quartz crystals came into common usage.  I think Hoagland has some sort of computer software that measures the variation of his Accutron from 360 Hz as he hops around with wild abandon in a 'torsion field.'

In order to measure the variation in the frequency of the Accutron tuning fork tines, Hoagland needs a second clock to measure it.  The second clock must be isolated from the 'torsion field' in order to properly measure what the Accutron is doing.  Otherwise both the experimental clock and the reference would be affected by the same phenomenon and you couldn't tell what was actually happening.

I think (don't know for sure since I haven't studied Hoagland's experiments that closely) that Hoagland believes a quartz crystal vibrates in translatory motion, rather than rotation, and so isn't affected by the 'torsion field.'  However, I looked it up last night and the quartz crystals used in time pieces are actually manufactured into the shape of very small, very high frequency tuning forks which typically vibrate at 32 768 Hz. 

Hence, Hoagland's experiment and Hoagland's control would appear to both be affected by the 'torsion field' and thus his results should have no value.   If he were to set his Accutron tuning fork at right angles to two reference quartz 'tuning forks' he might have a valid experiment, but I don't think this is what he does.

Of course, that completely ignores that he doesn't tell us about his experimental results in his house or at other random locations away from the effects of the 'torsion field.'

[Yorkshire pud]

Here is one of several difficulties I have in understanding Hoagland's scientific method.  Perhaps you touch on this in your podcast, astroguy, but I haven't reviewed it yet.

Apparently, the thinking goes that the tines of a tuning fork act like a very short-arc pendulum.  Therefore they are in rotary motion.  Therefore they are affected by the torsion field. 

The Accutron sets time by a small tuning fork that resonates at 360 Hz.  This turned out to be the most accurate way to measure time in a watch before quartz crystals came into common usage.  I think Hoagland has some sort of computer software that measures the variation of his Accutron from 360 Hz as he hops around with great abandon in a 'torsion field.'

In order to measure the variation in the frequency of the Accutron tuning fork tines, Hoagland needs a second clock to measure it.  The second clock must be isolated from the 'torsion field' in order to properly measure what the Accutron is doing.  Otherwise both the experimental clock and the reference would be affected by the same phenomenon and you couldn't tell what was actually happening.

I think (don't know for sure since I haven't studied Hoagland's experiments that closely) that Hoagland believes a quartz crystal vibrates in translatory motion, rather than rotation, and so isn't affected by the 'torsion field.'  However, I looked it up last night and the quartz crystals used in time pieces are actually manufactured into the shape of a very small, very high frequency tuning fork which vibrates at 32 768 Hz. 

Hence, Hoagland's experiment and Hoagland's control would appear to both be affected by the 'torsion field' and hence his results should have no value.   If he were to set his Accutron tuning fork at right angles to two reference quartz 'tuning forks' he might have a valid experiment, but I don't think this is what he does.

Of course, that completely ignores that he doesn't tell us about his experimental results in his house or at other random locations away from the effects of the 'torsion field.'

I think I'm right in thinking that Expat has posted a blog with this experiment to establish the baseline status of the watch and an external control to measure any variations.. I don't think Hoagland has done this, maybe it was  an oversight? Or ancient aliens, or something.

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

I think I'm right in thinking that Expat has posted a blog with this experiment to establish the baseline status of the watch and an external control to measure any variations.. I don't think Hoagland has done this, maybe it was  an oversight? Or ancient aliens, or something.

Thanks.  I will search for it at some point when I have time to do more than spout off 

[astroguy]

He likes the Accutron® because it uses a tuning fork, and hence its frequency will change based on a few different things.  He thinks that in the presence of "hyperdimensional physics" or the "torsion field," that at least one of those parameters would vary.

That would not be the case for any other kind of watch (other than a pendulum).  Hence, you can measure the Accutron with something like a computer and it'd be fine as a control.

But as you said, and as I explain in gory detail in my podcast episode I linked to, he has not provided any control (so we don't know how it behaves normally), he does not show his experimental results in full, and in a few places that he DOES show his results, they are different ... BUT FOR THE SAME TIME AT THE SAME EVENT!

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

He likes the Accutron® because it uses a tuning fork, and hence its frequency will change based on a few different things.  He thinks that in the presence of "hyperdimensional physics" or the "torsion field," that at least one of those parameters would vary.

That would not be the case for any other kind of watch (other than a pendulum).  Hence, you can measure the Accutron with something like a computer and it'd be fine as a control.

But as you said, and as I explain in gory detail in my podcast episode I linked to, he has not provided any control (so we don't know how it behaves normally), he does not show his experimental results in full, and in a few places that he DOES show his results, they are different ... BUT FOR THE SAME TIME AT THE SAME EVENT!

I guess my main point, and to be honest I'm not certain how computers keep time, is that the quartz crystal inside any reference timing device is also a tuning fork. 

If computers keep track of time in some other way then the specifics of my argument are null and void.

[astroguy]

I guess my main point, and to be honest I'm not certain how computers keep time, is that the quartz crystal inside any reference timing device is also a tuning fork. 

If computers keep track of time in some other way then the specifics of my argument are null and void.

Nope, quartz crystals are different, they're not tuning forks.  It's a piezoelectric mechanism, which is not dependent on mass or other things that Richard claims would be affected by his stuff.

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

Nope, quartz crystals are different, they're not tuning forks.  It's a piezoelectric mechanism, which is not dependent on mass or other things that Richard claims would be affected by his stuff.

They are shaped into tuning forks.  I guess I just read that and misunderstood how the actual principles are different.  Thanks, I will look at it some more.

[astroguy]

They are shaped into tuning forks.  I guess I just read that and misunderstood how the actual principles are different.  Thanks, I will look at it some more.

Hmmm... I'm pretty sure I'm right, that it's not based on a tuning fork principle, especially when you see them in tiny transistors.  Let me know if I'm wrong!

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

Hmmm... I'm pretty sure I'm right, that it's not based on a tuning fork principle, especially when you see them in tiny transistors.  Let me know if I'm wrong!

Will do

[RoseGirl]

I have taken the liberty of producing a RCH Public Service Announcement. Please distribute far and wide to all who may listen.

[Anthony Barnett]

I have taken the liberty of producing a RCH Public Service Announcement. Please distribute far and wide to all who may listen.

Excellent and you can here the Accutron in the background taking measurements..lol

[chefist]

Hmmm... I'm pretty sure I'm right, that it's not based on a tuning fork principle, especially when you see them in tiny transistors.  Let me know if I'm wrong!

Quart crystals expand when a charge is applied to them...I've studied this quite a bit in my career as Piezoelectric printheads are quite common in inkjet technology (Epson)...Drop size is modulated by the input frequency into the quartz...it's really fascinating science...

[RoseGirl]

Excellent and you can here the Accutron in the background taking measurements..lol

Oh the humanity!

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

Quart crystals expand when a charge is applied to them...I've studied this quite a bit in my career as Piezoelectric printheads are quite common in inkjet technology (Epson)...Drop size is modulated by the input frequency into the quartz...it's really fascinating science...

I would imagine the tuning fork shape is used to modulate the piezoelectric effect to a precise frequency in a time piece, but will try to be more thorough before posting more.