The Primer Fields?

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

Locked
User avatar
orrery
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: USA

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by orrery » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:12 pm

The Primer Fields seems more like David Wilcock's "Source Field's Theory" than anything showing a real understanding of magnetic fields. Some of the posts here would seem to indicate that people don't understand how Permanent Magnets work. The magnetic field of a permanent magnet is a product of the atomic alignment allowing the freeflow of electrons. The magnetic field of the bowl magnet is the result of a moving electric current by the electrons spinning.

TL;DR: Permanent Magnets result from an atomic arrangement allowing electron current to travel through the magnet.

I love Edward Leedsklanin & Walter Russell as much as anyone, but the Primer Fields guy is off his rocker if he thinks "magnetic fields" exist all by themselves. Electromagnetism is one force, not two.

In any case, some of the posters here can be debunked quite easily just by asking "How do Permanent Magnets Work?"

:?:

Answer: An electric current produces the magnetic field of a permanent magnet.
"though free to think and to act - we are held together like the stars - in firmament with ties inseparable - these ties cannot be seen but we can feel them - each of us is only part of a whole" -tesla

http://www.reddit.com/r/plasmaCosmology

alain
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2013 4:41 pm

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by alain » Sun Mar 03, 2013 11:39 am

Answer: An electric current produces the magnetic field of a permanent magnet
Then how do you explain the magnetism of an electron for example?

User avatar
nick c
Moderator
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by nick c » Sun Mar 03, 2013 5:34 pm

Then how do you explain the magnetism of an electron for example?
A moving electron would be an electric current, ie a moving charged particle(s) = an electric current. Therefore one would expect a moving electron to generate a magnetic field...no?

alain
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2013 4:41 pm

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by alain » Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:19 pm

So, a static electron won't have any magnetic property?

User avatar
nick c
Moderator
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by nick c » Sun Mar 03, 2013 10:31 pm

So, a static electron won't have any magnetic property?
I don't know. Motion is relative to something else. Everything is in motion.

kevin
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:17 am

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by kevin » Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:53 am

nick c wrote:
So, a static electron won't have any magnetic property?
I don't know. Motion is relative to something else. Everything is in motion.
Could I offer up the thought that physical mass and matter are not in motion at all?
It is all merely compressed memory that is switching on/off at superluminal speeds, and the illusion to ourselves who are part of that switching is of a seperateness from space.

What is causing this are the flowing magnetic fields created by ultra high electrical sort of strings of universe.
The real question is what is electricity?????
And I do not mean some made up fantasy words like electrons etc etc, they are made up.

I fully agree that this is an electrical universe, but that does create omni present variable magnetic fields which everything in creation is enabled to REMEMBER to be within it's own local memory field, but before any of that can be identified...WHAT IS ELECTRICITY?????
Kevin

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by Sparky » Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:05 pm

WHAT IS ELECTRICITY?
There is a thread where That is supposedly answered. All I got from it was knowing less than I thought I did at the beginning. Electricity needs to be redefined.

I now suspect electrical energy to be a result of cascade breakdown, tapping into aether field, controlled by natural restraints of electron. Ireallydonno :?
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

kevin
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:17 am

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by kevin » Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:21 pm

Sparky wrote:
WHAT IS ELECTRICITY?
There is a thread where That is supposedly answered. All I got from it was knowing less than I thought I did at the beginning. Electricity needs to be redefined.

I now suspect electrical energy to be a result of cascade breakdown, tapping into aether field, controlled by natural restraints of electron. Ireallydonno :?
Whats ENERGY??

It is extremely difficult to break free of the super indoctrinated accepted, and not to become a REPEATER, unfortunately most do fall into the trap of been repeaters, and good little such are given certificates , and they teach more and more repeaters.
Refreshing to hear someone admit they....donnoooo.
kevin

Goldminer
Posts: 1024
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:08 pm

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by Goldminer » Tue Mar 05, 2013 1:20 am

The answer to Alain's question "So, a static electron won't have any magnetic property?" is yes, a static electron does have a magnetic dipole field. Ampere called the electron a magnetic molecule. Both electron and proton have magnetic dipoles built in. You get a dipole magnetic field free for each monopole electric particle's charge field. Even the neutron has a dipole magnetic field.

When the magnetic dipoles of a group of charges are "jumbled" no magnetic field seems to be present. When the magnetic dipoles are aligned, they add up and the magnetic field becomes apparent. Magnetism is inherent in every subatomic particle. The various "fields" known to physics are not energy, per se. No energy is absorbed or created by existence of the fields surrounding each particle. In a sense, the field(s) is(are) the particle, and in that sense the particle itself is potential energy.

What Is "Electricity?" We will never find a simple answer to the question "what is electricity?" because the question itself is wrong. It is too ambiguous.
Junglelord wrote:"If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe." — Nikola Tesla
I sense a disturbance in the farce.

kevin
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:17 am

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by kevin » Tue Mar 05, 2013 8:58 am

Goldminer,
What is the apparent pressure detectable in the windings when magnetic fields are spun fast?
Kevin

alain
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2013 4:41 pm

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by alain » Tue Mar 05, 2013 10:28 am

To Goldminer,
Then, people who say that a magnetic field is only created by electricity currents are incorrect?

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by Sparky » Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:41 am

Then, people who say that a magnetic field is only created by electricity currents are incorrect?
To add a thought; they may arise from the same process, and support each other. If that is true, then the more precise statement would be, where you find one you find the other.

If I understand correctly, Michael V's model of aligned electrons, emitting particles that make up the B and E fields, ties it all together.
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

Goldminer
Posts: 1024
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:08 pm

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by Goldminer » Wed Mar 06, 2013 4:51 am

kevin wrote:Goldminer,
What is the apparent pressure detectable in the windings when magnetic fields are spun fast?
Kevin
I don' know of any windings in plasma, or electrons. When you speak of "pressure," I suppose you mean "voltage?" It depends upon the number of turns in the windings, and the rpm of the armature relative the stator.
I sense a disturbance in the farce.

Goldminer
Posts: 1024
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:08 pm

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by Goldminer » Wed Mar 06, 2013 5:02 am

alain wrote:To Goldminer,
Then, people who say that a magnetic field is only created by electricity currents are incorrect?
As I pointed out several posts ago, electricity is an ambiguous term. I think that if you study Ampere's original experiments, you will walk away with a superior understanding of the process. Your question is of the "which came first: the chicken or the egg?" variety.
I sense a disturbance in the farce.

Goldminer
Posts: 1024
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:08 pm

Re: The Primer Fields?

Unread post by Goldminer » Wed Mar 06, 2013 5:25 am

Sparky wrote:
Then, people who say that a magnetic field is only created by electricity currents are incorrect?
To add a thought; they may arise from the same process, and support each other. If that is true, then the more precise statement would be, where you find one you find the other.
Well said.
Sparky wrote:If I understand correctly, Michael V's model of aligned electrons, emitting particles that make up the B and E fields, ties it all together.
IMHO, Ampere, in his original experiments, and his analysis of them, did a mighty fine job. Having each atomic particle emit additional, undetectable particles, continuously, does little to increase our knowledge. It is just speculation. Just because atomic particles emit discrete frequencies of radiation for discrete durations of time does not make particles out of the radiation. A discrete frequency of radiation emitted for a discrete duration of time is a pulse of radiation. A pulse of radiation is a wave that acts like a particle.
I sense a disturbance in the farce.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 13 guests