The Revolutionary Discoveries of Davis and Rawls

[Rex]

Albert Roy Davis was the first scientist in the world to discover that the two poles of magnetism, North and South, are separate and distinct energies. North pole magnetism has the opposite effect on matter as South pole magnetism. Davis made numerous discoveries that other scientists and/or doctors now claim to be their own discoveries.

As I've already mentioned, it was Davis that first discovered that the North and South poles are separate energies. Another discovery of his is that the "lines of force" of magnetism do not flow around a magnet the way it is presented in textbooks to this day. The magnetic field leaves one pole, travels in a semicircle around to the exact center of the magnet (the Bloch Wall), reverses polarity, and then travels in a semicircle to the opposite pole. The magnetic fields are flowing in both directions simultaneously. Davis also discovered that magnetic energy does not have "lines of force", it has "cables of force", and he photographed these cables of force in the first picture ever taken of magnetic energy. Here is a quote from Magnetism and Its Effects on the Living System, his first book. "The spin effect is also noticeable by a pull, an electronic vortex twist, that appears on the screen at the outside edge of each cable and/or the roster." http://keelynet.com/energy/rawls1.htm

Davis was the first to discover that there are two vortices of magnetic energy at each pole, not one. Here is another quote from Magnetism and Its Effects on the Living System. "Within the wide diameter vortex of a magnet's pole is a similar attracting vortex spin. The magnet's spinning tornado-like vortex contains two expressions of power and energy. The electron spin acts as a force of spin direction, and the inner or reverse vortex located within the center of the electron fields acts to form an uptake of energy or a downward thrust of energy. The reversal of the spin effect results in the reversal of the inner vortex reaction." This book, the first by Davis and Walter C. Rawls, Jr., was first published in 1974, however Davis had informed many other scientists and doctors from several foreign nations of his discoveries. He had been in contact with these scientists and doctors for decades prior to the publication of the book. http://lifeforcegenie.com/problems-with-magnetics.html

Davis discovered that at the center of a magnet, at the Bloch Wall, the energies of a magnet change polarities in a broken figure eight. Once again, this is taken from Magnetism and Its Effects... "In the study of the unification of opposing potentials, we find on examining the energy there is the presence of the figure "8". We see this by making a visual study of the effects of the magnet's energies on the screen of a large cathode ray oscilloscope." "The upper part of this broken 8 shows a negative magnetic force, while the bottom is shown to have a positive charge and also reverses the direction of the spin."

Albert Roy Davis was the first to discover that each pole has a different effect on biological systems. He found in his research that the North pole energy has great healing potential, and the South pole can be very dangerous. The North pole energy eliminated or greatly improved many health problems. The South pole energy, for the most part, worsened health problems. Do magnetic fields from powerlines cause cancer? South pole magnetic fields can cause many health problems, and cancer is one of them according to Davis. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articl ... id=2626995

Scientists have an incorrect understanding of the true nature of magnetism, so the anwers they are searching for will not be forthcoming. Here is another brief explanation by Davis and Rawls in their fourth book, The Magnetic Blueprint of Life. "Gravity, electricity, the weak force, the strong force, and such, cannot be scientifically examined for more understanding of Nature and the universe without the acceptance and adoption of the separate natural energy of magnetism. Subatomic physics--the proton, electron, neutron, smaller atomic particles--is incapable of furthering studies for clearer understanding without natural magnetism's separate energies." "Magnetism has been relegated to an inferior position in relation to electricity and gravity. As long as this concept exists in the scientific community, there will be only theories on theories, confusion on confusion."

There is plenty more that I could add to this, but I think I've made my point. Davis and Rawls were geniuses and I think we should give them the credit they deserve. If you feel so inclined to learn more about Davis and Rawls, you'll find that I've only scratched the surface of their incredible discoveries. Take a look at this. http://www.teslatech.info/ttstore/repor ... /scope.htm

[Rex]

Here's one more I should mention. The "spin effect" is yet another discovery that was really made by Albert Roy Davis. Here are a few more quotes from The Magnetic Blueprint of Life. "The same laws of magnetism discovered by Albert Roy Davis apply to the proton, the electron, the atom, as a magnet, touching upon all fields of human knowledge." "Science News (vol. 112, September 24, 1977, p. 196) published, as Science News of the Week, a "discovery" entitled Proton Spin Surprise. Naturally, and we believe such a word aptly applies here, the spin of protons was not a surprise to many thousands of interested persons and scientists who have read the book, Magnetism and Its Effects on the Living System (Exposition Press, Hicksville, New York), first published in 1974. A specific drawing on page 93 of this publication shows the figure eight, unlike energies joining, and sufficient explanation is given for the differences when the energies are alike."

In this same book Davis and Rawls comment on A. C. Tam and W. Happer's Physical Review Letters. "In their Physical Review Letters (vol. 38 P. 278), they describe two Columbia University physicists' discovery that "light beams, that spontaneously split into two, repel and attract one another." We trust the reader will understand that whatever animal we are discussing, a beam of light, a proton, an atom, we are describing the same experience. Should we not point out that we have, for over twenty-five years, advised the scientific community of this phenomena? This is a matter of science, not of ego."

[bdw000]

I am not arguing that magnetism has no effect on living systems, nor am I an expert in this field. My guess is that their practical work with magnetism is probably valid.

However, I have this book, and I found nothing in it to support the claim of the "figure 8" magnetic field. I was hoping that there would be some sort of EVIDENCE for the claim, but all you get is some drawings, which prove nothing at all. Nor was there any discussion (maybe I missed it) of why the 'ole iron filings do not show this figure 8 pattern.

I found their site "magnetlabs.com," but no evidence for the "Davis and Rawls concept" (the figure 8 nature of magnetic fields) was to be found (by me anyway).

Claims without evidence are about as meaningless as the famous "interpretations" of modern physics!

If their own website shows no such evidence, I'm guessing you can't provide any links and/or books that do?

[bboyer]

However, I have this book, and I found nothing in it to support the claim of the "figure 8" magnetic field. I was hoping that there would be some sort of EVIDENCE for the claim, but all you get is some drawings, which prove nothing at all. Nor was there any discussion (maybe I missed it) of why the 'ole iron filings do not show this figure 8 pattern.

I found their site "magnetlabs.com," but no evidence for the "Davis and Rawls concept" (the figure 8 nature of magnetic fields) was to be found (by me anyway).

With an electromagnet, http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... rt=60#p917

[bdw000]

With an electromagnet, http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... rt=60#p917

Thanks a lot arc-us. Lots of really nifty things on that page.

But I have a question: what is a "rodin coil" ? a very small amount of googling suggests that it is a bit more complicated than a simple bar magnet, or even the usual electromagnet. It is not obvious to me that this supports Davis and Rawls.

If the "figure 8" magnetic field was correct, why not see it with a bar magnet? That is what the above authors are claiming, that the figure 8 configuration applies to ALL simple magnets.

Also, the lower Naudin picture looks like it has been overlaid with graphics to show the field lines. I assume that is correct? Correct me if I am wrong about that. But the real question is, why doesn't the typical "iron filings" demonstration show the supposed figure 8 of the magnetic field, for any magnet? I am not saying I know that the "figure 8" configuration is wrong (no expert here), just seems like there should be a pic with a bar magnet and the compass in the middle of the bar should be pointing out, to support Davis and Rawls.

That diagram of the quadrapole field lines is basically the same as drawings from the "vortex ring" aether theory crowd showing a cross-section of two vortex rings (making up an electron or proton). I dont' know why I like "vortex theory."

[bboyer]

I'm with you bdw, having wondered about the same things. A few years ago I even purchased a little visual gizmo at some educational site that sold magnetic learning materials (all types and sizes of magnets, magnetic film, etc). It was basically a rounded-ends, cylindrical magnet enclosed by a clear plastic, open-ended housing which contained iron filings. The filings were separated by the housing from direct contact with the magnet so you were able to shake the thing around and could slide the magnet in and out. The iron filings would line up perpendicular to the magnet, against the clear plastic housing walls, providing a nice 3D demo. Pretty nifty toy. Wish I could easily find the thing now, but it's packed away in a box somewhere from when I moved years ago. It seems I recall seeing a slight tendency to show a neutral point around the center of the magnet between the poles (as demonstrated by the center compass in the photo of the Rodin coil or electromagnet from the other thread), where the filings tended to gather less densely. Could be my faulty recall, too, it's been a while since I played with the thing. But I don't recall it being a particularly distinct demonstration, either. Anyway, it's always bugged me, too, that if true it should be easy to demonstrate.

There's a youtube video link somewhere in one of these threads, recently posted, that shows how to visualize magnetic fields by filling a clear jar with vegetable oil or some such and cutting up steel wool into fine particles that then suspend nicely throughout the oil volume into which a bar magnet is suspended. Unfortunately, the clip I saw wasn't very distinct ... but it seems this, or some similar setup, could clearly settle the question one way or the other.

[seasmith]

bdw000 wrote:

Nor was there any discussion (maybe I missed it) of why the 'ole iron filings do not show this figure 8 pattern.

How 'bout the magnetic quadrapole, a more natural volumetric configuration;
would it present as a 'figure 8' shape in plan view (cross-section or x-ray type photogragh ?

[bdw000]

How 'bout the magnetic quadrapole, a more natural volumetric configuration;
would it present as a 'figure 8' shape in plan view (cross-section or x-ray type photogragh ?

I'm guessing it would, but that's not what Davis and Rawls are talking about: they are saying that any ONE magnet has a figure 8 field configuration. Using 4 magnets arranged to produce a figure 8 field is totally different.

Something I read in the last few years (I think it was a book, not something online) seemed like it might be relevant. The author said that the "iron filings demo" with magnets actually cannot be taken to show "where the magnetic field is," becuase all the filings ACT LIKE MAGNETS, and that how the magnets interact with each other will be stronger than "how the magnetic field lines up the filings." Seems like he might have a point, but it also seems like it might be splitting hairs, or a "chicken and egg" situation that isn't really relevant. Anyone have any thoughts on this idea, pro or con?

HELP NEEDED !

Anyone here remember either an article here or a forum post about a Virginia Tech professor discovering that magnets have TWO poles at "each" pole ? They were doing VERY detailed mapping of the magnetic field around magnets, using robotics I think. Of course, zero publicity for such a significant discovery (of course, I don't "know" that the discovery is correct).

Sometime in the last few years I printed out at least one article about this, pics and all. It seemed like it was very serious discovery. But I can't find my printouts. I am not absolutely sure that I saw the article here, or that the guy(s) is from Virginia Tech. Anyone remember the really neat 3D graphics they had?

If anyone knows what I am talking about please post what you know of the sources for this info.

Thanks.

[seasmith]

bdw000,

No, just one volumetric magnet, as per Stefanr's posting (second image in the thread):

http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/forum/phpB ... php?id=902

[Rex]

When you bring the North pole of one magnet toward the South pole of another magnet, the Bloch Walls (and figure eights) in each magnet become one. So, if you had two magnets with the North and South poles touching, the Bloch Wall is at the exact spot where the two magnets meet. If you have 20 magnets, one on top of the other, you still only have one figure eight and one Bloch Wall.

A compass can't accurately show the Bloch Wall, you need a magnetometer that is designed to distinguish between the North and South poles. The only magnetometers on the market that I know of that will show the Bloch Wall are sold by the R. B. Annis Company (I have one). When you place it at the center of any magnet (or magnets) the meter reads zero, meaning no magnetic field.

As far as a demonstration of the figure eight with a bar magnet, I have a video from the Albert Roy Davis lab that shows it. Some barrium ferrite is placed in a large, clear glass container and filled with water. Next, a cylinder shaped magnet (the poles are separated better) with the poles at each end is held vertically in the water and stirred. Once the particles are swirling around the container pretty well the stirring ceases and the cylinder magnet is held vertically in the center of the container. Then you see the figure eight. There is a website on the web with of photo of this experiment, it's jarrotsierra.com. I haven't gone on the site recently because a message comes up on the google search engine that says"this site may harm your computer". Dr. Ralph Sierra was one of the doctors that worked with Davis and Rawls and he reproduced many of their experiments. There are some good photos of Dr. Sierra, Albert Roy Davis and other scientists on the site. Plus, there are photos of electromagnetic healing devices that Sierra used to save the lives of many people, and these devices were (and still are) illegal in the United States. I hope they fix the problems on their site.

[Rex]

I decided to do a search on "diagram of the Bloch Wall" and I found some diagrams that are in an article titled, Diamagnetic Gravity Vortexes, by Richard LeFors Clark. This information was taken from the book, Anti-gravity and the World Grid, by David Hatcher Childress.

Several of these diagrams were taken directly from Magnetism and Its Effects on the Living System, the first book by Davis and Rawls. All three of the diagrams on this page came from Davis and Rawls' book. http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/cienc ... ywg054.gif

The last sentence of the first paragraph on this page reads, "the newest advances in the science of magnetism have shown that there is a positive/negative polarity reversal that occurs in the center of a magnetic field (see below diagram). Again, this is in Magnetism and Its Effects... , yet there is no mention whatsoever of Albert Roy Davis or Walter C. Rawls, Jr. It appears as if Richard LeFors Clark is another scientist trying to steal credit for discoveries made by Davis and Rawls. http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt ... 2&ct=image

There are many doctors that have tried to steal credit from Davis and Rawls too, and the most well known of them is Dr. William H. Philpott. Here is a quote from an article that was excerpted from a book he co-authored, Magnet Therapy. "In 1974, physicist Albert Roy Davis noted that positive and negative magnetic polarities have different effects upon biological systems." First of all Davis didn't "note" that the two poles have different effects, he discovered it, and that was in 1936. He published Magnetism and Its Effects... in 1974, but he actually wrote a book prior to that titled, The Anatomy of Biomagnetism. Can you see how the details are conveniently lost in his book? And you'll find that same statement all over the web on magnet therapy websites.

[Rex]

Take a look at the image near the bottom of the page of the "anisotropy cone" - in actuality, a figure eight. One of the quotes from Davis and Rawls regarding the figure eight is, "as small as small, and as large as large - and many in between", meaning the figure eight exists in the smallest matter to the largest matter, around the atom and around the universe itself, and many sizes in between. http://www.enterprisemission.com/physics.html

You can see the figure eight in some Hubble Telescope photos too.
http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/nebula/+1

Richard C. Hoagland discusses in, The Moon/Mars Connection, a photo taken of the lunar surface that reveals a tetrahedron in a circle. Take another look at the first photo taken of magnetic energy (by Albert Roy Davis). http://www.keelynet.com/energy/rawls1.htm

[Rex]

Why not add to the list to further prove my point? Here is yet another BS artist trying to steal credit from Davis and Rawls. "The mechanism is based on Wollin's recent discovery of a universal spiral theory. Wollin discovered that spirals are found throughout nature, from the galaxies, each one consisting of hundreds of billions of stars, down to the basic shape of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid), the bodies' ultimate genetic material." Wollin's? I don't think so! Again, read The Magnetic Blueprint of Life, by Davis and Rawls. They specifically mention DNA, the human zygote, etc. http://www.stopcancer.com/magnetswollenrpt.htm

And another. "Since every permanent magnet possess not only oriented magnetic moments but also classical spins orientation as well, then every permanent magnet possess it's own torsion field. (This fact was first experimentally discovered by A.I.Veinik.) Understanding this important property of magnetic fields allows us to understand a variety of phenomena, for instance the phenomenon known as "magnetization of water." A.I. Veinik? I don't think so! Read The Magnetic Blueprint of Life, by Davis and Rawls. http://www.centuryinter.net/tjs11/hist/shipov.htm

Here's another quote. "Torsion field, also called axion field, spin field, spinor field, and microlepton field is a scientific concept loosely based on Einstein-Cartan theory and some unorthodox solutions of Maxwell's equations. The torsion field concept was conceived in the Soviet Union by a group of great physicists in the 1980s." The Magnetic Blueprint of Life was published in 1979, and Davis and Rawls stressed the importance of "spin" in their first book, in 1974. Davis and Rawls specifically stated that there was no indication from the Russian research that they had read (and Russian scientists were sending them info on Russian research) that they knew anything about the discovery of the two separate and distinct energies of magnetism.

Why not one more? "A.I. Veinik measured some properties of "chronal" fields and found that two types of "chronons" exist ("plus" and "minus" chronons). It is important to emphasize that A.I. Veinik concluded that the sign of the "chronon" depended on orientation of it's spin [4]." Now, here is a quote from, The Magnetic Blueprint of Life, by Davis and Rawls. "The spin is what governs the action of any particle in matter and is the correct analysis in identifying the positive or negative function of natural energies." Here is the article I quoted from. http://www.eioba.com/a85528/torsion_fie ... v_and_heim

[Rex]

I found an interview with Walter Rawls from June 5, 2008. It's only 30 minutes long, but it's good. http://www.blogtalkradio.com/kywaterfue ... -Roy-Davis

[Rex]

I hope this isn't getting old, but the truth is the truth, right? And that's what I'm trying to illuminate. His name is Claude Swanson.

Here is a quote from Laurance Johnston, Ph.D. about Swanson's work. "As discussed in Swanson’s book Life Force: the Scientific Basis, torsion fields are generated by particle spin. Whenever a charged particle produces electromagnetic waves, it also creates torsion waves. Because atomic particles spin (e.g., electrons, protons, and neutrons), it is a universal force." http://www.healingtherapies.info/Sungazing.htm

As I've already pointed out, the "spin" of particles was discovered by Albert Roy Davis, not the Russians.

Here is another quote from the section of the article about Torsion. "Because they don’t follow the rules, torsion fields also can explain many well-documented psychic phenomena - for example, why a mother immediately senses that her son has been hurt in a war half way across the world, why qigong masters can exert healing many thousands of miles away, or why long-distance prayer may work."

Now back to Davis and Rawls. This is from an article Rawls wrote in 1976. "The lower the frequency of energy per second the more power is necessary for the distance travelled. The higher the frequency, the less power is necessary, and the longer the distance energy will travel, instantaneously." It's the higher frequencies that explain psychic experiences according to Davis and Rawls, as "the accepted basis of possible thought transmission could not operate in the 1 to 50 cycle range." The 1 to 50 cycle range are those frequencies principally used in ESP and brain vibration research.

In this same article written by Rawls, he wrote about Davis' discovery that "every magnet, every living and non-living system, has similar positive and negative balancing energies, the proof thereof - not just the theory..." And that's the point, Davis was able to prove it! Rawls also mentioned Davis' discovery of "the figure 8 in the joining of the positive and negative energies of nature", and that DNA and RNA form themselves in figures of 8. Rawls then goes on to write that "If Dr. Davis had been a Russian scientist, these two discoveries would have been published all over the world. The Russians may some day announce that they made these discoveries first. They haven't yet decided how to do this. If they make such announcements they will call it a creation not a discovery. This is not our understanding of Nature."

You might want to read this article, if you haven't already, that Davis and Rawls wrote. Pay particular attention to what they wrote about the Russians and their tendancy to take credit for discoveries that are not their own. The truth is that much of the technology that Russia and China have originated in the United States. http://www.teslatech.info/ttstore/repor ... /scope.htm

Torsion fields are said to explain phenomenon in physics, parapsychology, medicine, etc., that were previously unexplainable. Davis and Rawls made these connections many years ago in the science that they founded, Biomagnetism. Science hasn't changed at all. Many scientists still put great effort into seeking out and co-opting someone else's lifetime of work to boost their own status and income, as they have for a long, long time.