Magnetism's Mystery. Can you solve it?

[spacecase0]

I find it fascinating that if you are looking for funding in physics, it is all in the topics that support quantum physics.
I can't help but wonder if that funding is part of the control grid on earth, because they do take most all the people that like physics and funnel them into the direction of quantum physics.
if I were planning funding and was really looking for advancement, I would spend a percentage on currently unsupported ideas and methods.

[TheoriaApophasis]

That thing people call an electron, l.

Nikola Tesla November 1928 interview:
On the whole subject of matter, in fact, Dr. Tesla holds views that are startlingly original. He disagrees with the accepted atomic theory of matter, and does not believe in the existence of an “electron” as pictured by science.
“To account for its apparently small mass, science conceives of the electron as a hollow sphere, a sort of bubble, such a bubble could exist in a medium as a gas or liquid because its internal pressure is not altered by deformation. But if, as supposed, the internal pressure of an electron is due to the repulsion of electric masses, the slightest conceivable deformation must result in the destruction of the bubble! Just to mention another improbability...” - Nikola Tesla
Article: “A Famous Prophet of Science Looks into the Future” (Popular Science Monthly)

“My ideas regarding the electron are at variance with those generally entertained. I hold that it is a relatively large entity carrying a surface charge and is not an elementary unit (particle). When the ‘electron’ leaves an electrode of high potential and in a high vacuum it carries an electrostatic charge many times greater than normal.” – N. Tesla

“To describe an electron as a negatively charged body is equivalent to saying that it is an expanding-contracting particle. There is no such condition in nature as a negative charge, nor are there negatively charged particles. Charge and discharge are opposite conditions, as filling and emptying, or compressing and expanding are opposite conditions.” – W. Russell

JJ Thomson developed the “Ether Atom” ideas of M. Faraday into his “Electronic Corpuscle”, this indivisible unit. One corpuscle terminates on one Faradic tube of force, and this quantifies as one Coulomb. This corpuscle is not and electron, it is a constituent of what today is known incorrectly as an “electron”. (Thomson relates 1000 corpuscles per electron) In this view, that taken by W. Crookes, J.J. Thomson, and N. Tesla, the cathode ray is not electrons, but in actuality corpuscles of the Ether.” – E. Dollard

“There is no rest mass to an ‘electron’. It is given here the ‘electron’ is no more than a broken loose “hold fast” under the grip of the tensions within the dielectric lines of force. They are the broken ends of the split in half package of spaghetti. Obviously this reasoning is not welcome in the realm of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.” – E. Dollard

“Unfortunately to a large extent in dealing with dielectric fields the prehistoric conception of the electro-static charge, the ‘electron’, on the conductor still exists, and by its use destroys the analogy between the two components of the electric field, the magnetic and dielectric. This makes the consideration of dielectric fields unnecessarily complicated” - C.P. Steinmetz (Electric Discharges, Waves and Impulses)

The idea of electricity as a flow of ‘electrons’ in a conductor was regarded by Oliver Heaviside as “a psychosis”. This encouraged Heaviside to begin a series of writings

Also consider the J.J. Thomson concept of the "electron" (his own discovery). Thomson considered the electron the terminal end of one unit line of dielectric induction.

“Electrons as a separate, distinct entity…doesn’t really exist, they are merely bumps in something called a ‘field’.” - Dr. Steve Biller



Electron "particle" BSD is nothing more than Greek ATOMISM. The universe is NOT a giant sea of tiny pool balls rolling and banging and spinning.

[dyetalon]

here is an idea for you.
so, let us take nothing and build on it
first dimension is length, (clearly just a construct )
second dimension is area (at a right angle to the first dimension)
third dimension is volume (the next right angle to the first 2, getting the pattern ?) (now we have 3D space)
forth dimension is movement (usually spin)
fifth dimension is a divergent spin (yes, right angle again, think vortex (also known as an electric field))
sixth dimension is a curled up divergent spin field. yes, this 6th one is a magnetic field.
and if it matters, the last 3 dimensions are the 3 field forces.

Yep. Another good theory.

[aljhoa]

the sun no more "has" a field than does a magnet have a field.

Nor does the sun "emit" light, light is a field perturbation.

A person in a pond flapping their arms doesnt emit anything either, its a field (in this case water) perturbation.

The field around a magnet or the sun is the mediated pressure modalities of the ether itself.


Iaad (instant action at a distance) cannot be answered with

1. The atomistic particle bs of quantum, or their "virtual photons" which make up a field, which is insane bs in the extreme

2. Nor with the conception that a sun/ magnet are emitting fields.


Iaad can only be answered the same way you answer light and magnetism, that being the substrate to phenomena, the ether.

@13:23 to 13:27 hexagon stands out
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9S3...youtu.be&t=802


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/saturn%27s_hexagon

Al