Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

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: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:46 am

Junglelord
Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 2:17 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Not to derail this thread but its important to note that the common misconception of dinosaurs collapsing under their own weight is due to incorrect structural parameters being used to consider their relationship and effectiveness against gravity. The structural model used is the one commonly taught in medical texts, beams and levers and fulcrums.
Confused

Thats really sad as beams and levers and fulcrums will never work for your bicep and a 100pd dumbbell let alone a dinosaur.
Shocked

The dinosaur can stand up all by itself with no extra help from any other model then to introduce Tensegrity Engineering instead of Beams, Levers and Fulcrums. Tensegrity is the brainchild of Buckminster Fuller. It stands for Tensional Integration.


Once viewed as a Tensegrity Structure where the Fascia (connective tissue) is the Continual Tensional Component and the Bones are the Discontinuous Compression Component the model is perfect and quite effecient. Voila you have just completed your first Tensegrity class and learned the ability to make huge structures both biological and man made.

Chris Marx
Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:13 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
junglelord wrote:
Not to derail this thread but its important to note that the common misconception of dinosaurs collapsing under their own weight is due to incorrect structural parameters being used to consider their relationship and effectiveness against gravity. The structural model used is the one commonly taught in medical texts, beams and levers and fulcrums.


Right, which makes you wrong (there's enough discussion to in these lists to disprove the Skeptics Jurassic Park). Even the mammoth would be too heavy for existence today. & architecture until ~650 years ago shows that there was a slight increase of gravitation even at the time of the LGJ (Last Great Jolt) in the middle of the Trecento, as proved by the GCR (Gregorian Calendar Reform). The LGJ stands at the end of ST (SchizoTime), during which in the (up till now) the last series of global catastrophes (the Apocalyptic ones caused by Venus & Mercury) Antiquity was destroyed (during the following 2 to 3 centuries more than 3'500 new cities were built throughout Europe following the new climatic & gravitational conditions (since then hardly 3 dozen)).

Chris Marx
Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 9:49 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
junglelord wrote:
You ovbiously did not understand my post. Which still makes me right and therefore your wrong.

I am still working on the Spintronics level of understanding.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/34317/Spintro ... rd-Johnson

Maybe we could debate that?
Confused



Thanks or the links. But Tensegrity doesn't refute the observations from natural history & archeology & ICS (Informed Common Sense) & the EVU that dinos (including their big birds) lived & could only have existed under less gravitation.

There is nothing to be said against Spintronics as far as it follows natural lore (qualifying) research & is showing up engineering progress. I have only had a brief look through the book yet, but it doesn't appear to refute the simple basic explanation in Part 1 of the EVU about induction & magnetism, while illustrating excellent bipolar vortex structures, such as we can also look for in substance-relevant bipolar gravitation, transporting energy & momentum & foreseeably our future space ships, with near to "free energy" (but non-EM) implosion drives (as already known from Schauberger's attempts toward the end of WW2).
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:58 am

will be continued......
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:10 pm

Chris Marx
Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 2:24 pm Post subject: Re: Sedated Reply with quote
earls wrote:
davesmith_au: Does this not count as an "observation?"

http://home.slac.stanford.edu/pressrele ... atter2.jpg


If one cannot see through or behind the blue colored space it is DM (or "Dark Energy". as they also call the non-understood phenomena, in reality being electricity in its 1st aggregate state as potential energy at ~-5'000'000 °C, ie being of no substance (cf The Primeval Phenomenon of Substance Formation http://www.paf.li/perceptions.htm#_Toc2338372 The Formation of Substance).

DM can, of course, be observed but not seen in the sun (behind the vortexes), the same as in the energy balls ("atoms") where, when torn open, the suddenly released ~-5'000'000 °C make the atomic bombs: how else could an "atom" or a star contain such enormous amounts of energy? (Don't tell us the absurdity of having been pre-charged by a "big bang".)
_________________
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:26 pm

Junglelord
Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:32 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Minus 6 million Celcius???

Well Mr Meyl has much more insightful obervation on the dual opposite vortex, the hydromagnetic field, longitudinal electricity, four field theory for both magnets and electricity and a full unified field vortex theory where gravity is a closed line field of longitudinal energy.

Mr Meyl explains the nature of the thermal relationship to the model within absolute zero, without resorting to a imagined absolute level of minus 6 million c with dark matter.

Quote:


Unified Field Theory
* electromagnetic interaction (open field lines)
* gravitation (closed field lines)
* strong interaction (does not exist)
* weak interaction (only special aspect)

the interactions are a result of the field dependent speed of light.

Temperature Model

The attempt to apply the formulas of the kinetic theory of gases to solids and liquids only succeeds, if additional supplements and improvements are introduced. Since at all events it concerns temperature, thus the same physical quantity, of course also an uniform interpretation should be demanded, which in addition should stand in full accord to the presented design of an integrated theory (TOE).

Against the background of the new theory of objectivity we consider, what happens, if for instance the local field strength is increased by a flying past particle. The matter located at this point is contracted for a short time. By coming closer to each other, the individual elementary vortices mutually reinforce their field and are further compressed. Sometime
this process comes to a standstill, is reversed and swings back.

At the same time every single particle, which in this way carries out an oscillation of size, has an effect on its neighbours with its field, to also stimulate these to the same oscillation, but delayed by some time. This phenomenon spreads in all directions. The propagation only will become stationary, if all neighbouring elementary vortices pulsate with the same
amplitude. It now should be recorded:

The oscillation of contraction of the elementary vortices we call temperature. Temperature is the oscillation of contraction of the elemental vortices resulting from the speed of light dependent on field strength.

Also this thermodynamic state variable therefore is a result of the variable speed of light. At the absolute zero of temperature no oscillation takes place anymore, whereas the upper limit lies in infinity. Since the cause for temperature represents an oscillation of the local electromagnetic field strength around the cosmic field strength, the following phenomena must be considered as excitation and cause, as dictated by the fundamental field equation

1. Electromagnetic waves are able to stimulate matter particles to synchronous oscillations of contraction by their alternating field. In doing so energy in form of heat is transferred to the particles, with the result that their temperature is increased. The wave is absorbed completely, if the thermal oscillation corresponds with the frequency of the wave. We speak of thermal radiation.

2. But also the two dual vortices, the eddy current and the potential vortex can cause oscillations of contraction. This immediately becomes clear, if we consider a vortex as the special case of the wave, in which the oscillation takes place around a more or less stationary vortex centre. In the case of the decay of vortices, of the transition of energy from vortices to matter, the increase in temperature is measurable.

3. Flying past particles, in particular unbound and free movable charge carriers (e) produce an alternating field for other fixed particles. Doing so kinetic energy can be transformed in temperature, thus in energy of pulsation. A good example is the inelastic collision. But it can also be pointed to numerous chemical reactions. Whoever searches for a concrete example, takes two objects in his hands and rubs them against one another. In that case the particles which are at the frictional surfaces are being moved past each other in very small distance, in this way causing oscillations of pulsation, which propagate into the inside of the objects according to the thermal conductivity. We speak of friction heat.

Heat Energy and the Dual Vortex

The oscillation of contraction shows two characteristic properties, which must be looked at separately: the amplitude and the frequency.

Temperature describes solely the amplitude of the oscillation of size.
The heat energy however is determined by both, by the amplitude as well as by the frequency.

Consequently the ideas of temperature and heat energy should be kept strictly apart. It therefore isn't allowed to set this oscillation equal to the electromagnetic wave in tables of frequency.

To be correct two tables should be given, one for the wave, characterized by a propagation with the speed of light, and another one for oscillations of contraction, thus for stationary phenomena and phenomena bound to matter.

Therefore it should be understood that the rules govern temperature and heat energy concerning the vortex.

Temperature describes the amplitude of the oscillation of size of all spherical vorticies.

The Heat Energy is determined by both the amplitute and the frequency.


This model concept provides sound explanations for a whole number of open questions, i.e. why the temperature occurs independent of the state and even in solids, where a purely kinetic interpretation fails. Every single elementary particle after all is carrier of a temperature.

With increasing temperature most materials expand, because the need for room, purely geometrically seen, increases for larger amplitude of oscillation. This principle is used in the case of a bi-metal thermometer.

In the case of solids the thermal oscillation of size is passed on primarily by the electrons in the atomic hull. Good electric conductors therefore at the same time also have a high thermal conductivity. An example of an application is the electric resistance thermometer.

In the case of gases the entire atoms carry out this task, for which reason a kinetic theory becomes applicable as an auxiliary description.

For extreme amplitudes of oscillation the atoms partly or entirely lose their enveloping electrons, when they change into the plasma state.

Finally the model concept even limits the second law of thermodynamics, which contains the postulate that it is impossible to design a cyclic working machine, which does nothing else, as to withdraw heat from a heat container and to convert it into mechanical work.

http://www.meyl.eu/go/index.php?dir=47_ ... sublevel=0




Properly understood in that context we can see that the universe is a unified field of dual opposite vortex electromagnetic spirals that create electron/positron pairs that build all other realites. Light is a dual pair electron/positron in relativistic rotation to each other. Electrons are vortex pairs of the outer electron centripedial potential current vortex and the innear positron centrufugal eddy current vortex. That way the electron is not a monopole. All other atomic particles can be built from the electron configuration of dual opposite spiral votex's enclosed. Which is the same information given to us by Howard Johnson of Spintronics. Which is why the magnetic model of four opposite spiral vortexs is the fundamental archetype in both four field electricity theory and four field magnatism theory


The proper relationship of temperature and heat energy can then be properly understood in that unified model as described above as it relates to the vortx spiral pair and the archetypes.

Consequently the ideas of temperature and heat energy should be kept strictly apart. It therefore isn't allowed to set this oscillation equal to the electromagnetic wave in tables of frequency.

Answers to open questions of thermodynamics by Konstantine Meyl:

1. Temperature occurs independent of the state in which the
matter is (unified theory).

2.Temperature even occurs in solids, where a purely kinetic
interpretation fails (unification).

3. Each elementary particle is carrier of a temperature.

4. Expansion with increasing temperature because of the
increasing need for room for larger amplitude of oscillation
(principle: bi-metal-thermometer).

5. For solids the thermal oscillation of size is primarily passed on
by the electrons in the atomic hull. Good electric conductors
therefore at the same time also have a high thermal conductivity.
(principle: electrical resistance thermometer).

6. For gases the entire atoms carry out this task, for which reason
a kinetic auxiliary description becomes applicable.

7. For extreme amplitudes of oscillation the atoms partly or entirely
lose their enveloping electrons, when they change into the
plasma state.

8.The second law of thermodynamics loses its claim to be
absolute and at best reads:
with today's technology we are not capable, to design a cyclic working machine, which does
nothing else, as to withdraw heat from a heat container and to
convert it into mechanical work.
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:29 pm

Chris
Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 6:08 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
junglelord wrote:
Minus 6 million Celcius???

~-5'000'000 °C. Be again referred to The Primeval Phenomenon of Substance Formation http://www.paf.li/perceptions.htm#_Toc2338372 "The Formation of Substance".

junglelord wrote:
Well Mr Meyl has much more insightful observation on the dual opposite vortex, the hydromagnetic field, longitudinal electricity, four field theory for both magnets and electricity and a full unified field vortex theory where gravity is a closed line field of longitudinal energy.
[...]



However, My dear Lord, the simple GFMI by straight observation
(1) proves Mr Meyl's UQTs quite wrong;
(2) Mr Meyl's UQTs have not lead to the understanding of Gravitation as substance-relevant, let alone to proving them by experiment (eg with the GFMI);
(3) in the form you quoted these UQTs not the slightest indication points to an explanation of SGR (http://www.sources.li/sgr-e.pdf) transporting energy & momentum at multi-c (c meaning the speed of light or, in fact, anything of EM nature); & also
(4) your favorite UQTs being employed in such areas as localizing earthquake prediction, or at the prevention of gravitationally caused aircraft, rocket or submarine mishaps & such trifles.

In plain words: the discussion-groups here not withstanding, the universe is run by SGR, ie by qualitative gravitation, & not by EM

++++

SGR = Substance-relevant Gravitational Resonance
cf http://www.sources.li/SGR-e.pdf

GFMI = Gravitational Field Measuring Instrument:
cf http://www.sources.li/gfmi-proof.pdf,
http://www.sources.li/physical-congress-2006.pdf;
output of experiment online in
http://evu.paf.li, substance-relevant in
http://evu.paf.li/rrd/hg.html - Mercury
http://evu.paf.li/rrd/cu.html - Copper
http://evu.paf.li/rrd/sn.html - Tin
http://evu.paf.li/rrd/pb.html - Lead

LQS = Logical Qualitative System

UQT = Unlogical Quantitative Theories
(cf http://www.paf.li/Quantification.pdf)[/code]
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:31 pm

Junglelord
Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 7:07 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I think its ok too disagree Chris. Your model has a new lower limit temperature. Meyls has a new upper limit temperature. You both have a vortex model. Those commonalites and differences are ovbious.
Cool
I believe that the work in the field of actual test observations in the electric lab leave no question as to the validity of the work of Konstanitine Meyl and longitudinal energy wireless transfer as a fundamental form of electricity as first demonstrated by Nilola Tesla.
http://www.meyl.eu/go/index.php?dir=47_ ... sublevel=0
Paramahamsa Tewari has made a breakthrough in a method of electrical power generation by magnets.
http://www.tewari.org/
Howard Johnson has reexamined the same in Magnets and Spintronics.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/34317/Spintro ... rd-Johnson

All three have a vortex model that supports each others model by experiments in Electricity and Magnatism. The model does not need any departures into esoteric matter or objects or away from absolute zero. I find that clear and concise and refreshing.

You yourself admit to not having completed the necessary lab work to prove the theorectical model you have designed. That may be the crux of the matter. Our own departures in the Vortex Electric Universe model seem to stem from that position. Mine are validated by three independent researchers with fundamentally the same theory and observable effects. That in and of itself makes it difficult to prove incorrect from a purely theoretical model. Predictability, testability, scalability is the focus of the EU. The EU depends on observerable and scaleable effects that can be tested time and time again and in fact have already been shown and proven, just not accepted in modern cosmology.

The only UQT is the view of yours chris that the work of the three men mentioned as to be incorrect or invalid and that a purely theoretical theory called the EVU that cannot be tested or has not been tested as noteworthy in comparison.

Get back to me when you have the lab results chris.
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:00 pm

Chris Marx
Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 8:39 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
junglelord wrote:
Get back to me when you have the lab results chris.

What "lab results", if you please?

For the GFMI showing SGR there's no need for a lab, it merely shows nature as it is, ie - in the words of Paul Scherrer (the Swiss Physicist): Nature is as simple as it can be, simpler is simply not possible. With the complicated UQTs about EM you & your heroes simply fall into a trap similar to the "mass attraction" one, from which the natural sciences despite Sir Isaac's warning have never freed themselves.

The hard facts remain: the universe is run by SGR, ie by qualitative substance-relevant bipolar vortex structured variable gravitation, & not by EM. Whether you accept observing it or not.

++++

SGR = Substance-relevant Gravitational Resonance
cf http://www.sources.li/SGR-e.pdf

GFMI = Gravitational Field Measuring Instrument:
cf http://www.sources.li/gfmi-proof.pdf,
http://www.sources.li/physical-congress-2006.pdf;
output of experiment online in
http://evu.paf.li, substance-relevant in
http://evu.paf.li/rrd/hg.html - Mercury
http://evu.paf.li/rrd/cu.html - Copper
http://evu.paf.li/rrd/sn.html - Tin
http://evu.paf.li/rrd/pb.html - Lead

UQT = Unlogical Quantitative Theories
(cf http://www.paf.li/Quantification.pdf)[/code]
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:01 pm

davesmith_au
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:14 am Post subject: EVU, GFMI etc etc etc... Reply with quote
Chris Marx you seem to not understand the nature of scientific inquiry and debate. All we have seen from you so far are your own assertions, tacked onto the works of someone else who seems to be relatively unheard of.

The vast bulk of the information you reference is likewise nothing more than assertions. For example the pdf you link to (http://www.sources.li/gfmi-proof.pdf) called "proof" has no proof of anything in it, save the proof that the author has different ideas to the rest of the world...

Your posts have offered nothing new since the first one, you seem to be regurgitating the same links over and over. Nor have you offered anything coherent by way of rebuttal to other suggestions offered to you.

This is hardly the way to have your ideas given serious consideration by others. Perhaps, if you have something to offer, you should reconsider your approach.
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:05 pm

Arc-us
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:17 am Post subject: Reply with quote
Thought this might make an interesting side-by-side comparison. Left image is originally from this thread, LINK: ELECTRICITY involved in the formation of planets? and referred to also in this one, LINK: Snowflakes. Right image is from the 1st page of this thread.

ImageImage

As mentioned in the "Snowflake" thread, the image on the left is referenced by "Figure 2" in the original documentation from The Max Planck Institute, thusly:

"Figure 2: Features of a complex plasma (3 seconds superposition of particle trajectories)"

About Figure 2 wrote:
Under microgravity conditions the typical static and dynamic behaviour of complex plasmas is illustrated in figure 2. This figure shows a 3 second trajectory fragment of the microparticles, color coded from red to blue. The dominant features which can be investigated here are:

- a microparticle free "void" in the centre of the system for most experimental parameters;
- a sharp boundary between the void and the complex plasma;
- demixing of complex plasma clouds formed by microparticles of different sizes;
- crystalline structures along the central axis;
- vortices in different areas away from the central axis.

All of the above mentioned features have been investigated in detail over the last years.
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:07 pm

Chris Marx
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:18 am Post subject: Re: EVU, GFMI etc etc etc... Reply with quote
davesmith_au wrote:
Chris Marx you seem to not understand the nature of scientific inquiry and debate.


I agree that refusing it leaves such an impression. It is caused by replacing "scientific" by ICS (informed common sense) inquiry leading to repeatable results by 3rd parties. The reason for doing so is CoR (Collective Repression) as we know it since Velikovsky, proven since by all knowledge fabricated by the P[hilosophies]R[eligions]S[cience]-Conglomerate when compared to directly observable natural & historical lore: thus in the case of the sciences the collective on the excitation background of the experienced traumatic global catastrophes teaches us totally absurd physics together with crazily distorted history. The method of fabricating such delusive knowledge is what you know as "scientific inquiry & debate", & because this method is leading straight to CoR & thus to IBC (Irrational Behavior of the Collective) in Knowledge corruption, Holocaust, War,
Terrorism, & Destructive Technology - the questioning of which lead Velikovsky to the RHNH (Reconstruction of Human & Natural History) - I simply refuse to become part of such madness.

davesmith_au wrote:
The vast bulk of the information you reference is likewise nothing more than assertions. For example the pdf you link to (http://www.sources.li/gfmi-proof.pdf) called "proof" has no proof of anything in it...

But of course it shows the principle proof of substance-relevant gravitation! It is a perfect example of proof by ICS: on a neutral GFMI beam there is no controlled movement, while on a substance equipped beam there not only is, but of different resonance for each substance. You can see this online @ http://evu.paf.li, running now for nearly 4 years.

davesmith_au wrote:
...save the proof that the author has different ideas to the rest of the world...


Now this, Dave Smith, is no proof that the ICS proposed here are as wrong as the knowledge fabricated by the ORS-Conglomerate.
davesmith_au wrote:
Your posts have offered nothing new since the first one, you seem to be regurgitating the same links over and over. Nor have you offered anything coherent by way of rebuttal to other suggestions offered to you.


Yes. There is hardly anything new to say if not challenged by someone's problem here. As for any rebuttals, they are obviously part of the links' contents.
Of course, illustrating your problem with scientific against ICS procedure, as an example of another principle ICS proof the ILJE (Inherent Logic of the Joshua Event) could be quoted (cf slides 06 & 07 in http://www.paf.li/moscow_2001.htm) about the doings of young Venus near earth, its destabilization explained in http://www.paf.li/Axis%20Overturn.pdf - all of it showing up the absurdities of PRS knowledge.

davesmith_au wrote:
This is hardly the way to have your ideas given serious consideration by others. Perhaps, if you have something to offer, you should reconsider your approach.


No ideas are being offered by the RHNH, merely the results of L[ogical]Q[qualified]S[ystems] analysis. It is the readers' problem to judge them with their own ICS, incorporate them in their own ideas or just generally arrive at new conclusions within their own domains of knowledge.

The ICS approach demonstrated here has shown definitely that gravitation is something quite different from what science claims, & that SGR even offers multi-c transport of energy & momentum throughout the universe. So let's be satisfied with little things for the time being & go to work on them with ICS.
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:37 pm

davesmith_au
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:02 pm Post subject: Re: Re: EVU, GFMI etc etc etc... Reply with quote
Ok Chris, NMMNG (No More Mr. Nice Guy). Your CBS (Constant Badgering Self-assertions) are BQT (Becoming Quite Tiresome). This forum is a place of IDD (Intelligent Discussion and Debate) not an ESP (Ego Stroker's Paradise).

Should you wish to PTLOD (Persue This Line Of Discussion) I feel we will NGA (Not Get Anywhere). You have already MYP (Made Your Point), at least HDT (Half a Dozen Times).

I'm sorry if our SSA (Somewhat Scientific Approach) has you TB (Totally Bamboozled) but it's the way we DTAH (Do Things Around Here). I hope you now GTM (Get The Message) and POQ (Post in Other Quarters) as your insistance on BS (Being Sarcastic) and TRIPE (Totally Random Individual Pumping of Ego) will not win you many CONVERTS (converts in UC [Upper Case]). Do I MMC (Make Myself Clear)?

For those who understand plain English, your posts are looking more like self-serving advertising, than discussion or debate. You have already posted links to your site where anyone can read up on what it is you propose. Any further posting of the same material will be considered an attempt to derail the thread, and will be treated accordingly. Kindly bring something new to the discussion, or bow out. You have had your say, over and over. There are others here who would like to continue fruitful discussion.
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:38 pm

***** 3 PAGES LATER WHEN CHRIS LEFT THE BUILDING THE DISCUSSION RESUMED *****
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:40 pm

Junglelord
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:44 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
My interest in Magnatism has taken center stage the last few days. I came across this thesis on Magnatism from the Over Unity people and control of sub atomic spin as well as control of spin fields.

Quote:
Magnetism has been studied for centuries and almost from the beginning seemingly wild claims as to its importance have been stated. As I too have now studied magnetism it becomes much more obvious that as the 2nd most powerful force we have discovered, these claims may not be so inaccurate. My studies have led me all the way into quantum physics at the smallest measurable places where this force is detected. My surprise is what Leedskin and many of the others have been pointing towards, that magnetism is actually two forces working in harmony. More specifically four forces. It may very well be that in the splitting of these magnetic flows lies the [Source] of free energy.

Engineering magnetism at the atomic level is the only piece we are missing at present. The needed mathematical relationships must be converted to useful formulas to accomplish this for each device considered.



What is magnetism?
At the roots of magnetism, within the atom, we discover 4 different sources which can result in a magnetic flow external to the atom itself. Magnetism is a force linked to 4 separate forms of spin at the atomic level.

1 - Proton Particle Spin [42.5781 Mhz / Tesla] NMR

2 - Proton Orbital Spin [around 2 Mhz / Tesla] NMR

3 - Electron Particle Spin [28.025 Ghz / Tesla] ESR [Reversed component from Proton]

4 - Electron Orbital Spin [around 12 Ghz / Tesla] ESR

The 4 types of spin are all very different and distinct. In the normal magnetic field all these spins are setting in alignment and create basically one polarized magnetic field, in which the Proton is the dominant force in weight [mass is 1836 times higher]. However the Electron has a magnetic moment around 658.2106881 times the Proton. In a coherent magnetic field with both a Proton and an Electron it should be noted that the electron is spinning the opposite direction of the Proton. It's particle momentum is reversed from its magnetic field. When combined within a Neutron this becomes important, as well as establishing an orbital repulsion.

In the non magnetized atoms these spins are distributed such that none align consistently as they orbit the atom. In the atoms of Iron Cobalt and Nickel these spins come into alignment enough to create a coherent flow. In Iron the Electron shell is magnetic and the Nucleus is not. In Cobalt both are magnetic. In Copper only the Proton shell is magnetized and the Electron shell is not.

As an atomic particle spins, its motion contains two different yet linked spin properties.

Angular momentum [the spin of mass]

Magnetic moment [the magnetic field]

The method in which atomic particles interact is through the charge of the particle, the magnetic field , spin coupling, and the strong force.

Charge:
Charge is a voltage potential. It attracts Electrons to Protons and it is completely balanced in Neutrons. An inverse distance squared force, reaches further out then Magnetism. Charge causes attraction or repulsion, and the result of a complete attraction creates a Neutron from a Proton [plus charge] and an Electron [minus charge] merging.

Magnetism:
Magnetism is an inverse distance cubed force. It is bipolar in any one magnet having a North and South.When Electron and Proton combine to form a Neutron the Electrons magnetism wins slightly, and the Neutron still has a very small negative magnetic moment. The atoms particles all have a magnetic field, as they move about they wobble or precess at some frequency. The Electron, Proton, and Neutron can be thought of as little spinning magnets, spinning in a dual cone shaped pattern, that may spread wider or narrower depending on the frequency and magnetic field they sit inside.

Spin Coupling:
This is a hard force to conceptualize, but can be easily grasped if holding a magnet next to a fast spinning copper cylinder. The spin of mass is not coupled by a charge, spin is coupled through a magnetic field crossing Electrons and Protons. In the spinning copper cylinder experiment, it does not matter which direction the magnets poles are pointing, as soon as its magnetic field crosses through the spinning copper the force is felt in the magnet. The two forces felt are "Spin Coupling" and "Magnetism" acting between the Copper and the Magnet. The Copper is a "Proton magnet," and the magnet is an "Electron magnet." The experiment shows why Electrons do not crash into the Nucleus of atoms. As you bring the magnet closer to the spinning Copper you feel the reverse magnetic force that results from the spin coupling. It pushes the magnet away, and also tries to drag it along at a distance, as well as spin it backwards as it orbits. The only thing missing in this experiment is the attracting voltage that would cause the magnet to begin orbiting the spinning cylinder like an Electron orbiting the Nucleus. If released the magnet will be shot off at high speed and hit the wall. So we see that as Electrons orbit the Nucleus it does not matter which way their magnetic poles turn they are still repelled by magnetism.


http://magnetism.otc.co.nz/Magnetism.htm
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:41 pm

Junglelord
Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 2:21 am Post subject: Reply with quote
This little bit of information helps us to understand why Tesla's pulsed DC Impulse Magnifying Transmitter operated as it did. I find the information on Copper and Spintronics to be an amazing find in my effort to understand all the parameters of the Tesla system as well as Birkelands experiments with the Terrella and the copper sphere. Pure copper is where electronics evolved from and all these observations of Faraday, Tesla, Birkeland and others were made using it. Other materials do not operate exactly the same which is why equal mass coupled the primary and secondary coils of the Magnifying Transmitter.
Wink

Quote:


DC pulse
A DC pulse will interact with copper differently then an AC one. It will cut off 3/4 of the circular spin cycle with a recovery time between pulses where resonance will try to start at the wires resonant frequency. It will greatly reduce one of the shells interactions.

A fast negative rise time pulse will shoot many more photons down the wire before the Protons shell can react with a sine function and turn electron shells spin angle into alignment with the wire where electron start to flow.

Torsion
Torsion works entirely different and is based on the length of the isotope chains, and the mass of the copper. This is a coherent torsion field with non coherent magnetic fields in each atom. It involves mass of nucleus spin and precession vibrations. NMR theory states that Photons can only be exchanged by copper atoms that are setting in the exact same magnetic field, thus will be responsive to the same frequency photons for radiation and absorption.

There is an exact frequency to magnetic field strength parameter established to determine what this frequency will be, and a resultant gyromagnetic ratio emitting photons as the mass containing nucleus is turned by the magnetic field rotation. Copper is 80 percent made of two nuclear isotopes with very close RF frequencies and a high nuclear magnetic moment, so is extremely responsive to the magnetic field at the proton shell. Electron and Proton shell photons are not being exchanged. They do not interact directly as they have no magnetic field strength as light, and they can freely pass in opposite directions through one another. This leads to the possibility that there is more then one kind of E field energy flow possible down copper wire.

NMR
The study of many over unity and anti gravity devices reveals the presence of coils and magnets positioned at 90 degrees to one another. The only place we find coils being used at 90 degrees in current technology is in the MRI or NMR scanners. This is the correct place to look for the answers. Howard Johnson used 90 degree placements of magnets. Wilbert Smith also used a 90 placement of magnets...square magnets and rectangular magnets are more efficent in progagation of these fields due to their ability to cancel spin and enhance spin.

Proton energy is easily tapped using the high nuclear magnetic materials, Copper, Aluminum, and Bismuth. I believe that the field of Protonics will be the greatest discovery of the 21st century and completely change the way we think of and interact with the world.

Independent control of electron and proton may be possible by pulsing two DC waves to opposite polarity down a wire, or from opposite ends. Frequency of the negative DC pulse would entrain the Electron shell and frequency of the positive pulse would entrain the proton shell as these are the only places their photons can interact. If 3 frequencies of each were used it may be possible to create almost any of the conditions we see in OU and AG devices. It has been recognized already that these photon flows as well as the electron currents can flow both directions simultaneously on one wire as waves.

They may be thus injected on opposing ends of the wire to flow towards one another. Hetrodyned frequency will become the parameter to manipulate tilt angles of the gyros of each shell, but the frequencies must combine on the shells of the copper and not before. A mixer stage would disperse the energy into a spread spectrum and the atoms will only absorb one of these frequencies at any one point along the wire. To deliver multiple frequencies DC pulsing would seem to work best using the slower of the pulses to shut off the faster of the pulses. Square waves will deliver these across a broad spectrum of NMR and ESR rates where more atoms will be set for absorption.

As a particle spins it couples energy in three EM methods:
Its [electrical charge] is seen to reach out as an inverse distance squared force. This force is divergent in all directions.

Its [magnetic field] is seen to reach out as an inverse distance cubed force. This is a raw force of dipole magnetism independent of frequency of precession. It is caused by the electron traversing a circle at .999999... the speed of light, and spinning a reverse direction, as it does. The Proton doing similar yet with a like direction of spin as orbit.

Its [RF field] is seen to absorb and radiate photons at its NMR or ESR frequency as a little point source of RF or microwave energy. This is a link between magnetisms dipole [precession frequency] and the photons frequency.

This interaction has the capacity to flip the dipole completely over increasing its energy by placing the magnetic moment in opposition, and the angular momentum in an aiding state with all opposite particles in the field. The only way that both magnetic polarized states could be stable is if there are a combination of 4 forces, 1 is always in opposition to the other 3. The forces at work here are magnetic polarity of the Proton in its orbital, magnetic polarity of the Electron in its orbital, Proton angular momentum, and Electron angular momentum.

Because the RF frequency is a function of the surrounding magnetic field strength, the particles may interact across a wide band of RF EM spectrum. That of electrons, reaching far in excess of there natural microwave range as well as far below, if they are removed from the atom as with an electric arc.



http://magnetism.otc.co.nz/GyroEffects.htm
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Magnetism: Form, Structure, & Dynamics

Unread postby StefanR » Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:45 pm

MGmirkin
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 7:11 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
@rc-us wrote:
Thought this might make an interesting side-by-side comparison. Left image is originally from this thread, LINK: ELECTRICITY involved in the formation of planets? and referred to also in this one, LINK: Snowflakes. Right image is from the 1st page of this thread.
Image
Image

[...]

Best,
arc-us

Interesting... But, I'm rather surprised nobody has yet pointed out this gem. I guess I'll claim first "notice" of the similarities?

(Alfven's solar circuit; noted in The Electric Sky and The Electric Universe monograph.)
Image

One sees certain similarities between the solar circuit diagram and the dusty plasma experiment. Certain things "line up," so to speak.

What do I see?


Points to ponder:



1. Poles of the sun's circuit diagram indicate current flow / "poles" (if one calls them that) of the plasma experiment indicate "electrodes."
2. The main current in the solar circuit diagram seems to flow in at the poles and out at the equator.
3. If one mirrors the upper and lower right secondary circuits to the left side of the image, one replicates the quadruple "circuit" / "vortex" (whatever one wants to call it) of the magnetic field diagram with four quadrants.
4. The secondary "vortices" / "circuits" {?} in the 2D representations of the "cubic magnet," dusty plasma experiment, and solar circuit diagram all appear to point / circulate / flow (however you want to describe it) in similar directions. Counter to the direction of the main current flow?
5. In a 3D diagram of the sun, the northern hemisphere's opposite vortices would actually (I think) form a ring, with motion flowing somewhat toroidally (if a bit deformed?). I'd assume there would be a ring current flow inside the ring as well (in addition to the [convective?] flow along its surface). Hope that makes sense...
6. If there is a "void" in the center of the PKE-Nefedov plasma experiment (there seems to be a dearth of "force lines" in the center of the magnetic fields diagram as well {?}), with a sharp layer (double-layer, perhaps?) dividing the plasma void from surrounding material, does this imply that the center of the sun or other bodies might in fact be either hollow or less dense than its outer layers? What would this mean for the "nuclear fusion" model of the sun, if even remotely correct?
7. If the sun is "gravitationally bound" and/or compressed, would the void in the center still be that compressed oval/ellipsoid, or would it be circular, as the sun is?
Last edited by StefanR on Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.
User avatar
StefanR
 
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

PreviousNext

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest