The Keshe Foundation
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 8:23 am
I have been taking a look a the Keshe Foundation material on alternative energy and health systems: The Keshe Foundation.
Keshe's atomic model is very similar to that of John Worrell Keely, where the internal structure is composed of three components, matter, antimatter and dark matter. Keely used simply positive, negative and neutral:
Keshe's descriptions are based on those of conventional science and as a result, contain a number of the same misunderstandings. Keshe is a nuclear physicist. His web descriptions are basically a model of the neutron that can be broken down into a proton-electron pair, with the electron in an irregular orbit about the proton.
In the Reciprocal System, the neutron is a compound particle, being composed of a proton and cosmic electron neutrino. Cosmic matter (matter that is in the space region) is the antimatter of conventional science. Per Nehru's argument on the dimensionality of motion, cosmic matter is technically the conjugate (not the reciprocal) of material matter. So the RS neutron is a mix of matter and antimatter, the same as Keshe. Extrapolating from the documentation, it appears that the "dark matter" is the manifest portion of the atom, not the astronomical "dark matter." In RS terms, the dark matter would be the projection into extension/coordinate space of the material/cosmic scalar motion. The concepts here are very similar.
A question arises as to whether Keshe's neutron and Larson's neutron are the same thing, since Larson's "massless neutron" is actually the muon neutrino, with a displacement of 1/2-1/2-0. The muon neutrino is the smallest magnetic structure in the RS. Keshe extracts a proton and electron from his neutron, suggesting the compound neutron structure. But if his neutron is fundamental, then it would probably be the smallest displacement possible--which would actually be the electron neutrino, a combination of a muon neutrino and electron. The web site does not appear to have sufficient information on his theory to clarify this.
Like Keely, Keshe has the same structure for all the particles, but treats the photon as "fragments" that can be composed of the matter or antimatter parts of the atomic makeup. Larson considers subatomic particles as "incomplete atoms" and photons are building blocks, not fragments. Keshe does not consider the subatomic particles as incomplete atoms, but just atoms of a smaller "quantity" of material--what Larson would call a smaller displacement.
Unfortunately, the material available online at the Keshe Foundation is not sufficient to determine the working principles of his purported devices. The material is not well written nor presented (if you though Larson was hard to follow... try Keshe). He is somewhat acronym obsessive, and though he says what the acronyms stand for, he fails to define the underlying concepts. He constantly goes back to a plastic bottle with nails in it to produce a few millivolts of power from a "Kt fluid" (Keshe technology fluid), which is kept a secret. From the comments I've read on his books, he never discloses any new technology--only claims that he has it. There are no plans nor designs of his "reactor" technology, and if you want one, you have to put up $5000, sign a non-disclosure, and pay a yearly "maintenance" fee to use it.
None of his work is public domain. IMHO, he may have stumbled upon a magnetic relationship like Keely and others have found, discovered a way to exploit it, but does not understand it. His experimental write-ups are based on trial-and-error, not natural consequence from theory. (All the RS/RS2 research IS based on natural consequence of theory, so there is no guesswork.)
If anyone has a better understanding of Keshe's theory, please post so we can discuss. Thanks.
Keshe's atomic model is very similar to that of John Worrell Keely, where the internal structure is composed of three components, matter, antimatter and dark matter. Keely used simply positive, negative and neutral:
Keshe's descriptions are based on those of conventional science and as a result, contain a number of the same misunderstandings. Keshe is a nuclear physicist. His web descriptions are basically a model of the neutron that can be broken down into a proton-electron pair, with the electron in an irregular orbit about the proton.
In the Reciprocal System, the neutron is a compound particle, being composed of a proton and cosmic electron neutrino. Cosmic matter (matter that is in the space region) is the antimatter of conventional science. Per Nehru's argument on the dimensionality of motion, cosmic matter is technically the conjugate (not the reciprocal) of material matter. So the RS neutron is a mix of matter and antimatter, the same as Keshe. Extrapolating from the documentation, it appears that the "dark matter" is the manifest portion of the atom, not the astronomical "dark matter." In RS terms, the dark matter would be the projection into extension/coordinate space of the material/cosmic scalar motion. The concepts here are very similar.
A question arises as to whether Keshe's neutron and Larson's neutron are the same thing, since Larson's "massless neutron" is actually the muon neutrino, with a displacement of 1/2-1/2-0. The muon neutrino is the smallest magnetic structure in the RS. Keshe extracts a proton and electron from his neutron, suggesting the compound neutron structure. But if his neutron is fundamental, then it would probably be the smallest displacement possible--which would actually be the electron neutrino, a combination of a muon neutrino and electron. The web site does not appear to have sufficient information on his theory to clarify this.
Like Keely, Keshe has the same structure for all the particles, but treats the photon as "fragments" that can be composed of the matter or antimatter parts of the atomic makeup. Larson considers subatomic particles as "incomplete atoms" and photons are building blocks, not fragments. Keshe does not consider the subatomic particles as incomplete atoms, but just atoms of a smaller "quantity" of material--what Larson would call a smaller displacement.
Unfortunately, the material available online at the Keshe Foundation is not sufficient to determine the working principles of his purported devices. The material is not well written nor presented (if you though Larson was hard to follow... try Keshe). He is somewhat acronym obsessive, and though he says what the acronyms stand for, he fails to define the underlying concepts. He constantly goes back to a plastic bottle with nails in it to produce a few millivolts of power from a "Kt fluid" (Keshe technology fluid), which is kept a secret. From the comments I've read on his books, he never discloses any new technology--only claims that he has it. There are no plans nor designs of his "reactor" technology, and if you want one, you have to put up $5000, sign a non-disclosure, and pay a yearly "maintenance" fee to use it.
None of his work is public domain. IMHO, he may have stumbled upon a magnetic relationship like Keely and others have found, discovered a way to exploit it, but does not understand it. His experimental write-ups are based on trial-and-error, not natural consequence from theory. (All the RS/RS2 research IS based on natural consequence of theory, so there is no guesswork.)
If anyone has a better understanding of Keshe's theory, please post so we can discuss. Thanks.