If you think that Quantum Mechanics are guys that fix broken Quantums, then
this book is probably not for you.

If, on the other hand, you dislike the idea that location and energy and
momentum are statistical when they involve electrons, and are smoothly well
defined when they involve currents, then this 135 page book may be what you
have been looking for.

Meade's basic premise is that the quantum nature of matter can be used to
describe ALL EM phenomena. To demonstrate this, he has chosen an interesting
starting point: a variety of loops of super conducting material.

In conventional EM theory, for a given current, as the size of a loop
changes, the flux associated with the loop will change in a strictly linear
fashion. Experimentally, Meade has learned that flux in super conducting
loops is quantum. That is, as a loop's dimensions are changed, the flux
level varies in small increments, rather than in a strictly linear fashion..

The reason, says Meade, is that in a conventional loop, the currents are
disordered. In a superconductor, all the electrons are in what amounts to
"lock step."

He takes this newly discovered experimental evidence and uses it to develop
current EM theory *without* Maxwell's Equations. (And, thankfully, without
Displacement Current!) In other words, he takes Quantum Results and uses
them to derive Classical EM.

But he does not stop there.

Instead, he analyzes the apparent discontinuity that occurs when an electron
changes its energy state and emits a photon. He shows that the apparent
"jump" or discontinuity does not happen instantaneously. Instead, there is a
process analogous to "positive feedback" in the interaction between two
charged particles. Because the interaction happens so rapidly, it simply
*appears* instantaneous.

This is a thought-provoking booklet. It leaves many questions - such as the
nature of an electron - unanswered or partially answered. But it provides a
plausible explanation to "bridge the gap" between the quantum universe and
the classical one. They are, he claims, one and the same.

My thanks to *maxwell* for referring me to this book.

Bill Miller
You are very welcome, Bill. I'm pleased that you found such valuable

If you think that Quantum Mechanics are guys that fix broken Quantums, then
this book is probably not for you.



If, on the other hand, you dislike the idea that location and energy and
momentum are statistical when they involve electrons, and are smoothly well
defined when they involve currents, then this 135 page book may be what you
have been looking for.

Hi Bill

I have read the book and for me it where a disappointment.

The problem is that Mead haven't studied EM in dept before he wrote the
book. He blindly assume that Maxwell's and QED describe all EM phenomena
and overlook important phenomenas discovered by Tesla, Brown and others.



Bill Miller wrote:
If you think that Quantum Mechanics are guys that fix broken Quantums,
then
this book is probably not for you.



If, on the other hand, you dislike the idea that location and energy and
momentum are statistical when they involve electrons, and are smoothly
well
defined when they involve currents, then this 135 page book may be what
you
have been looking for.

The problem with Tesla's work is that he was so d---d secretive. All of his
so-called "special" or "different" findings, like free energy were never
written down. (Or, for those wearing aluminium hats, the findings *were*
written down but were stolen by the FBI, US Military, GE, Edison or...)

Of all of Tesla's "far out" work, the only one that seems to have been
witnessed by reliable observers is his generation of something akin to "ball
lightening." Apparently he could produce this rarely-seen-in-nature
phenomenon at will.

NOBODY knows how he did it, and apparently no one has ever replicated the
phenomenon in a lab.

There are many people named "Brown." Which one were you referring to?

Hi Bill

I have read the book and for me it where a disappointment.

The problem is that Mead haven't studied EM in dept before he wrote the
book. He blindly assume that Maxwell's and QED describe all EM phenomena
and overlook important phenomenas discovered by Tesla, Brown and others.

"Knud Soerensen" <4tuu4k002@sneakemail.com> wrote in message
news:4787322f$0$7603$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk...
Hi Bill

I have read the book and for me it where a disappointment.

The problem is that Mead haven't studied EM in dept before he wrote the
book. He blindly assume that Maxwell's and QED describe all EM phenomena
and overlook important phenomenas discovered by Tesla, Brown and others.



Bill Miller wrote:
If you think that Quantum Mechanics are guys that fix broken Quantums,
then
this book is probably not for you.



If, on the other hand, you dislike the idea that location and energy and
momentum are statistical when they involve electrons, and are smoothly
well
defined when they involve currents, then this 135 page book may be what
you
have been looking for.


Hello Knud...

Thanks for looking at Meade's book, and for adding your thoughts.

Conventional wisdom (?) is that all EM *can* be described by QED and EM. The
problem has been that you had to pick one or the other. Meade's book is a
useful step toward unifying the two disciplines.

The problem with Tesla's work is that he was so d---d secretive. All of his
so-called "special" or "different" findings, like free energy were never
written down. (Or, for those wearing aluminium hats, the findings *were*
written down but were stolen by the FBI, US Military, GE, Edison or...)

Well, Tesla did initially publish hes discovery of dielectric or

Of all of Tesla's "far out" work, the only one that seems to have been
witnessed by reliable observers is his generation of something akin to "ball
lightening." Apparently he could produce this rarely-seen-in-nature
phenomenon at will.

NOBODY knows how he did it, and apparently no one has ever replicated the
phenomenon in a lab.

There are many people named "Brown." Which one were you referring to?

My guess he means "Townsend Brown" of ionic wind (and also same thing
in a hard vacuum) fame. I'm not sure there is much "unexplained"
about the Brown discoveries, at least the ones related to his
patents.

Bill Miller wrote:
"Knud Soerensen" <4tuu4k002@sneakemail.com> wrote in message
news:4787322f$0$7603$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk...
Hi Bill

I have read the book and for me it where a disappointment.

The problem is that Mead haven't studied EM in dept before he wrote the
book. He blindly assume that Maxwell's and QED describe all EM phenomena
and overlook important phenomenas discovered by Tesla, Brown and others.



Bill Miller wrote:
If you think that Quantum Mechanics are guys that fix broken Quantums,
then
this book is probably not for you.



If, on the other hand, you dislike the idea that location and energy and
momentum are statistical when they involve electrons, and are smoothly
well
defined when they involve currents, then this 135 page book may be what
you
have been looking for.

Hello Knud...

Thanks for looking at Meade's book, and for adding your thoughts.

Conventional wisdom (?) is that all EM *can* be described by QED and EM. The
problem has been that you had to pick one or the other. Meade's book is a
useful step toward unifying the two disciplines.

The problem with Tesla's work is that he was so d---d secretive. All of his
so-called "special" or "different" findings, like free energy were never
written down. (Or, for those wearing aluminium hats, the findings *were*
written down but were stolen by the FBI, US Military, GE, Edison or...)

Well, Tesla did initially publish hes discovery of dielectric or
longitudinal radiation in the article "On the dissipation of the
electrical energy of the hertz resonator"

Also the reason that Tesla where so secretive after that was because
he was payed to shut up.

Hes said so in one of articles in the book "Tesla said" by John T.
Ratzlaff.

I have read the book and for me it where a disappointment.

The problem is that Mead haven't studied EM in dept before he wrote the

book.  He blindly assume that Maxwell's and QED describe all EM phenomena

and overlook important phenomenas discovered by Tesla, Brown and others.

Of all of Tesla's "far out" work, the only one that seems to have been
witnessed by reliable observers is his generation of something akin to "ball
lightening." Apparently he could produce this rarely-seen-in-nature
phenomenon at will.

NOBODY knows how he did it, and apparently no one has ever replicated the
phenomenon in a lab.

If you really believe nobody knows how he did it will effectively
prevent you from finding does who do know !

If you really believe nobody knows how he did it will effectively
prevent you from finding does who do know !

There are many people named "Brown." Which one were you referring to?

My guess he means "Townsend Brown" of ionic wind (and also same thing
in a hard vacuum) fame. I'm not sure there is much "unexplained"
about the Brown discoveries, at least the ones related to his
patents.


Yes, this is the Brown I talk about.

If you look in to the subject you will see that
the "ionic wind" hypotheses doesn't hold.
And experiments also confirm this.

Bill Miller wrote:
"Knud Soerensen" <4tuu4k002@sneakemail.com> wrote in message
news:4787322f$0$7603$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk...
Hi Bill

I have read the book and for me it where a disappointment.

The problem is that Mead haven't studied EM in dept before he wrote the
book. He blindly assume that Maxwell's and QED describe all EM
phenomena
and overlook important phenomenas discovered by Tesla, Brown and
others.



Bill Miller wrote:
If you think that Quantum Mechanics are guys that fix broken
Quantums,
then
this book is probably not for you.



If, on the other hand, you dislike the idea that location and energy
and
momentum are statistical when they involve electrons, and are smoothly
well
defined when they involve currents, then this 135 page book may be
what
you
have been looking for.


Hello Knud...

Thanks for looking at Meade's book, and for adding your thoughts.

Conventional wisdom (?) is that all EM *can* be described by QED and EM.
The
problem has been that you had to pick one or the other. Meade's book is
a
useful step toward unifying the two disciplines.

The problem with Tesla's work is that he was so d---d secretive. All of
his
so-called "special" or "different" findings, like free energy were never
written down. (Or, for those wearing aluminium hats, the findings *were*
written down but were stolen by the FBI, US Military, GE, Edison or...)

Well, Tesla did initially publish hes discovery of dielectric or
longitudinal radiation in the article "On the dissipation of the
electrical energy of the hertz resonator"

Also the reason that Tesla where so secretive after that was because
he was payed to shut up.

Hes said so in one of articles in the book "Tesla said" by John T.
Ratzlaff.


Of all of Tesla's "far out" work, the only one that seems to have been
witnessed by reliable observers is his generation of something akin to
"ball
lightening." Apparently he could produce this rarely-seen-in-nature
phenomenon at will.

NOBODY knows how he did it, and apparently no one has ever replicated
the
phenomenon in a lab.

If you really believe nobody knows how he did it will effectively
prevent you from finding does who do know !

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-721789270445596549
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6461713170757457294