Energetic Forum

Energetic Forum (http://www.energeticforum.com/)
-   General Discussion (http://www.energeticforum.com/general-discussion/)
-   -   about the Ferrocell (ferrolens) (http://www.energeticforum.com/general-discussion/20998-about-ferrocell-ferrolens.html)

dyetalon 06-07-2018 04:32 PM

2 Attachment(s)
Ok, since everyone is having trouble with understanding what we are seeing in the cell, here are a couple of cartoons showing magnetic equipotential of a dipole:

from wiki: "An equipotential region of a scalar potential in three-dimensional space is often an equipotential surface, but it can also be a three-dimensional region in space"

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equipotential)

http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...tial-lines-gif

and this one has cute little arrows indicating direction...

http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...ipotential-gif

Same thing, different view and values :clap:

Markoul 06-07-2018 08:46 PM

Timm,

For an electric point charge, field lines are straight lines therefore the isolines since there must be perpendicular to the force lines all the time are closed lines, circles. For an electric dipole the isolines are the ones you show in your cartoon diagram (purple).


However, since there is not yet the magnetic charge particle discovered there are no isolines for magnetic fields.

To say that ferrocell is not showing the magnetic flux but isolines is not true.

Magnetic dipole fields are curved space force fields and therefore can not have isolines.

On the other hand electric dipole fields are straight line interacting monopole force fields.

The fact that the isofield of an electric dipole matches the flux field of a magnetic field (dipole) is just another strong indication in nature that Electrism is actually the inverse of magnetism.




EM

dyetalon 06-07-2018 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markoul (Post 311027)
Timm,

For an electric point charge, field lines are straight lines therefore the isolines since there must be perpendicular to the force lines all the time are closed lines, circles. For an electric dipole the isolines are the ones you show in your cartoon diagram (purple).


However, since there is not yet the magnetic charge particle discovered there are no isolines for magnetic fields.

To say that ferrocell is not showing the magnetic flux but isolines is not true.

Magnetic dipole fields are curved space force fields and therefore can not have isolines.

On the other hand electric dipole fields are straight line interacting monopole force fields.

The fact that the isofield of an electric dipole matches the flux field of a magnetic field (dipole) is just another strong indication in nature that Electrism is actually the inverse of magnetism.




EM

I'm struggling to understand your first paragraph.
There are no straight lines in 3-D space. I'm talking about curved space, like a magnetic field.

An iso-line can be curved. It's called a contour line and Michael Snyder wrote a couple of papers on the subject using his Ferrocells.

I can give you references, if you like.

And, how will you explain the appearance of the Bloch region (null) without potential difference?

Markoul 06-08-2018 10:25 AM

3 Attachment(s)
Timm,

Here is an electric charge in normal space.

http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...s-capture1-png
fig.1

Arrows are the open srtaight force lines. Circles are the isolines (equipotential).

Here below is the same diagram for an electric dipole with opposite charges in normal space. Force lines (arrows) may curve but are still open lines start to end. Isolines are indicated again by circles except the straight line in the middle of the field. Isolines must be always perpendicular the to electric force lines.

http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...s-capture2-png
fig.2

Also notice that force vectors by definition are always a straight arrow (vector) pointing to a single direction and therfere can not be curved in space. Therefore a force line is different than a force vector and therefore we say that in every point of a force line there is a force vector tangent to this point which is the dfinition actually of a force line.

Contour lines or surfaces are isolines or issurfaces to indicate same amplitute or altitude and are more used in geosciences.

The thing is, taking the classic image of the force lines on a magnetic field, magnetic fields are different, they don't have open force lines (since there is no monopole magnetic field) all the force lines are closed forced lines by definition and therefore you can not draw isolines in a an already closed circle. In a nutshell there is no equipotential diagram for magnetic fields.

http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...ield-lines-png
fig.3

Search the literature if you don't believe me. Electric dipole flux is different than magnetic dipole flux, compare fig.2 and fig.3 This is because electric flux is essential caused by monopole charges whereas there is no monopole magnetic charge.

EM

Markoul 06-08-2018 11:20 AM

@Timm

Quote:

And, how will you explain the appearance of the Bloch region (null) without potential difference?

The net potential difference of the two toroidal pole fields back to back are responsible for the Bloch region showing up in the ferrocell.

You can not really see the real Bloch line since it is zero and will not light up in the ferrocell, only the neighboring lines.

Although Brian Kerr used a trick and made the line visible here I believe:


bistander 06-08-2018 05:39 PM

Magnetic vector potential
 
2 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Markoul (Post 311037)
... In a nutshell there is no equipotential diagram for magnetic fields.
...

Isn't this an example?

http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...9&d=1528479103

Quote:

A 2D Square Magnet plot 3.png
Now, we will make a colorful filled contour plot of the vector potential, and plot it underneath the box, but on top of boring gray scale plot we made. We will also include a colorbar.
http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...0&d=1528479125

Quote:

Now, let's plot white magnetic field vectors on top of the vector potential plot. We will also make sure that the longest arrow length is the grid spacing.

Ref.
https://casaguides.nrao.edu/index.php/PlotBasics

dyetalon 06-08-2018 05:51 PM

Thank you.

As I said before- same thing, different view.
You can not have a zero without two opposite potentials.

bistander 06-08-2018 06:55 PM

Nanorods
 
1 Attachment(s)
Hey dyetalon,

Stumbled upon this.

http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...1&d=1528484018


https://www.comsol.com/blogs/gaussia...rray-nanorods/

Regards,

bi

Markoul 06-08-2018 08:57 PM

I don't know where you found this and what the guy who did that was trying to do but this is dead wrong.

First of all looking at his code these plots are not product of any measurements or simulated (theoretical calculated values) he just draws graphics to demonstrate the software. He probably has mistakenly took electric fields as magnetic fields. If this was correct the internet would be bursting with equipotential plots of magnetic fields.

From Maxwell's equations we know that an curled isoline (closing at itself) in a magnetic field would immediately mean zero magnetic field ∇ ⋅ B = 0.

In other words all magnetic fields are divergence free meaning all force lines must return to the poles and therefore can not have isolines (this is not the case of electric fields). He also states that this is a vector potential field (whatever he means by that?) and never says that these are isolines.

You can see that this are not isolines and thus equipotential field because he then draws vectors!! Equipotential fields are scalar fields and don't have vectors.

I think this guy has not a glue of what he is doing although by ignorance he draw the magnetic flux of a magnet as shown by the ferrocell I admit :rofl: :notworthy:

:D

Who the **** is this guy?

EM

p.s. and yes by saying that a magnetic dipole field has no isolines this means that there are no two points in a magnetic field which have the same vector potential as it is defined mathematically except the Bloch domain wall.

Magnetic Vector Potential

bistander 06-08-2018 09:47 PM

Magnetic vector potential
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Markoul (Post 311054)
I don't know where you found this and what the guy who did that was trying to do but this is dead wrong.

First of all looking at his code these plots are not product of any measurements or simulated (theoretical calculated values) he just draws graphics to demonstrate the software. He probably has mistakenly took electric fields as magnetic fields. If this was correct the internet would be bursting with equipotential plots of magnetic fields.

From Maxwell's equations we know that an curled isoline (closing at itself) in a magnetic field would immediately mean zero magnetic field ∇ ⋅ B = 0.

In other words all magnetic fields are divergence free meaning all force lines must return to the poles and therefore can not have isolines (this is not the case of electric fields). He also states that this is a vector potential field (whatever he means by that?) and never says that these are isolines.

You can see that this are not isolines and thus equipotential field because he then draws vectors!! Equipotential fields are scalar fields and don't have vectors.

I think this guy has not a glue of what he is doing although by ignorance he draw the magnetic flux of a magnet as shown by the ferrocell I admit :rofl: :notworthy:

:D

Who the **** is this guy?

EM

p.s. and yes by saying that a magnetic dipole field has no isolines this means that there are no two points in a magnetic field which have the same vector potential as it is defined mathematically except the Bloch domain wall.

Magnetic Vector Potential

Quote:

Magnetic vector potential
The magnetic vector potential A is a vector field, defined along with the electric potential ϕ (a scalar field) by the equations:[2]

{\displaystyle \mathbf {B} =\nabla \times \mathbf {A} \,,\quad \mathbf {E} =-\nabla \phi -{\frac {\partial \mathbf {A} }{\partial t}}\,,} {\displaystyle \mathbf {B} =\nabla \times \mathbf {A} \,,\quad \mathbf {E} =-\nabla \phi -{\frac {\partial \mathbf {A} }{\partial t}}\,,}
Obviously the equation didn't copy and paste so well. It said that the magnetic field vector B is equal to the curl of the magnetic vector potential A

From wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_potential

Edit:
Quote:

The magnetic scalar potential ψ is sometimes used to specify the magnetic H-field in cases when there are no free currents, in a manner analogous to using the electric potential to determine the electric field in electrostatics. One important use of ψ is to determine the magnetic field due to permanent magnets when their magnetization is known.
Also from the referenced Wikipedia.

dyetalon 06-09-2018 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bistander (Post 311056)
Obviously the equation didn't copy and paste so well. It said that the magnetic field vector B is equal to the curl of the magnetic vector potential A

From wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_potential

Edit:

Also from the referenced Wikipedia.

And let me add a little more here:
Iron filings will not respond the same way as nanoparticles do to a magnetic field.

For one thing, the iron filings are ferromagnetic and the nanoparticles are paramagnetic (actually, superparamagnetic) and can not maintain magnetization after the applied field is removed.

WE ARE AFFECTING THE MAGNETITE AT THE ATOMIC LEVEL !
I propose we are kicking out electrons to a higher energy state and that's why we are seeing potential difference with a null between.
Iron filings are not capable of such an action or response.

Folks, I will prove this 100% before I die :eek:


"The basis for magnetism can be explained at the atomic level. Electrons have both an electrical charge and a spin, it can be called a charge in motion. Any moving charge gives rise to a magnetic field. The spin of an electron can be oriented in one of two directions, either up or down. When electrons pair up in an energy level they will have opposite spins and their magnetic fields will cancel. In some atoms there can be more electrons with spins in one direction than the other because they are not all paired up (Pauli Exclusion Principle). The result is that there is a net magnetic field for the atom. This is a paramagnetic material. When placed in a magnetic field the atoms in a paramagnetic material will tend to align their fields with the external one, i.e., the North Pole of each atom will align with the North Pole of the applied magnetic field."

https://lecturedemos.chem.umass.edu/...ucture9_6.html

Markoul 06-09-2018 07:46 PM

1 Attachment(s)
http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...1&d=1528569508

The above figure describes essentially all quantum mechanics today.

it is a deuterium isotope hydrogen atom consisting of one proton one neutron and one electron

Photon is the carrier of the EM force holding holding the electron in to the atom.

Gluons are the strong nuclear force carries holding the quarks inside the protons and neutrons of the nuclei of an atom.

W ans Z bosons are the carriers of the weak nuclear force holding the protons and neutrons together inside the atom. Sometimes (radioactivity) an up quark is transformed to a downquark and the nuclei breaks, proton radiation. At the same time a neutrino is released.

The influence of gravity on a single atom is minuscule compared to the other acting forces described.

The whole atom is moving inside the Higgs field which is defining the rest mass of the atom.

In order to produce electron current out of the superparamagnetic dielectric magnetite nanoparticles you must knock off electrons out of the atoms. You can do that either via radiation with a specific frequency and above of EM E=hf depending the material. For Fe3 and O4 I believe this must be in the γ rays range.

or through a very strong applied electric field through the field emission phenomenon which will excite the Fe3 metal in the magnetite.

Reference https://www.physicsforums.com/thread...n-atom.875191/

or possible via a strong dynamic external magnetic field which will produce actually and Electric field and and thus EM

but ionizing the paramagnetic magnetite by just applying a strong static magnetic field i find it very difficult, the reason is although it will act uppon their magnetic moment of the electrons inside the magnetite atoms trying to pull them out, at the same time due to the electric charge of the electron it will squeeze them to tighter orbits around the nuclei.

https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/...ugh_to_ionize/

But again mainstream could prove wrong once again!

...so keep trying... and please don't die!:grindaisy:


EM

TheoriaApophasis 06-09-2018 11:19 PM

Too many peeps here smoking PARTICLE FANTASIES
:blowout:


No branch of modern "science" (bullshyt religion inhabited by mathematicians) has defined the term FIELD.

Not a single one :blowout:


Fields have NO QUANTITY, that the realm of PHYSICS has co-opted the definition of Fields is an absurdity. The QUANTIFIED effects of cause and effect interactions measured, in either Joules, or Watts, or Amperes is DENOTATIVE and DESCRIPTIVE…….none of which EXPLAINS what A FIELD IS, nor magnetism

Quantum mechanics has UTTERLY co-opted the definition of magnetism along with the source of quantums religion, that being light. But quantum is Atomistic. Its very foundation is built upon “wave particle dualities” of which light is NOT a particle, and a WAVE is not a thing, but what a thing DOES!

“The magnetic field between magnetic dipoles. It is caused by the exchange of virtual photons.” - Insane position of GR & QM

“This medium of propagation, the Ether must exist. This medium must be a prominent thought in our investigations” Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism – J.C. Maxwell

When you remove the ether you MUST necessitatively replace it with particle fantasies and “messenger particles”. These absurd fantasies are not the inputs or outputs of ANY experiment ever done.


HERES AN INSANE DEFINITION: “Such skyrmions are quasiparticles—they do not exist in the absence of a magnetic field.” ----The mathematical concept of the skyrmion was invented over fifty years ago by high-energy physicist Tony Skyrme

“Nothing is more fantastical and a travesty of how nature works than is quantum theory. Its very basis has no relationship to reality.” – W. Russell

Most so-called scientists today are NOT scientists rather mathematicians….and fundamentally if it cant be quantified and counted by a mathematician, then it doesn’t really exist in their eyes.

“All literature on this subject (Relativity & and curved ‘space-time’) is futile and destined to oblivion” - N. Tesla

“A virtual particle is an abstraction, which facilitates in calculations and understanding, the term is very vague and loosely defined, they never appear as inputs or outputs of experiments, their existence is questionable at best,…however they are very useful in rendering concepts and making equations balance out”. QED FEYNMAN

“Where common sense and intuition failed, we (the insane relativists) had to create a new form of intuition based upon abstract (unreal) mathematics. When common sense fails, we must create uncommon sense.” -Leonard Susskind, professor theoretical physics, and priest of the cult of Quantum

“The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be SANE to think clearly, …..but one can think deeply and be quite insane.” TESLA


:D:blowout:

Markoul 06-10-2018 06:39 AM

@Ken

I know all these are distortions and different manifestations of the aether field (or dark energy as I call) as well different densities of light manifested as matter.

However, balls is just a model, mere representations, (if you ask an scientist they know that these are nothing like balls) and the mainstream accepted linguistic terminology and and vocabulary in order to communicate with each other.

If this linguistic approach is hindering now to see things clear and to find the truth is a big subject for debate.

As I have said in the past , modern science reached a crossroad and had to choose between One Stone and Tesla...unfortunately she took the wrong turn :wall: ...or choose the wrong hole!...stupid *****!

So, I admit I don't have your background and can not talk about these things other than with the balls language.

How you would describe the above picture with your words?

...But then with whom I could exhange ideas? You and a couple more guys?? :rofl:

You see what the problem is?

EM

bistander 06-10-2018 07:19 PM

Analogy
 
Imagine, if you will, an intelligent person who is blind from birth. Now explain, in common and in scientific terms, what light is to that person.

Now imagine doing that when you are also blind from birth.

Can you realize the difficulty? Is this not like the problem with discussion on magnetism?

Regards,

bi

BrianKerr 06-12-2018 11:02 PM

Finally I have been accepted to post. Thanks Admin. Thanks for inviting me Mikrovolt.

Markoul 06-12-2018 11:41 PM

Hello Brian!

Good to have you here! :hug:

EM

mikrovolt 06-13-2018 08:09 AM

Welcome Brian, It started on the UFO/Magnetism thread about Ken Wheeler's book.BTW who is giving lecture on July 5th. in Idaho. The conference has been successful and unique at having great people attending in an atmosphere of learning.

Timm started this thread to address FerroCell as it;s discussion, now has more variety of opinions from different aspects. Having the technology
experts here is great it can gather more interest, new ideas, open new avenues of opportunities.

I am still sorting out the various ways Ferro can help us understand the nano-scale environment of ferro and lipids, small charges acting differently from small iron. Also how the optical effects can be explained takes trained eye in what is being seen.

Sorry but it has been a real struggle to make sense. Possibly this will strengthen and agree in part with the UFO /Ken Wheeler thread as the ferroCell gets more attention in the future.

Thanks for sharing your hard work on youtube and taking the time to join everyone here.

Selfsimilarity 06-13-2018 06:04 PM

Hey guys,

I so far was reading your conversation while waiting for my accounts approval.
As Im back in contact with Timm, I thought to let you know that I want to join this club of awsome people! :D

Im Pascal, the one that wrote the webpage What really is Magnetism – Some Thoughts – An Analysis investigating Magnetism Energy Dynamics via Ferrocell (Light) & CRT (Electrons) & Matter (Iron filings). Click on the picture below to see my powerpoint presentation

My journey started quite few years ago where I started to ask questions, because after studying biochemistry, I was not able to explain how our medicine works. So I started digging, deeper and deeper. Ended up at Nassim Haramein with Planks spheres and whirmholes, as he still thinks in Gravity as main driver of our cosmos, ending up with black holes etc. Then I found Kens book, when I was in holidays in France surfing. After reading it, everything started to make more and more sense. I ordered a Ferrocell from Timm and started playing, constently asking myself, what I was looking at. I knew it must be something special, as it points to the flower of life and geometry, that our ancectiors aleady were celebrating.

I have a lot of time to think,every evening 5 hours :D when Im not working for our pharmaceutical startup trying to improve chemotherapy www.innomedica.ch, in case your interested for more info.

So recently, I though it could be likely that we observe a permanent electric field when looking at a permanent magnetic field through ferrocell, it seems to make a lot of sense to me. They are in 90° phase to the iron filing visualization, point-geometric, fractal, toroidal, just like magnetic field and electric fields, currently understood, only visible in presence of energy, such as light (ferrocell) or electrons (crt)

Better read through my webpage than me now writing everything Ive written there.

Its an absolut honor to interact with all of my idols such as Ken and Timm in a common forum :) It electrifies me, so excited :heartbeat::dance::hug:

Hi all :)

bistander 06-13-2018 06:48 PM

90°
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Selfsimilarity (Post 311147)
...
So recently, I though it could be likely that we observe a permanent electric field when looking at a permanent magnetic field through ferrocell, it seems to make a lot of sense to me. They are in 90° phase to the iron filing visualization, point-geometric, fractal, toroidal, just like magnetic field and electric fields, currently understood, only visible in presence of energy, such as light (ferrocell) or electrons (crt)
...

Hi Pascal,

Welcome to this board.

From your paragraph which I quote, the image seen from a ferrocell or CRT resulting from a permanent magnet field is likely that of an electric field and not the magnetic field itself. That concept has merit and fits more closely with what I have been saying.

Thanks for that insight.

bi

Selfsimilarity 06-13-2018 07:08 PM

Hi Bi,

Yes I agree. I think its all about the electric field. What we think about magnetism is rather the effect of the di-electriostatic field.

I think its an electrostatic field that is fully 3-dimensional, permanent opposed spin equilibrium through polarization/disturbance, toroidal, fractal, vibration creating geometry. Resonant/Harmony in relation to matter, pulsed in relation to electron and photon.
The potential is increasing by decreasing volume, up to infinity when infinitely compressed, as light shows. The smaller the wavelength, the higher the energy density. Infinitely small wavelength, infinite potential at zero point. (You cant draw a point, as then it becomes dimensional, its something, yet cant be drawn, everything and nothing at the same time) :D

Selfsimilarity 06-13-2018 08:14 PM

What do you think about an electric potential of a permanent magnet that is constantly there (field seen in ferrocell). It should be measureable.

bistander 06-13-2018 10:32 PM

Electric potential
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Selfsimilarity (Post 311150)
What do you think about an electric potential of a permanent magnet that is constantly there (field seen in ferrocell). It should be measureable.

The permanent magnet doesn't have a measurable electric potential. In fact, some rare earth magnet material is electrically conductive. However I think that the magnet's field when interacting with material and energy external to the magnet develops electric potential(s).

Regards,

bi

TheoriaApophasis 06-14-2018 12:44 AM

From the Genius of Dr. Oleg D Jefimenko

he wrote many books and taught electrical theory and was one smart MOFO himself......

Faraday was the originator of the concept of the magnetic field, (which is described in terms of "magnetic curves" our present day "magnetic lines of force") however HE NEVER SO MUCH AS SUGGESTED in his works that induced currents were a resultant of changing magnetic fields. ON THE CONTRARY, he clearly associated the phenomena of electromagnetic induction with changing electrical currents. As per Maxwell, he TOO considered EM induction as a phenomena in which a current (or EM force) is induced in a circuit. but not as a phenomena in which a changing magnetic field causes an electrical field. He CLEARLY said that the induced EM force is "MEASURED BY, not CAUSED BY the changing mag field" Just as Faraday, he made NO allusion to ANY CAUSAL link between magnetic and electric fields - Dr. Oleg D. Jefimenko Causality, Electromagnetic induction & Gravitation

Maxwell too considered the electromagnetic induction as a phenomena in which a current is induced in a circuit, but not as a phenomena in which a changing magnetic field causes and electric field. He clearly said that the induced electromotive force is measured by, not caused by the changing magnetic field. Just as Faraday, he made no allusion to any causal link between magnetic and electric fields. - Dr. Oleg D. Jefimenko Causality, Electromagnetic induction & Gravitation

Neither of Maxwells equations nor their solutions indicate an existence of a causal links between electric and magnetic fields. Therefore we must conclude that an electromagnetic field is a dual entity always having an DIelectric and a magnetic component simultaneously created by their common sources: time variable electric charges and currents. - Dr. Oleg D. Jefimenko Causality, Electromagnetic induction & Gravitation

A time variable electric current creates an electric field parallel to that current. The field exerts an electric force on the charge in the nearby conductors thereby creating induced electric currents in them. This in the term “electromagnetic induction” is an actually a misnomer, since no magnetic effect is involved in the phenomena, and since the induced current is caused solely by the time variable electric current and by the electric field produced by that current. - Dr. Oleg D. Jefimenko Causality, Electromagnetic induction & Gravitation

Selfsimilarity 06-14-2018 06:40 AM

Ken, you mention it to be a dual entity - in an equilibrium.

A Dielectric component, and a magnetic component

But we create the permanent magentic component/field by electron spin alignment not by creating "electrons" itself, thats why I think magnetism of rather being an effect than part of the cause regarding the dual-incomensurable dielectric structure. Retroduction would also say there can only be one thing ;)


Coudnt it be that the electron is a permanent existing purly dielectric structure resulting in permanent magnetic effects such as attraction, repulsion, acceleration that are in 90° phase to the dielectric field?
Couldnt the toroid and the hyperboloid be part of the same one thing? The polarized dielectric "hypertoroboloid"?

Regards,
Pascal :)

Markoul 06-14-2018 01:50 PM

Occam's razor
 
Dear Selfsimilarity,

Quote:

So recently, I though it could be likely that we observe a permanent electric field when looking at a permanent magnetic field through ferrocell, it seems to make a lot of sense to me. They are in 90° phase to the iron filing visualization, point-geometric, fractal, toroidal, just like magnetic field and electric fields, currently understood, only visible in presence of energy, such as light (ferrocell) or electrons (crt)

I present a more intriguing and simple possibility however.

What if the ferrocell shows correctly the magnetic flux of a dipole magnet and iron filings classical experiment DOES NOT?! And just shows the magnetic dipole interactions of the iron filings with a magnet mistakenly taken for more than 200 yeas as the field of the magnet? :wall:

After all the right hand rule gives us a 90° difference between the Electric and the magnetic vector, so why you should expect there to be any other difference than that between the Electric flux and the magnetic flux?

BTW, Welcome to the forum!:hug:

Kind Regards,

EM

TheoriaApophasis 06-14-2018 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Selfsimilarity (Post 311161)
But we create the permanent magentic component/field by electron spin

Pascal :)


There is no such nonsense as electrons. :rofl:


Tesla said it

Heaviside said it

Dollard said it.


"Mother nature is not a hooker on crack with a bag of bumping particles"- Myself
:rofl:

Selfsimilarity 06-14-2018 08:18 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Coudnt it be that the electron is a permanent existing purly dielectric structure resulting in permanent magnetic effects such as attraction, repulsion, acceleration that are in 90° phase to the dielectric field?
Couldnt the toroid and the hyperboloid be part of the same one thing? The polarized fractal dielectric "hypertoroboloid"?

Please Ken, dont think Im still stuck at the electron ;)

Markoul 06-14-2018 09:40 PM

I'm joining the youtube ferrocell club
 
Any donations are welcome and F**K You!!...

...just kidding! :D




EM
p.s. why shoot in 30fps if you can have 60fps?
Also almost all of my videos (about 600) are unlisted, I don't want them to spread out...

Markoul 06-14-2018 09:51 PM

Ferrocell Decipher Quiz!
 
5 Attachment(s)
In order to decipher why we see what we see in a ferrocell I am starting a series of quiz questions.

You are welcome to contribute with your explanations. The winner coming with the best explanation will win a one night stand with the Mother****er previously presented in this thread here. :rofl:

Quiz Question 1:

Why a ring magnet under the ferrocell does not show a field inside (pole view) fig.1 ring magnet under the ferrocell?

http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...-ferrocell-png


But when a ring magnet is placed above the ferrocell the field inside the ring shows up? Why is that? Fig.2

http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...-ferrocell-png


Bonus!


I've put a ring magnet inside water!!...

http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...1&d=1529014731


EM


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved