Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ENLIGHTENED MAGNETISM (The Full Proof of Ken Wheeler's Theories)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Displacement versus Deflection

    Originally posted by bistander View Post
    You yourself called it deflection.

    Regards,

    bi
    Negative Bistander,

    The Thread is there still...anyone could go there and check.

    When I showed the SIDES of the Magnet DEFLECTION on the CRT...it was when you said it was a DISPLACEMENT, NOT a Deflection.

    Deflections are ALL of them, the ACT OF "BENDING" the Electron Beam.

    An UP or DOWN Displacement is a Deflection as well, but it does NOT HAVE A COMMON CENTER WITH TWO OPPOSITE FORCES ACTING UPON THE SCANLINE PLANE.


    Originally posted by bistander View Post
    Edit: Hi Ufo,

    I ceased arguing with you, rotation vs deflection, in the other thread because it's like we speak different language. Seems pointless. You bring it up again so WTF. Here goes.

    You were talking about the effect the an external magnetic field has on the CRT. What are the coils on the sides of the tube which control the position of the beam's intersection with the screen? Deflection coils. Right? They function by making a magnetic field which deflects the beam, which is moving charges. The magnetic field from a magnet held close to the screen does the same thing. It deflects the electron beam. Nothing is rotating. Except your perception of the resulting image (scanline) on the screen. You can call it what you want, but it is deflection to me.

    Regards,

    bi
    So what?

    On my Video I clearly dedicate all the first part to show how the HORIZONTAL-VERTICAL BEAM DEFLECTING COILS (DRIVERS) WORK.

    They receive a specific signal, that I also showed on video, REVERSING POLARITIES, running at 15 KHZ.

    This FACT creates a 2D TRIANGULAR PLANE, which is seen on screen as a simple LINE...A GEOMETRICAL INTERSECTION, between SCREEN PLANE and E-BEAM RASTERED PLANE.

    And so, actually what we all see on screen IS NOT JUST A "2D LINE" ROTATION, BUT A 3D TORSION OF THAT 2D RASTERED PLANE


    Maybe You (or whoever else do NOT or CAN NOT "see" this FACT)...is because YOU ALL need some reviewing of SPATIAL GEOMETRY, BASICALLY PLANES, INTERSECTIONS PLUS TORSION'S BASED ON EXTERNAL ACTING FORCES... again.

    Sorry, but I am not gonna be your geometry teacher here...same way you search to give your answers on Wikipedia and else...then could do same with Advanced Spatial Geometry.

    This TORSION in 3D VIEW that JUST FRONTAL POLES GENERATES ON E-BEAM PLANE (NOT SIDES) , gives Us a FULL UNDERSTANDING OF THE VORTEX SHAPE OF BOTH MAGNETIC POLES.

    Now, again, the fact that you or whoever else, do not see this, is beyond my problem...as it is clearly IGNORANCE ON THIS SUBJECT ANALYSIS.


    Take care


    Ufopolitics
    Last edited by Ufopolitics; 04-29-2018, 11:12 PM.
    Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

    Comment


    • Rotation?

      Hi Ufo,

      Yep, different language.

      Look at it this way. What causes the contact of a single electron in the beam to deviate position from the horizontal centerline? Lorenz force. Right? And at an instant in time, that occurs between a moving charge (electron with velocity vector V, a straight line direction of motion) and the magnetic field at that location (B vector, also straight lined with specific direction. The result is a force on the electron (F, a vector having a straight force and direction). Now integrate that interaction over time for the period of one horizontal sweep and you will get a function of straight forces, up and down, left and right of the center of the screen from the screen back to the electron gun or extent of the magnet's field. The image on the screen conforms to the electron beam that has had its trajectory altered by incremental linear displacements by linear forces. Nothing was rotated. The B vector (magnetic field) was static once movement on the sample magnet stopped. The instantaneous velocity of the electron is straight. Nothing there is rotating except your imagination.

      What's the difference between the effects of the deflection coils and the sample magnet? Nothing. Same action. Straight deflection and incremental displacements. The fields from the deflection coils don't rotate. Neither does the field from the magnet.

      Isn't the reason you want to see rotation to support your contention that the magnetic field is rotating?

      In your nice video, does Mr. (or is Dr) LaPoint ever mention rotating magnet field, or Bloch wall. Wonder why?

      Regards,

      bi

      Comment


      • Originally posted by bistander View Post
        Hi Ufo,

        Yep, different language.

        Look at it this way. What causes the contact of a single electron in the beam to deviate position from the horizontal centerline? Lorenz force. Right? And at an instant in time, that occurs between a moving charge (electron with velocity vector V, a straight line direction of motion) and the magnetic field at that location (B vector, also straight lined with specific direction. The result is a force on the electron (F, a vector having a straight force and direction). Now integrate that interaction over time for the period of one horizontal sweep and you will get a function of straight forces, up and down, left and right of the center of the screen from the screen back to the electron gun or extent of the magnet's field. The image on the screen conforms to the electron beam that has had its trajectory altered by incremental linear displacements by linear forces. Nothing was rotated. The B vector (magnetic field) was static once movement on the sample magnet stopped. The instantaneous velocity of the electron is straight. Nothing there is rotating except your imagination.
        You can not account for just one single electron, when we are talking about a BEAM of Electrons shut with the strength of the RAY GUN ASSY...So it is a BEAM, not just a single electron.

        The Magnetic Field at the driving coils REVERSE POLES, for the HORIZONTAL SCREEN LINE the ACTING DRIVERS ARE VERTICALLY LOCATED, this creates reversed DRIVING spins, which displaces the BEAM from CENTER TO LEFT and from CENTER TO RIGHT.

        Originally posted by bistander View Post
        What's the difference between the effects of the deflection coils and the sample magnet? Nothing. Same action. Straight deflection and incremental displacements. The fields from the deflection coils don't rotate. Neither does the field from the magnet.
        All DRIVER Coils produce SPINS, and THOSE SPINS are what makes E-BEAM to move from one end to the other of screen. Watch my video again.

        Originally posted by bistander View Post
        Isn't the reason you want to see rotation to support your contention that the magnetic field is rotating?
        You need to study SPATIAL GEOMETRY Bistander...to see what I see here.

        Originally posted by bistander View Post
        In your nice video, does Mr. (or is Dr) LaPoint ever mention rotating magnet field, or Bloch wall. Wonder why?

        Regards,

        bi
        Why?...just because He don't need to "mention it"...he is "showing it"...But you also missed to see it spinning...


        Regards


        Ufopolitics
        Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

        Comment


        • UFO,

          If only you had taken a look at what I was referring you in my first post in this thread.. (joseph Newman model of magnetism).. you would realize I'm not against your "Rotation-Spin" or gyroscopic action as I call it in my language.

          The thing about the theory that I'm against is the vortex in the poles and that "double hemisphere" as markoul is referring to... there is not enough evidence to support this claim as a matter of fact "Magnetic Attraction" clearly destroys this model (vortex), in which ken's book conveniently Eliminates..
          and explains as "Voidance" in an analogy he refers to it being dragged towards the "Dielectric Inertial Plain"...
          so It appears as if a Stream of "Aether" is moving towards counterspace "Centripetally" is causing objects to be attracted.. towards the magnet this is his explanation of "Magnetic Attraction"...
          but as there is a "Centripetal" Flow of "Aether" TOWARDS counterspace there is also a "Centrifugal" Flow of "Aether" FROM counterspace.. if something springs in and something springs out.. forces SHOULD cancel out.. but NO.. there is still the thing called "Magnetic Attraction"..

          another thing... Incidentally our planet has a large magnetic field.. applying ken's theory suggest that "Gravity" is caused by "Aether" flow towards counterspace (ok seems good) and gravitational force is the effect we feel being dragged by the "Aether" streams towards counterspace (okay understandable)..

          now since people here is trying to apply "Magnetism" as a universal thing as ken suggest as "dielectric flow", "Aether Flow" or whatever term is it, I'd like to challenge the theory in which "The Model" was built..

          If there is really an "Aether" Flow centripetally towards counter space in the bloch region of a magnet.. you should be able to "Bend" the light passing there WITHOUT using Magnetic Medium AT ALL to show deflection.. since "Aether" is the theoretical medium for "Light" in which its true name is formed "Luminiferous Aether" or "Light-Bearing-Aether"..

          a vertical Interferometer has already proven that light is interfered by "Gravity" (Aether Flow Towards the center of earth),
          if your not familiar with it see this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DH-NC8rvGvU)

          I was thinking maybe you just didn't get my question..
          as you focus more on the "Geometric" Side of magnetism and pay less attention to the more important side of the theory..
          If this cannot be proven.. the entire "Model" in which you all promote would shaken.. or even collapse..
          then we will be back to the Magnetic Field of the Iron Filings..

          Comment


          • Opinions, beliefs, or whatever

            Originally posted by Ufopolitics View Post
            You can not account for just one single electron, ...
            Hi Ufo,

            Don't like calculas, hey? Anyway, different language like I said. Here it is:

            Displacement, deflection, rotation, spin... You say "rotation"; I say "no rotation" on the CRT.

            Static magnetic field... You say "spin"; I say "no spin".

            Middle of the magnet... You say "Bloch wall, dielectric inertial plane, gate to counterspace"; I say "nothing different than the rest of the magnet".

            We disagree on a few things. Please just carry on and show proof and enlightenment per topic.

            Regards,

            bi

            Comment


            • Originally posted by bistander View Post
              Hi Ufo,

              Don't like calculas, hey? Anyway, different language like I said. Here it is:

              Displacement, deflection, rotation, spin... You say "rotation"; I say "no rotation" on the CRT.

              Static magnetic field... You say "spin"; I say "no spin".

              Middle of the magnet... You say "Bloch wall, dielectric inertial plane, gate to counterspace"; I say "nothing different than the rest of the magnet".

              We disagree on a few things. Please just carry on and show proof and enlightenment per topic.

              Regards,

              bi



              Hey Bistander,

              I like Calculus...I do it all the time on my job...
              But you were applying your Lorentz angular deviation for a single electron...when we are dealing with a high velocity stream of electrons...and...sorry. But can't do it like that...to then add single events.

              Anyways...I do understand your position...we all live in an Engineering World where it don't matter if you reverse voltage polarity in any given solenoid or mechanical actuator...just like the sample you have shown previously on a C Core with a gap and an insert (plunger)...it don't matter if + or - goes wherever...right?

              So again...in a world like this...where it really don't matter if South or North...the "job gets done" either way...then who cares about all these stupid theories about "spinning polarizations"...right?

              Then it becomes a pretty hard job...to make anyone more "enlightened"...when they actually don't see the point right?


              However...I will answer same way Galileo did about the Earth spinning or not...to the Spanish Catholic Inquisition...

              It still spins...


              Regards


              Ufopolitics


              .
              Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

              Comment


              • Point proof

                Originally posted by Ufopolitics View Post
                ...
                Then it becomes a pretty hard job...to make anyone more "enlightened"...when they actually don't see the point right?...
                Learning, knowing, truth; I do see the point. Just see no proof. But still, I look.

                bi

                Comment


                • Darwinism and Occult philosophy

                  This is where I agree with Bistander. As a Christian I react adversely to the extreme view. That is why we test. In absolute terms by this enlightened condemnation of iron filings unreasonable rejection of the historicity and map constructing magnetic lines of force never interfered with learning ferro viewing therefore the overly strong assertion is totalitarian method of science.

                  I reacted as strongly to same methods of anti-Christian theory called
                  "Punctuated Equilibrium" It is like adding sewage into clean water. All bundled and mingled with neutral theory.
                  It is unprofessional and an assault on Christian beliefs. Eliciting a response to polarize and target those who give credit to the God of the bible rather than philosophers. Should not be part of this discussion, make your point without attacking conventional science which is making enemies here.

                  Patterns and Cycles

                  What is fair and reasonable is to stop extremist indoctrination, methods controling the narrative
                  using absolute terms and twisting statements. This is why students are forced to learn Darwin and why our children are forced to learn garbage forced totalitarian beliefs. This effort in trying to run the show uses certain mindsets that are black and white extremist, a most unpleasant experience.
                  The energetic forum progress does not depend on extremist opinions. What did the moderator do about it ? why does it continue ?

                  That is why I tested that issue here. The truth is being stolen from rightful persons who worked hard to make progress with magnets. FerroCell USA patent why point to someone's protected work.
                  Consider why there is such an unreasonable attack on iron filings as if we are stupid. When point is made how iron filings were used
                  their reply is twisted changing the subject from the specific use to how Iron filings do not depict accuracy, drawing out argument. Markoul decided to
                  bring disharmony here with an attack on (grandpa) Michael Faraday and others bringing his University needlessly being critical of Faraday.
                  Making a precedent of ferro-viewing accuracy at the expense by twisting Iron filings role. A cheap shot attack.

                  Stop thinking we are stupid, in need of Darwin type enlightenment. Occult revelation repeating others work in a condensed ramble
                  and overlooking all those who deserve the recognition for discovery. Why are there are so many fake papers in hyperspace ? Who is responsible ?
                  Publishing fake academic papers using dishonest means. Be careful they will continue to spew sewage on Internet as anarchist.
                  Patterns and Cycles

                  Just as reprehensible are those who seek recognition for their own glory.
                  Attention seekers out of balance that are outraged over nothing, cannot get perspective on the scope of their delusion.
                  They cause problems and damage innocent persons who find it disturbing unpleasant drama. There is a rational place for Iron filings.
                  Last edited by mikrovolt; 06-21-2018, 08:25 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Why these ATTACKS ?!

                    Originally posted by mikrovolt View Post
                    This is where I agree with Bistander. As a Christian I react adversely to the extreme view. That is why we test. In absolute terms by this enlightened condemnation of iron filings unreasonable rejection of the historicity and map constructing magnetic lines of force never interfered with learning ferro viewing therefore the overly strong assertion is totalitarian method of science.
                    Hello Mikrovolt.

                    Why ALL these attacks ON MY THREAD all of the sudden?

                    But let me say this...There is something called HUMAN RIGHTS...are you somehow FAMILIAR with this term?

                    Well, if you are not, (and even if you are I'll still recall it) ...there is one of the main RIGHTS which is called:

                    The Right to the FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

                    And so, maybe if you have ever read about it...it is the main RULE OF EVERY DEMOCRATIC NATION OR SOCIETY in this World.

                    And that includes United States of America.

                    Originally posted by mikrovolt View Post
                    I reacted as strongly to same methods of anti-Christian theory called
                    "Punctuated Equilibrium" It is like adding sewage into clean water. All bundled and mingled with neutral theory.
                    It is unprofessional and an assault on Christian beliefs. Eliciting a response to polarize and target
                    those who give credit to the God of the bible rather than philosophers. An attack on liberty. Convert or die mentality.

                    Patterns and Cycles

                    What is fair and reasonable is to stop extremist indoctrination, methods controling the narrative
                    using absolute terms and twisting statements. This is why students are forced to learn Darwin and why our children are forced to learn garbage forced totalitarian beliefs. This effort in trying to run the show uses certain mindsets that are black and white extremist, a most unpleasant experience.
                    The energetic forum progress does not depend on extremist opinions. What did the moderator do about it ? why does it continue ?
                    ..You are so funny...

                    You say you are a Christian right?, "supposedly" a follower of Jesus Christ, one who preaches and acts accordingly to the way the Son of God acted during all his stages on this Earth...

                    First you are condemning anyone who expresses themselves freely, under the Human Rights of Freedom of Speech...

                    You are calling me a "Totalitarian"...an "Extremist"...and an "Attack on Liberty"...hahahahahahahaha

                    Originally posted by mikrovolt View Post
                    That is why I tested that issue here. The truth is being stolen from rightful persons who worked hard to make progress with magnets.
                    Consider why there is such an unreasonable attack on iron filings as if we are stupid. When point is made how iron filings were used
                    their reply is twisted changing the subject from the specific use to how Iron filings do not depict accuracy, drawing out argument. Markoul decided to
                    bring disharmony here with an attack on (grandpa) Michael Faraday and others bringing his University needlessly being critical of Faraday.
                    Making a precedent of ferro-viewing accuracy at the expense by twisting Iron filings role. A cheap shot attack.
                    This is outrageous...Mikrovolt...I can not believe what I am reading above...


                    Originally posted by mikrovolt View Post
                    Stop thinking we are stupid, in need of Darwin type enlightenment. Occult revelation repeating others work in a condensed ramble
                    and overlooking all those who deserve the recognition for discovery. Why are there are so many fake papers in hyperspace ? Who is responsible ?
                    Publishing fake academic papers using dishonest means. Be careful they will continue to spew sewage on Internet as anarchist.
                    Patterns and Cycles

                    Just as reprehensible are those who seek recognition for their own glory.
                    Attention seekers out of balance that are outraged over nothing, cannot get perspective on the scope of their delusion.
                    They cause problems and damage innocent persons who find it disturbing unpleasant drama. There is a rational place for Iron filings.
                    Now you are calling me or "Us" (I assume Ken, Markoul, and all other members who are on our side here)...

                    Anarchists?

                    Delusional?

                    "Damaging Innocent Persons"?

                    OMG...I am gonna cry...

                    Let me ask you...what did you take today?...what kind of such Heavy Intoxicating Chemicals did you consume tonight Mikrovolt?

                    One last thing here Mikrovolt...and look at my tone gain...so re read me again...am being VERY POLITE..

                    Please DELETE ALL RELIGION RELATED SUBJECT...AND SO, DO NOT BRING IT ON THIS THREAD, ANYMORE.

                    PLEASE, RE-READ "MEMBERS RULES" ON THIS FORUM.

                    And avoid to be Banned from here.


                    Ufopolitics
                    Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-01-2018, 02:07 AM.
                    Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ricards View Post
                      UFO,

                      If only you had taken a look at what I was referring you in my first post in this thread.. (joseph Newman model of magnetism).. you would realize I'm not against your "Rotation-Spin" or gyroscopic action as I call it in my language.

                      The thing about the theory that I'm against is the vortex in the poles and that "double hemisphere" as markoul is referring to... there is not enough evidence to support this claim as a matter of fact "Magnetic Attraction" clearly destroys this model (vortex), in which ken's book conveniently Eliminates..
                      and explains as "Voidance" in an analogy he refers to it being dragged towards the "Dielectric Inertial Plain"...
                      so It appears as if a Stream of "Aether" is moving towards counterspace "Centripetally" is causing objects to be attracted.. towards the magnet this is his explanation of "Magnetic Attraction"...
                      but as there is a "Centripetal" Flow of "Aether" TOWARDS counterspace there is also a "Centrifugal" Flow of "Aether" FROM counterspace.. if something springs in and something springs out.. forces SHOULD cancel out.. but NO.. there is still the thing called "Magnetic Attraction"..

                      another thing... Incidentally our planet has a large magnetic field.. applying ken's theory suggest that "Gravity" is caused by "Aether" flow towards counterspace (ok seems good) and gravitational force is the effect we feel being dragged by the "Aether" streams towards counterspace (okay understandable)..

                      now since people here is trying to apply "Magnetism" as a universal thing as ken suggest as "dielectric flow", "Aether Flow" or whatever term is it, I'd like to challenge the theory in which "The Model" was built..

                      If there is really an "Aether" Flow centripetally towards counter space in the bloch region of a magnet.. you should be able to "Bend" the light passing there WITHOUT using Magnetic Medium AT ALL to show deflection.. since "Aether" is the theoretical medium for "Light" in which its true name is formed "Luminiferous Aether" or "Light-Bearing-Aether"..

                      a vertical Interferometer has already proven that light is interfered by "Gravity" (Aether Flow Towards the center of earth),
                      if your not familiar with it see this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DH-NC8rvGvU)
                      Not enough evidence to prove the Two Hemispheres on the Magnetic Fields?!!

                      Really?

                      WHAT ABOUT THREE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGIES WHICH, ALL THREE REVEAL EXACTLY THE SAME, IDENTICAL TWO HEMISPHERES ON THE MAGNETIC FIELD?

                      1- COLOR CRT.

                      2-MAGNETIC VIEWING FILM.

                      3-FERROCELLS

                      Now tell me, besides the Iron Filings Method...could you please cite at least JUST ONE SINGLE TECHNOLOGY which reveals the same geometry as the Iron Filings does?!!

                      Do You need more "empirical evidence" than all these three methods, which happen to be completely different in nature and technology?

                      All Three Methods are Graphically and Clearly exposed with the same exact magnet on my video below:

                      [VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v5YsV_M5hc[/VIDEO]


                      Originally posted by ricards View Post
                      I was thinking maybe you just didn't get my question..
                      as you focus more on the "Geometric" Side of magnetism and pay less attention to the more important side of the theory..
                      If this cannot be proven.. the entire "Model" in which you all promote would shaken.. or even collapse..
                      then we will be back to the Magnetic Field of the Iron Filings..
                      I focus on ALL SIDES Ricards...not only "Geometry" as you wrote above!!

                      What about ALL experiments showing and confirming such claims, that I have done here back and forth?

                      Not enough?...need more?

                      Outrageous!!...There are only ONE SINGLE MODEL, based on the Iron Filings...
                      Ken Wheeler's Book shows ALL THREE I have cited above...and you all still need more proof?

                      Really?

                      All this work don't even deserve "the benefit of the doubt"?

                      Instead I get attacked here...back and forth...it is really unbelievable!!!

                      Unfortunately, there is quite a while Ken Wheeler does not come around here...but I don't blame him...He will also be attacked...


                      Ufopolitics
                      Last edited by Ufopolitics; 05-01-2018, 02:49 AM.
                      Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by bistander View Post
                        Thanks Ufo,

                        [VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EPlyiW-xGI[/VIDEO]

                        I enjoyed this video. Very well done. From five and a half years ago. 2 questions. Did the patent issue so we can see how the bowls are made? And what happened to the relatively inexpensive electric generator using the technology which had been developed?

                        Regards,

                        bi

                        Edit: found it. Patent issued 1/28/2014


                        Did You really liked the Video above Bistander?

                        Even though LaPoint clearly shows on that Video the "Two Hemispheres" Geometry?...

                        First on 3D CAD (wire frame), Red and Blue ...but then He shows it on his Plasma Experiment...

                        Then He goes into the way Galaxies and Nebulas are formed, or exposed...also the two bubbles...

                        And it all reminded me about Ken's Book...

                        Didn't you also thought about it, even for a single minute?


                        Have a good night Bistander...I will sleep wonderfully...


                        Regards


                        Ufopolitics
                        Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

                        Comment


                        • To UFO,

                          If only you had read more carefully.. set aside the emotions..

                          watch this "crazy" experiment.. they might just be "Playing around" with magnets.. but you can really surely visualize magnetic lines of forces.. like that of the Iron filings..

                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8cCvAITGWM
                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vdkac3wJ9Aw
                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oevYHizoxLg

                          in these videos clearly no double hemisphere is being formed in case of viscous magnetic material.
                          no vortex at the poles, just some portion of the fluid pointing outwards indicating the lines of force have been concentrated there, and they are not even bent to form that 3D-Torsion shape you are claiming..

                          and visually observe "MAGNETIC ATTRACTION" IN WHICH KEN'S BOOK CONVENIENTLY ELIMINATES AS IT WILL DESTROY THE MODEL IN WHICH YOU ALL TRY TO PROMOTE. (sorry for the caps need to highlight that).

                          you might be seeing new geometries being formed by those 3 experiments you have cited.. but in our eyes we only see magnetic material being attracted and charge particles being deflected forming new geometries.

                          the whole point is.. you don't overthrow an experiment for another one.
                          you may have sufficient evidence to clearly depict the "New Magnetic Field" but you don't have enough evidence to prove the "Old Magnetic Field" is wrong.. (get it?)..

                          you are already been given the benefit of the doubt when people asked you how you perceived what you did and how did you came to such conclusion..
                          otherwise we would have just ignored you and treated you like some flat earth theorist who wants to make the whole world fall at the edge of the planet into the abyss of the cosmos when it gets off balanced...

                          beside the claims of the theories is OUTRAGEOUS as well.. claiming to have explained gravity, aether, electricity, counterspace, even how galaxies work.. with what...? just by "Magnetism"..
                          you would really be confronted with OUTRAGEOUS demands of PROOF...

                          maybe you and ken is right.. maybe you and ken is wrong.. its just the two..
                          The theory is on the hot seat..

                          Comment


                          • Bad science

                            Originally posted by Ufopolitics View Post
                            That's right...that one...the one you called "bad science"...Rawls & Davis book.
                            Here is an example what these authors promote which I call bad science. Found in chapter three:



                            Then they end chapter with what I find disgusting:

                            We are closing chapter three with the discussion and drawings presented only to better explain magnetism, the rate of flow direction, the two poles, the division of the two poles, and the potential force as to the electronic charge potential of each pole. This allows a reference to scientists who may not have continued into the physics of electrodynamics. Students and instructors should attempt to upgrade and correct any older text materials that differ from today's concepts and understandings of the basic of magnetism as presented herein.
                            All because they observed a bubble drifting on a microscope slide between magnets in 1936. From what I call tell, this bad science was the beginning of the misuse of "Bloch wall" and spinning static magnetic fields. The origin of fantasy magnetism.

                            As long as I have started and have the Rawls & Davis diagram shown (attch#1), I'll explain some of what's wrong with it. When you do a Google image search for Bloch magnetic domain wall, you see hundreds of hits most looking like attachment #2.



                            From: Domain Wall Magnetoresistance

                            Now compare the two diagrams. The primary discrepancy is the labeling of the N & S surfaces. The arrows represent particle or crystal dipoles and point to the N end of the dipole. So the surface of the domain to which the arrows (dipoles) point will be the N side (pole) of the domain which is the top left as shown in attch#2. Similarly, the bottom right will be that domain's N making the upper right surface S as indicated in attch#2.

                            Notice in attch#1 that Rawls & Davis apparently misread such a diagram and labeled the end surfaces N and S. This makes a huge difference. They continue bad science assuming they're looking at a diagram of a magnet of handheld size when the domains, of which there are two shown, are but a small fraction of a millimeter in size. And then their third piece of bad science is to assign spin to the magnetism. I won't even touch their ridiculous broken figure 8. The whole deal stinks.

                            Regards,

                            bi
                            Attached Files
                            Last edited by bistander; 05-02-2018, 09:07 AM. Reason: Added link

                            Comment


                            • Magnetic domains

                              Over the course of research into literature on magnetism I came across this interesting geology. It's quite long, and dry, so I snipped and pasted a bit about domains and Bloch wall. The source is listed so you can find the context and bibliography. There are also some microphotographs, empirical data and analysis.

                              Enjoy.

                              The atomic coordination in ferromagnetic grains gives rise to sub-grain magnetic domains; this feature is important in explaining ferromagnetic behaviour and the size dependence of ferromagnetic grains on their anisotropic behaviour. In each sub-grain, the electron spins are parallel. The coordinated electron spins give rise to an internal magnetic field, which is equal to an external demagnetizing field (in the opposite direction) (Fig. A3a). A large external field is, however, energetically inefficient and the size of a single domain of parallel electron spins is limited to around 01 μm. In grains larger than this, the coordinated electron spins divide themselves into domains divided by Bloch walls, arranged so as to minimize the external field (Fig. A3b).


                              Fig. A3.
                              (a) SD and MD configurations serve to minimize the external demagnetizing field. (b) Movement of the Bloch wall in MD grains gives rise to a magnetization when an external field is applied. (c) Inverse susceptibility anisotropy of a SD grain.
                              View largeDownload slide
                              (a) SD and MD configurations serve to minimize the external demagnetizing field. (b) Movement of the Bloch wall in MD grains gives rise to a magnetization when an external field is applied. (c) Inverse susceptibility anisotropy of a SD grain.
                              In grains that are around 01 μm, multi-domain (MD) behaviour may not be stable and the grain will exhibit some single domain (SD) behaviour (Fig. A3c); these are pseudo-single domains (PSD). Grains smaller than 003 μm are not large enough to retain coordinated magnetic moments and thus cannot retain magnetization and behave essentially paramagnetically. This is super-paramagnetism (SPM) and is important for studies involving nanoparticles.
                              From: https://academic.oup.com/petrology/a...6/1187/1490561.

                              For those interested in the real Bloch wall, the link below will reference a thesis that covers the subject very well. A free download is easy to find.
                              Roberts, H. G., 2008. Magnetism and transport in nanostructured domain wall systems. Thesis (Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)). University of Bath.
                              Magnetism and transport in nanostructured domain wall systems - Opus

                              Regards,

                              bi
                              Attached Files
                              Last edited by bistander; 05-01-2018, 06:53 PM. Reason: Added link

                              Comment


                              • Thanks bistander for mentioning the 1936 Rawls, Davis
                                Accomplished much more than is published, did great things.
                                Humbling yourself would be a benefit in this case.

                                If I understand you propose that the conical shape has no twist.
                                https://youtu.be/rjnALkkUlNY

                                From a historical from 1936 perspective we can see the influence had on magnetic theory.
                                While flaws exist, we now use a longer magnet to make clear both the toroids not hidden
                                it is important to consider the shape with the poles along length of the magnet. 5:1 ratio vs 1:1
                                It seems counter intuitive however by not using right shape the details of the field are obscure or hidden.

                                http://www.rexresearch.com/davisrawl...vingSystem.pdf
                                Last edited by mikrovolt; 05-01-2018, 09:13 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X