Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube 2018 ENERGY CONFERENCE - ALL SEATS SOLD OUT!

2018 Energy Science & Technology Conference
Sponsored by Teslacoin Foundation

Teslacoin Foundation

https://www.tesla-coin.com/inventorshome/


Go Back   Energetic Forum > >
   

Renewable Energy Discussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.

* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #31  
Old 07-08-2014, 02:39 AM
Netica's Avatar
Netica Netica is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 142
You have decided to attack the Pope, Mother Mary and effectively God and all who believe in God in the first few pages of your book.
I thought it was supposed to be about Magnetism.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann
Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets

  #32  
Old 07-08-2014, 03:46 AM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Netica View Post
You have decided to attack the Pope, Mother Mary and effectively God and all who believe in God in the first few pages of your book.
I thought it was supposed to be about Magnetism.

Mmm, nope. Intro is only 2.5 pages long. The other attack I got was for attacking the fool Richard Feynman.

Nobody should EVER "try to be all things to all people"

If you don't like the intro, don't read it. However what you refer to is merely ONE sentence

You certainly didn't pay for it

Logically , attacking 1 to 2 sentences out of 110 pages, is patently absurd.
But thats ok.

Additionally, I made no such 'attack',....... what you refer to was merely an analogy to the "Cult of Quantum" explanation of magnetism as regards "Virtual photons". (i.e. nonsense).

If however, you assume I am some atheist, nothing could be further from the truth.
However none of THAT, has anything to do with magnetism.


I've never judged any book by its cover, OR its intro. This might be a rule to follow.
__________________
 

Last edited by TheoriaApophasis; 07-08-2014 at 03:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 07-08-2014, 06:44 AM
sadang sadang is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 84
I like your theory, even just for the simple fact that it does not agree with current electromagnetic theory. I'd be glad to know that has a practical application, that brings something new in a practical way, not just theoretically. I got to page 41 and so far everything you wrote is ok for me, many common things to Keely, Russell, Shauberger, Meyer, Grebennikov, and also many others who have sustained dynamic helical of ether as fundamental dynamics of universe.

After I'll finish reading the whole article, I will return with some questions, comments, suggestions if I deem necessary. Of course if you agree.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 07-08-2014, 06:54 AM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadang View Post
I like your theory, even just for the simple fact that it does not agree with current electromagnetic theory. I'd be glad to know that has a practical application, that brings something new in a practical way, not just theoretically. I got to page 41 and so far everything you wrote is ok for me, many common things to Keely, Russell, Shauberger, Meyer, Grebennikov, and also many others who have sustained dynamic helical of ether as fundamental dynamics of universe.
After I'll finish reading the whole article, I will return with some questions, comments, suggestions if I deem necessary. Of course if you agree.

Kind regards, I am already well into the 3rd edition


New sections including formulas,
and a section on field incommensurability
section on divergent and convergent gradients etc.
And a section on 'fields vs. space'

Something amounting to 40+ more pages.



However I'm currently busy building a new type of motor. (and its killing me).

Today I was experimenting more with some instrumentation on a borrowed 6" by 2" thick Neodymium magnet

Id buy one, but they're $800 EACH

1 Neodymium Magnet 6 x 2 inch Disc N48 Huge Strong | eBay


It is just an "INSANELY DANGEROUS" beast.... Its one magnet that could just about KILL YOU.

I already have 100s of magnets, I dont need one of these titanic beasts.
__________________
 

Last edited by TheoriaApophasis; 07-08-2014 at 06:56 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 07-08-2014, 07:19 AM
tachyon tachyon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 233
I've actually thought about the magnetic flux lines being one with space some months ago in order to explain some thought experiments and the nature of induction in coils, to tell you the truth this is just another way to calculate things it doesn't bring new results just make you more flexible in terms of motor design e.t.c..... elinas ise re?
__________________
The pure in heart will see the light.

Last edited by tachyon; 07-08-2014 at 07:29 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07-08-2014, 07:35 AM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by tachyon View Post
I've actually thought about the magnetic flux lines being one with space some........just another way to calculate things it doesn't bring new results

In conventional motor design and calculations that is true.


However the far reaching implications in other arenas, other designs, ...is immense and mind boggling.

Best of all (well, not best, but wonderful ) it takes relativity and its insane reifications OF SPACE "as something" that "does something" etc etc.

....and flushes it at the speed of C-squared right down the toilet.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 07-08-2014, 09:48 AM
tachyon tachyon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 233
what's interesting is how this relation relates xD to space contraction of earth itself and how this perserves energy in the end I will let you think about it, think xD about what happens when particles fall down to earth, in a sense the voltage potential of earth can be deduced from it, about the photons you say I remember some guy Lapoint making videos about this structure but some say photons are really fast (time dilluted) electrons which may be more true than this.

feynman is a smart dude that makes everything overcomplicated

what do you mean "However the far reaching implications in other arenas, other designs, ...is immense and mind boggling." about mass and gravity?
__________________
The pure in heart will see the light.

Last edited by tachyon; 07-08-2014 at 10:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 07-08-2014, 10:16 AM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by tachyon View Post
what's interesting is how this relation relates xD to space contraction of earth itself and how this preserves energy in the end I will let you think about it, think xD about what happens when particles fall down to earth, in a sense the voltage potential of earth can be deduced from it, about the photons you say I remember some guy Lapoint making videos about this structure but some say photons are really fast (time diluted) electrons which may be more true than this.

Feynman is a smart dude btw

what do you mean "However the far reaching implications in other arenas, other designs, ...is immense and mind boggling." about mass and gravity?


Nope, Feynman was a lobotomized insane asylum patient and a genuine mental midget.


I suggest you look AROUND you, at your TV, computer, lights, etc etc etc etc. All that was invented by Tesla, Faraday, Steinmetz, Heaviside, JC Maxwell and some others.

The idiots in the religion of quantum generate NOTHING but piles of fictional TRASH. 99% of them do NO experiments, they create NOTHING, then invent NOTHING and their writings would make a drunkard scoff in protest.

The ONLY difference between these insane fools of GR and QM and Arthur C. Clarke, for example, is that Arther C Clarke ADMITTED he was a fiction author.




When the supposed ‘expert’ and Hollywood-scientist and academic fraud Richard Feynman was asked to explain what magnetism is, how it works, sitting in his chair, he twitched and squirmed like a frog on a hotplate, wiggling and dodging the question, then deflects, and finally says its too complex (for mere mortals) to understand. Eventually he concedes he cannot explain these “forces”. This rather infamous video of a worm on a hotplate can be found everywhere. Likewise, his book so highly praised by his hubris filled academic stooges, “QED strange theory of light and matter” explains magnetism away with angels and unicorns, or rather I should accurately say “virtual photons”, of which there is no quantitative difference between unicorns and the ‘sage’ academic explanation of “virtual photons”, both are patently absurd and offend even the common sense of a ten year old child and people collectively.

This is all of course is against Feynman’s own proclamation that “if you can’t explain it to a six year old, then you really don’t understand it”. In this case, the absurdity of unreal particles and mythical abstractions might be enjoyed conceptually by someone with the mind of a six year old. All these mathematical reifications, sadly, fall in line with the unscientific and irrational mythos of mathematical physics (Greek Atomism in reality) of which one of its key proponents declares ......“when common sense fails (to explain things rationally), uncommon sense must be created” L. Susskind

Translation?? "When we dont understand something, we make up insane fictional quasi-plausible answers"

Nothing was more perturbing and aggravating than watching the demon Richard Feynman sitting in his chair twitching and squirming and fidgeting like a frog on a frying pan when being asked very simplex and logical questions “how does magnetism work?”, “how does one magnet attract another, and what is the medium of this attraction?”. Finally after flopping like a fish on dry land for an enormous amount of time he states: “I cannot answer it in a manner in which you can understand it or that is familiar to you”. That idiots with degrees and acclaim are looked to like a empty-headed religious icon, a clueless fool put on a pedestal, is a timeless human failing, and can be forgiven. However when people assume they know what something is (if they care at all), they do not go looking for the answer to what they already assume they know.

That Feynman and others have declared (as he has done in his mystical book: QED strange theory of light and matter) that magnetism is mediated by “virtual photons” is no different than evoking unicorns and angels. Humanity has placed, as dept. chairs in countless universities and likewise, heads of mathematics and physics, people who are quite literally insane, are deep thinkers, but insane ones. The insane asylums of the world are full of genuinely deep thinkers, however it is not for sake of deep thinking they are locked up and away from others! So, taking a cue from Quantum mysticism we then ask the expert (fool) relativist “since you declare magnetism to be mediated by ‘virtual photons’, what is same?”.

Answer received? Yes, here we have it: “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”. Well, insanity has been reified, at last!

Isnt that a "cute" answer? One would be hard-pressed to find a drunkard buy such religious-level twaddle.


Feyman was 100% exactly the.... "deep thinking insane fool" - Nikola Tesla made mention of.

The one good thing about Feynman is, that he isn't generating anymore quantum insanity "Negative momentum gluons" etc etc. Poor sad science fiction writer that he was.



If Feynman was still around, I would 'kiss' him with a tire iron.

I HAVE his books, I HAVE his videos. He is genuinely a fool of the highest magnitude. Like Carl Sagan, he was nothing but a "Hollywood scientist".
Smooth talker, personable, makes jokes. 100 Charisma points, and 0 wisdom points.


What Photons? what Electrons? these are unreal reifications of field and charges.

No, "far reaching" as meant that space is purely attributional to fields and not something in "which a field is", rather is an attribute OF a field.
"no fields in space", only space IN a field.



“The more you see how strange nature behaves, the harder it is for us to make a model that explains even the how
the most simple phenomena works. Theoretical physics has given up on this pursuit.” – R. Feynman

Such a statement (as above from Richard Phoneyman) deserved a backhanded slap with brass knuckles.
__________________
 

Last edited by TheoriaApophasis; 07-08-2014 at 10:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 07-08-2014, 10:17 AM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Edit Duplicate post


(this site has a serious issue double posting when using Firefox)
__________________
 

Last edited by TheoriaApophasis; 07-08-2014 at 10:20 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 07-08-2014, 04:34 PM
sadang sadang is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 84
Quote:
However the far reaching implications in other arenas, other designs, ...is immense and mind boggling.
This is exactly for what I like alternative theories! Because the answers in the actual scientific paradigm are totally useless and circular answers. Really far from the real, simple and beautifull explanations, just descriptions of some only predictable results, explained in terms as more complicated as possbile as to not understand anything and just give the impression of depth of thought and research. Unpredictable results are not paid any attention. This model was used and aplied by J.J. Thomson when imposed (by Cavendish Laborator and its financial supporters) the electron as a particle. The same was used by Milikan when imposed the value of the electric charge of the same electron as particle (against the Ehrenhaft who using the same path of thinking proved the existence of magnetic monopoles, magnetic current and the helical movement of magnetic flux). The same method was used by Menshutkin from University of Petesburg when in 1907 removed the ether form Period Table of Mendeleev (to prepare the field for the new relativistic paradigm). Also the same method was follwed for the original 20 ecuations of Maxwell, which today are just four, and by which is modeled the entire actual sci-tech world, and examples can continue. I'm tired and disgusted by actual science, its founders and their way to interpret the experimental results, and to neglect what was not according to their predictions.

To understand magnetism based on ether dynamics is really mind boggling! To understand the world, seen and unseen, based on ether, means to change totally the current paradigm of thinking. The horizonts are truly infinite as space, time and... speed! And all these are merely limiting human terms, which are in fact manifestations of eternal and everlasting and eternal ether.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 07-08-2014, 05:30 PM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadang View Post
Unpredictable results are not paid any attention.

Indeed so, I have been saying for years and in a lecture that NOBODY

A: goes looking for something they DENY exists to begin with

B: goes looking for answers regarding something they ASSUME (due to academic hubris which is TITANIC) they already know the answers to.


Academic methodology is PURE TRASH. 10,000%

“I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties.” - N. Tesla

“Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality. ” - N. Tesla


Tesla's "bible" was the work of Roger Boskovich THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY, who himself was a hardcore student of the Retroductive method of Plato and the Platonists.

Boskovich's main source was the PERIPHYSEON 5 Vol. work (which most people have never heard of).



Quote:
Originally Posted by sadang View Post
To understand magnetism based on ether dynamics is really mind boggling! To understand the world, seen and unseen, based on ether, means to change totally the current paradigm of thinking.

When I get flack from those in the Cult of Quantum, I remind them that their "crowd" has produced NOTHING, invented NOTHING, and their writings offend even a drunk fool.


If it was created, designed or inspired , it was made by Tesla, Faraday, Maxwell, Steinmentz, Heaviside etc etc.

All these people outright admitted the Ether, even the demented fool Einstein (before he lost his mind) admitted to the Ether/Aether.

"When the electric current comes into being, it immediately sets the surrounding Ether into some kind of instantaneous motion, the
nature of which has still not been exactly determined. In spite of the continuation of the cause of this motion, namely the electric
current, the motion ceases, but the Ether remains in a potential state and produces a magnetic field. That the magnetic field is a
potential state [of the Ether] is shown by the [existence of a] permanent magnet, since the principle of conservation of energy excludes
the possibility of a state of motion in this case. The motion of the Ether, which is caused by an electric current, will continue until the
acting [electro-] motive forces are compensated by the equivalent passive forces which arise from the deformation caused by the
motion of the Ether itself." –(“Concerning the Investigation of the State of Ether in Magnetic Fields” by Albert Einstein)


Here is the REAL TRUTH of the matter well put:

“The word Ether has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics only because its past association with opposition to
relativity. This is unfortunate because stripped of these connotations, it nicely captures the way most physicists actually thin about the
vacuum. The modern concept of vacuum space confirmed by every experiment is a relativistic Ether. But we do not call it this because
Ether is a taboo term.” - Robert B. Laughlin


What GR and QM have done, in their insanity, is reify an attribute of a (or any) FIELD, that being space, "as something" that "does something" and "acts on X"


Its like saying "anger" kicks a rock (i.e. space did it)
The answer is ...... "no, you demented fool the PERSON (Aether) WITH the attribute of anger (space) kicked/moved the rock".

Typical bass-ackwards counter-logical pseudo-intellectual reifications and false causation-processing conclusions from the insanity of GR and QM.



“The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one century than in all the previous centuries of its existence.” – Nikola Tesla (referring to Ether science)


“In order to understand electricity, you have to have an understanding of counterspace, otherwise it’s impossible.”- Eric P. Dollard
__________________
 

Last edited by TheoriaApophasis; 07-08-2014 at 05:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #42  
Old 07-08-2014, 10:16 PM
tachyon tachyon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 233
I haven't read much of feynman but I have his book an online version is here FLP Vol. II Table of Contents so I don't have an opinion about your writings. He seemed smart to me because it's hard to understand him lol :P
__________________
The pure in heart will see the light.

Last edited by tachyon; 07-08-2014 at 10:27 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 07-08-2014, 10:29 PM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by tachyon View Post
I haven't studied feynman very much but it's the virtual photons that pisses off everyone that I know for sure :P

Thats only part of it. They explain EPR away with "particles traveling from the future to cause effects on the results"
Sometimes these insane folks in QM academia say "sometimes its like there are ghosts affecting the results"- Susskind


negative momentum particles that 'cause gravity'
Unicorns, angels, leprechauns....... maybe Zeus did it?

Math doesnt zero out? NO PROBLEM, create a NEW PARTICLE which MAKES it zero out.
Taa-daaa (well, nature doesnt work that way). Nor does rationality and common sense.


GR and QM contains an enormous pantheon of BS so absurd, so insane, so irrational that a drunkard on crack would (and should) scoff.


Human creatures believe these demonic fools because they're "peer reviewed" demons. Which merely means If the person under you writes the SAME STUFF (in agreement) then its "professionally peer reviewed" nonsense.
Its like 2 dung beetles agreeing how much they love the smell and sight of fecal matter.

Quackademia brain washing the sheeple
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvUD6MWufIc

hilarious<


“Scientists today think deeply rather than clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane. Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander thru equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no basis in reality.” – Nikola Tesla

“You can always recognize a relativist, they will either ask you for your credentials, or offer their credentials without you asking for or about them.”

“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


“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

Quantum insanity: “Everything we call real is made up of things that cannot be real.” – N. Bohr
Quantum insanity: “The more you see how strange nature behaves, the harder it is for us to make a model that explains even the how the most simple phenomena works. Theoretical physics has given up on this pursuit.” – R. Feynman



Mother Nature does not calculate, does not do math, she only knows of three pairs, spatial-counterspatial, centrifugal-centripetal, and charge-discharge. With these three conjugates, the entire cosmos is painted in full detail.
__________________
 

Last edited by TheoriaApophasis; 07-08-2014 at 10:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 07-09-2014, 03:02 AM
thx1138 thx1138 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 370
Deleted duplicate post
__________________
 

Last edited by thx1138; 07-09-2014 at 03:18 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 07-09-2014, 03:17 AM
thx1138 thx1138 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 370
@TheoriaApophasis

I've often wondered why Dr. Tesla went to the trouble to patent his fountain.
TESLA PATENT 1,113,716 FOUNTAIN

Thank you for the insight into Dr. Tesla's later work being about dielectricity and counterspace.

That gives a whole new perspective of his "The Problem of Increasing Human Energy" and "DIAGRAM b. OBTAINING ENERGY FROM THE AMBIENT MEDIUM".


I have been looking for over a year for the source of the Tesla quote “If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6, and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.” and have yet to find it. Have you come across it in your researches? I'm looking for the context.

Quote:
Mother Nature does not calculate, does not do math, she only knows of three pairs, spatial-counterspatial, centrifugal-centripetal, and charge-discharge. With these three conjugates, the entire cosmos is painted in full detail.
That covers the 3 and the 6.
3X1 = the fundamentals: space, force, & charge
3X2 = the fundamental conjugates
3X3 = ?
Any ideas about the 9 or is the quote hogwash invented by numerologists? Without the context it is meaningless jibberish.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 07-09-2014, 03:37 AM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by thx1138 View Post
@TheoriaApophasis

I have been looking for over a year for the source of the Tesla quote “If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6, and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.” and have yet to find it. Have you come across it in your researches? I'm looking for the context.
.


I know exactly where Tesla got them from, from his "bible", THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY by Roger Boskovich

You can see him reading it here:



WHICH Bosckovich got it from the 5 vol. set of the PERIPHYSEON

I scanned those extremely rare books in years ago, theyre HERE:
PERIPHYSEON by Eriugena 4 VOL SET. Incredibly RARE | Scribd


which all came down from the Neopythagoreans.
You can read about it HERE:
Iamblichus the Theology of Arithmetic


3 is generation, 6 is excess (excessius in Latin) and 9 is transcendence.


3 6 9 are also the 3 "super" numbers of electricity and magnetism.

magnetism, dielectricity and frequency (or precession) 3

6 pressure zones in a 360 degree revolution of ANY magneto-dielectric system, 2 centripetal, 2 centrifugal, and 2 dielectric
6 is also the number for SPACE or Xaos in ancient greek Pythagoreanism, the "excess byproduct of a field (the Chora, or Khora)".


9 is also the INCOMMENSURATE number of FIELD PERFECTION, you can see it in my book here about the field geometries:
https://archive.org/details/magnetism1small

Page 36:
(all angles of magneto-dielectricity in a binding conjugate system add to 9)
108
72
54
36
18


and of course.....Taaa-Daaaaaaa 360 degrees (in rotation = produce electricity).




9 is also the "divine number of the Pythagoreans" which make up the 1-1-Phi triagle which is 108 degrees, 36, and 36 (again, all are totaled to 9 , 9 and 9).

I wrote a intro to this discovery that needs a LOT of updating. Just an article years ago on a serious discovery I made in the ancient greek of Rep. 509d-511:
https://archive.org/details/Pythagor...TheGoldenRatio

(sadly, that article is only half finished and half-polished).





Long before Christianity came along, there was a Pythagorean "trinity", Monad, Nous, Xaos, Hyle (matter/mass), On (Being 'man)

same as the golden ratio 1 1 2 3 5 ............ 1 and 1 (Monad and Nous).... 2 and 3 (magnitude-matter/mass) ... and 5 "man" (On [in the Greek], ie being)

1 and 1 are 'principle-attribute' (i.e. coeternals)
2 and 3 are 'principle-attribute' (i.e. coeternals)
5 is the product of 1 1 2 3

(1 1 2 3 5 8 13..........etc. golden section, golden ratio. )


Which I coined about 10 years ago (to keep it simple!) "Monad, Mind, Magnitude, Matter, Man" Monas, Nous, Xaos, Hyle, On
1 and 1 are "1 thing" 2 and 3 are "1 thing" 5 is "1 thing"


That is the ancient "Pythagorean 'trinity' "



(I have a lot lot more on this, but wont bore you )



See this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5mJeRtjPvY

__________________
 

Last edited by TheoriaApophasis; 07-10-2014 at 06:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 07-10-2014, 03:25 PM
thx1138 thx1138 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 370
Citation

@TheoriaApophasis - Good stuff. Thank you. I've seen some of it before but it's starting to make sense now. Especially the vortex math.

Since my early days (teenager I guess) I've always been interested in functional simplicity and spent some time back then looking at the Buahaus design theory. Functional simplicity to me is the design of the universe and the basis of beauty which is explained by The Golden Ratio.

One of the things I was looking for regarding Tesla's quote was a citation - the context in which he said it. I've spent the last three years studying the works of Tesla and, although I see the quote all over the internet, I've never seen a citation from which I can determine the context in which he made the statement.

During the last three years of studying Tesla's work I put together a few documents in chronological order about how his ideas changed and developed over his lifetime. I appreciate your work on the basis of the statement but am really looking for the citation to see where it fits in that timeline.

Again, many thanks.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 07-10-2014, 06:33 PM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by thx1138 View Post
I appreciate your work on the basis of the statement but am really looking for the citation to see where it fits in that timeline.


You're using the wrong approach, like an academic, looking for linear influence.
X influenced Y, who got it from Y

(which is kinda what I did above)



In genuine philosophy for example, things are examined circularly.
meaning around what or who its centers and how X circle influences X.



Tesla said it to his close buddy George Sylvester Viereck, who was a mystic.

Tesla said it to him who recorded same somewhere in the mind 1920s.




You should always (just a recommendation) approach things AGAINST an academic by doing this:

1. is this right?
2. what is it right?
3. what does it really mean?
4. If 123, then what are the implications?
5. OK.........how do I use this information?





Here is Telsas poem to his buddy George Sylvester Viereck, SLAMMING Einstein:

"Too bad, Sir Isaac, they dimmed your renown and turned your great science upside down. Now a long haired crank, Einstein by name, puts on your high teaching all the blame. (he) Says: matter and force are transmutable and wrong the laws you thought immutable. I am much too ignorant, my son, for grasping (crazy) schemes so finely spun.”

- N. Tesla (Fragments of Olympian Gossip. by Nikola Tesla regarding Einstein)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 07-11-2014, 10:39 AM
sadang sadang is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 84
Hi Ken,

I still read your book and try to deeply understand the real meanings of the common terms used to describe the magnetism as you see, understand, interpret and describe it, before begining to express some of my questions! But for now I would like to bother you with an older puzzle of me related to one of Tesla's words. It is about a phrase that I meet everywhere on the internet, but nowhere in the Tesla's writings or other references to Tesla's work.

The phrase is: "My brain is only a receiver, in the Universe there is a core from which we obtain knowledge, strength and inspiration. I have not penetrated into the secrets of this core, but I know that it exists". Do you have knowledge about it, belong's it to Tesla, when was it used and so on!

Thanks,
SaDAng
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 07-11-2014, 05:36 PM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadang View Post
Hi Ken,
The phrase is: "My brain is only a receiver, in the Universe there is a core from which we obtain knowledge, strength and inspiration. I have not penetrated into the secrets of this core, but I know that it exists". Do you have knowledge about it, belong's it to Tesla, when was it used and so on!

Thanks,
SaDAng

It doesnt "belong to tesla" , not meaning he didnt say it, but its an ancient (just another analogy than a radio reciever of course) analogy.

Its a 100% Emanationist allusion to which Boskovich (however there were no receivers in his time) refers to 'receiving light from afar'

Tesla just applied the logical "brain is a radio tuning into a frequency"

I use the analogy all the time to refer to Neoplatonic theology of there "is a signal COINCIDENT to the radio but no signal IN THE RADIO"

and "no little people inside the TV set " etc.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 07-12-2014, 05:43 PM
sadang sadang is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 84
Hi Ken,

I finally arrived at the final of your work. Very interesting, very logic and correct, but only seen trough a shift of thinking paradigm, from an empty space born from nowhere and filled by actual science withh infinite type of virtual particles, fields, laws and rules, back to a space born from the interaction of ever helical-vortexial dynamic etheric fields. Only words of appreciations from me!

Even if right now I don't have a comprehensive and deep understandings of all implications of what you explain, the main ideea with which I think should start this book is the existence of the ether, as an universal 0 reference, from which everything arise and to which everything tends. And that this ether is not spatialy located somewhere outside of us, because there is no an "outside" concept except the one defined in an utopic empty space.

Avoiding to comment too much on the edge of your work, not until I read at least one more time, I would like to draw your attention to some personal experiments with magnets.

In the picture below is the interaction of the magnetic field of a cylindrical magnet, placed on a CRT with luminophores in delta. As you can see the image resultant is of a two overlapped colored triange (conform with triangular shape of luminophores), which reverses their color (blue-purple), at reversing the polarity of magnetic field. I made these experiments some years ago to prove for myself the helical movement of the magnetic fields, and also the change in their CW and CCW direction, according to their polarity.


Next week I'll repeat them again, to confirm for myself the dielectric-inertial plane, by its effect over the CRT image. I'll keep you informed about this. Or maybe you have some suggestions for this kind of experiment!

Thanks,
Danut
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #52  
Old 07-12-2014, 06:55 PM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadang View Post
And that this ether is not spatially located somewhere outside of us, because there is no an "outside" concept except the one defined in an utopic empty space.

We are all swimming fields, and all atoms are dynamo field creation 'points' since a "still atom with field(s)" cannot and doesn't exist. We are composed of (existentially of course) endless compounded fields, and walking in enormous fields moving in other fields and others and others.

According to the math of Dr. O. Defimchenko who backs up my premise , there exists no space other than as a posterior attribute TO or OF any field, meaning there are no fields "in space", but only space as an attribute within and TO any field.

Space is "empty" , in that it does nothing, is nothing, acts on nothing, and controls nothing. Empty is merely a fallacy of relationship, X is empty of Y, but there is no such thing as "emptiness"

Ask anyone if they've "seen anything that's empty" If they say yes, then ask them WHO saw it (they did), and inform them since there was a witness to it, then it really wasn't empty at all, since "He/she/they" were IN there witnessing it.

We are living on the "out-side", the In-side (counterspace), or the Ether at "rest" which isn't being perturbed into any one of several energy archetypes (radial, circular, spatial, dielectric-centripetal-counterspatially moving) would be the in-side.



Kha, and the denotation of 0 or Xaos (space) brief primer:

Kha, cf. Greek Xaos, is generally "cavity"; and in the Rg Veda, particularly "the hole in the nave of a wheel through which the axle runs" (Monier Williams). A. N. Singh has shown conclusively that in Indian mathematical usage, current during the earlier centuries of the Christian era, kha means "zero";(1) Suryadeva, commenting on Aryabhata, says that "the khas refer to voids (khaini sunya upa lakptani) . . . thus khadvinake means the eighteen places denoted by zeros." Among other words denoting zero are sunya, akasa, vyoma, antariksa, nabha, ananta, and purna.(2) We are immediately struck by the fact that the words sunya, "void," and purna, "plenum," should have a common reference; the implication being that all numbers are virtually or potentially present in that which is without number; expressing this as an equation, o=x-x, it is apparent that zero is to number as possibility is to actuality. ,.gain, employment of the term ananta with the same reference implies an identification of zero with infinity; the beginning of all series being thus the same as their end. This last idea, we may observe, is met with already in the earlier metaphysical literature, for example RV IV.I.II, where Agni is described as "hiding both his ends (guhamano anta) "; AB 111.43, "the Agnistoma is like a chariot wheel, endless (ananta)"; JUB 1.35, "the Year is endless (ananta), its two ends (anta) are Winter and Spring . . . so is the endless chant (anantam saman)." These citations suggest that it may be possible to account for the later mathematicians selection of technical terms by reference to an earlier usage of the same or like terms in a purely metaphysical context.

Our intention being to demonstrate the native connection of the mathematical terms kha, etc., with the same terms as employed in purely metaphysical contexts, it will be necessary to prepare the diagram of a circle or cosmic wheel (cakra, mandala) and to point out the significance of the relationships of the parts of such a diagram according to universal tradition and more particularly in accordance with the formulation of the Rg Veda. Take a piece of blank paper of any dimensions, mark a point anywhere upon it, and With this point as center draw two concentric circles of any radii, but one much less than the other; draw any radius from the center to the outer circumference. With exception of the center, which as a point is necessarily without dimension, note that every part of our diagram is merely representative; that is, the number of circles may be indefinitely increased, and the number of radii likewise, each circle thus filled up becoming at last a plane continuum, the extended ground of any given world or state of being; for our purpose we are considering only two such worlds mythologically speaking, Heaven and Earth, or psychologically, the worlds of subject and object as forming together the world or cosmos, typical of any particularized world which may be thought of as partial within it. Finally, our diagram may be thought of either as consisting of two concentric circles with their common radii and one common center, or as the diagram of a wheel, with its felly, nave, spokes, and axle point.

Now in the first place, as a geometrical symbol, that is to say with respect to measure or numeration, our diagram represents the logical relationships of the concepts naught or zero, inconnumerable unity, and indefinite multiplicity; the blank (sunnya) surface having no numerical significance; the central point (Indu, bindu) being an inconnumerable unity (inconnumerable, advaita, because there cannot be conceived a second center); and either circumference an endless (ananta) series of points, which may be thought of as numbers; the totality (sarvam) of the numbered, that is to say individual, points representing the sum of a mathematically infinite series extending from one to "infinity," and conceivable as plus or minus according to the direction of procedure. The whole area (sarira) delimited corresponds to place (desa), a revolution of the circles about their center corresponds to time (kala) It will be observed further that any radius connects analogous or corresponding points or numbers on the two circumferences;(3) if, now, we suppose the radius of one or both circles indefinitely reduced, which brings us to the central point as limiting concept (that is also "as it was in the beginning"), it is evident that even this point can be thought of only as a plenum of all the numbers represented on either circumference.(4) on the other hand, this point, at the same time that it represents an inconnumerable unity and, as we have seen, a plenum, must also be thought of as representing, that is, as the symbol of, zero, for two reasons: (1) inasmuch as the concept to which it refers is by definition without place and without dimensions, and therefore nonexistent, and (2) the mathematically infinite series, thought of as both plus and minus according to direction, cancel out where all directions meet in common focus.

So far as I know, Indian literature does not provide a specifically geometrical exegesis exactly corresponding to what is given in the preceding paragraph. What we do find in the metaphysical and religious traditions is a corresponding usage of the symbol of the Wheel (primarily the solar chariot, or a wheel thereof), and it is in this connection that we first meet with some of the most significant of those terms which are later on employed by the mathematicians. In RV 1.155.6 and 1.164.2, II, 13, 14, 48; AV x.8.4 7; KB xx.i; JUB 1.35; BU 1.5.15; Svet. Up. 1.4; PS 6, and like texts, the year as an everlasting sequence is thought of as an unwasting wheel of life, a revolving wheel of the Angels, in which all things have their being and are manifested in succession; "none of its spokes is last in order" (RV v.85.5) . The parts of the wheel are named as follows: ani, the axle point within the nave (note that the axle causes revolution, but does not itself revolve); kha, nabhi, the nave (usually as space within the hub, occasionally as the hub itself); ara, spoke, connecting hub and felly; nemi, pavi, the felly. It should be observed that nabhi, from nabh, to expand, is also "navel"; similarly in anthropomorphic formulation, "navel" corresponds to "space" (MU vi.6) ; in the Rg Veda, the cosmos is constantly thought of as "expanded" (pi n) from this chthonic center.



Quote:
Originally Posted by sadang View Post
In the picture below is the interaction of the magnetic field of a cylindrical magnet, placed on a CRT with luminophores in delta. As you can see the image resultant is of a two overlapped colored triange (conform with triangular shape of luminophores), which reverses their color (blue-purple), at reversing the polarity of magnetic field. I made these experiments some years ago to prove for myself the helical movement of the magnetic fields, and also the change in their CW and CCW direction, according to their polarity.

Well, you're looking at a reciprocating field STILL in only 2 dimensions.

Lovely pics!!!!!

CW and CCW is just meant polarization, but even that is a fallacy of spatial attribution which doesn't exist.

spin ANY object and its moving in the same direction, BUT appears CW from one end and CCW from the other end


Use SPHERE MAGNETS to get the best "views" off a CRT screen

Well, I have about another 40 pages to add to the book, with more details, pictures, and I have videos to upload etc etc.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sadang View Post
infinite type of virtual particles
Nope, nature doesn't have any of those things. Like unicorns and angels, no such things.

Thats the realm of the Cult of Quantum (muons, gluons, negative momentum particles, angel dust particles, 2 legged unicorn particles, 4-eyed pixie dust particles)

bit of humor.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by sadang View Post
Next week I'll repeat them again, to confirm for myself the dielectric-inertial plane, by its effect over the CRT image.
You can use simple magnetic viewing film which shows simple velocities NOT polarity, to see the dielectric inertial plane. Its the 'electric flywheel' that makes any magnet a 'magnet'.
__________________
 

Last edited by TheoriaApophasis; 07-12-2014 at 07:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 07-12-2014, 08:44 PM
sadang sadang is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 84
Thanks Ken for your comments!

I didn't read until today the Rig Veda, just parts of it over years, ond only when my searches took me accidentaly to it. Instead, I read Ramayana and Mahabharata wahe I was 10-11 years, and it fascinated me on the one hand, but also I felt all things described there somehow very known or common to me.

These pics belongs to a set of movies, and if you consider valuable I can place them here. I use magnetic film in my experiments but I consider the CRT more valuable, because we talk here about dynamic fileds interactions, even though they are seen just as 2D projection of more complex 3D dynamics. But I have a very good spatial view, and I can easily imagine the 3D aspects based on 2D projections.

Let me now show you another two intriguing pictures, of a spherical magnet on which I placed a few drops of ferrofluid. Under a light source of a desk lamp I got these hexagonal and square light reflection (2D projection of a 3D specific dynamic), which I believe is not accidental. The association that I did at that time was similar to 2D geometric shapes obtained in cymatic experiments.


Have a nice weekend,
SaDAng
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 07-12-2014, 09:39 PM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadang View Post
These pics belongs to a set of movies, and if you consider valuable I can place them here
Does a bear love honey? YES POST THEM



Yes, I use a CRT too, they're lovely to use.

There is a toy (see pic in THIS THREAD ABOVE) that shows so wonderfully the dielectric inertial plane, that "pin art" toy can do MORE THINGS and show you more things that nothing else can.

Also after 2 years of work, earlier this week I perfected a 3D "device" I am working on trying to get a patent for, that shows a flowing vortex in real time.

Ive shown the "device" to a few people, and its knocked their socks off.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sadang View Post
Let me now show you another two intriguing pictures, of a spherical magnet on which I placed a few drops of ferrofluid. Under a light source of a desk lamp I got these hexagonal and square light reflection (2D projection of a 3D specific dynamic), which I believe is not accidental. The association that I did at that time was similar to 2D geometric shapes obtained in cymatic experiments.


Did you see my other thread on diff. types of ferrofluid formulations???
Make your own ferrofluid viewing device, cheaper and much better. 3 diff. types


Lovely pics yet again.


YOUR SECOND PICTURE SHOWS THE 137.5077 degree golden angle
I detail in the book. WHILE your picture looks (only perspectively) like a diff triangle, flatten it out in your mind and you will see that 137.5077 (apex angle) on the centripetal and precessing vortex in your SECOND picture....

Of course, like iron filings, the ferrofluid is only a SNAPSHOT of those angles, its constantly precessing round and round at that specific geometry.


ANY AND ALL FIELD VIEWING MATERIALS (except the one I just created) only show instant snapshots of field reciprocation. They "lock" into the field pressures and become magnetically induced and therefore arent moving to show the centrifugal and centripetal reciprocation

Taaaa-Daaa!!!!! Lovely picture from YOU proving my precession angle points I found as well.




Not so easy to get ferrofluid off that magnet, I "love" the way it stains your hands.

I just ordered more ferrofluid myself, I had 12 ounces and STILL ran out.
__________________
 

Last edited by TheoriaApophasis; 07-12-2014 at 09:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 07-13-2014, 04:01 AM
thx1138 thx1138 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheoriaApophasis View Post
You're using the wrong approach, like an academic, looking for linear influence.
X influenced Y, who got it from Y

(which is kinda what I did above)



In genuine philosophy for example, things are examined circularly.
meaning around what or who its centers and how X circle influences X.
I'm neither an academic (high school education) nor a philosopher. I work from a background of 40 years of professional software development, often on projecst that take years before they are released the first time.

After hearing what appeared to be a lot of gibberish about what Tesla did and said, I went back to the source - Dr. Tesla himself. My approach has been to attempt to follow his train of thought on two of his developments - fuelless energy production and wireless transmission of industrial scale power. It's been an interesting project since I also had to determine what we know today that was not known at the time he was working on these ideas to get a handle on the information that he had available and how it influenced his thinking.


Quote:
Tesla said it to his close buddy George Sylvester Viereck, who was a mystic.

Tesla said it to him who recorded same somewhere in the mind 1920s.
I've heard it attributed to Walter Russel also. That's why I'm looking for a citation.

I'm enjoying your work. Thank you.

I don't know much about philosophy but I particularly enjoyed a line in the movie "Max Dugan Returns". Max Dugan shows up to visit his estranged son that he never knew with a boat load of money he stole from a Las Vega casino that screwed him over on a real estate deal. He tells his son that his field of endeavor is philosophy. His son says, "I didn't know you could make a lot of money in philosophy." Max Dugan says, "You can if you have the right one."
__________________
 

Last edited by thx1138; 07-13-2014 at 04:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 07-13-2014, 04:22 AM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
our western connotation of "philosophy" is western Existentialist TRASH like Kant, Hume, Nietzsche, and other mental midgets.

That "contemplate your belly button lint" philosophy is a brain wasting dead end of BS and nonsense.




The Genuine philosophy, of Pythagoras, Plato, Tesla, Plotinus, the stuff that "PRODUCES RESULTS" and bears fruit in wisdom is 100% opposite of what most people think of when they hear "philosophy"


most "philosophy" makes me want to puke too, but not the REAL stuff.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 07-13-2014, 05:28 AM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadang View Post
Thanks Ken for your comments!


SaDAng

PROOF that ON EVERY SIDE (I already proved it many other ways however!!!!!) of the magnet, you have a center situated CENTRIPETAL moving OPPOSITE to the SAME SIDED centrifugal !!!!!!!!!!



AHHHHHHH~~~~~~!!!!!! I had a stroke of genuis a little while ago today!!!!!


VIDEOS HERE:
see:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dilk8gcDxac

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fwn3CqvRumg



Uploading the video now, but heres some SNAPS:

, PROJECT a spiral FROM a camcorder to the SCREEN of the TV, and PROVE what is going on!!!!!


This is the image ON the WALL taken from the camcorder to the TV set:

which is a printed CLOCKWISE vortex



If the outside centrifugal is ALSO clockwise LIKE the printed vortex, THEN IT MUST move the vortex in the SAME CW direction

BUT!!!!!! IT MUST CREATE A CENTRIPETAL CENTER THAT IS MOVING OPPOSITE, COUNTERCLOCKWISE!!!!

TAAA-DAAAA



Since the printed vortex is CW, then a CCW centrifugal MUST distort the printed and projected vortex

Yup:-------





CCW centrifugal DISTORTING the printed CW ring, AND showing a CW centripetal



CW centrifugal spinning the printed CW ring, AND showing a CCW centripetal



also.......CCW centrifugal DISTORTING the printed CW ring, AND showing a CW centripetal
__________________
 

Last edited by TheoriaApophasis; 07-13-2014 at 07:07 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 07-13-2014, 09:02 AM
sadang sadang is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 84
Hi Ken,

Because you mentioned the ancient indian vedas let me show you something much older than indian vedas. It is about slavon aryan vedas, a set of of five books of wisdoms from which I found translated in english only the first one called "Book of wisdom of Perun". Here is a single strophe:

Sacred hymns and songs,
will not save from falsehood those,
who easily yield to deception,
who stay in a world of charms and self illusions.
Like birds leave nest,
when their wings grow,
so sacred songs leave human,
when the time comes...


Coming back to magnetism and its beautiful world, here is the magnetism playlist of my youtube channel:
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYQG...1SxT_I40ruVosd

I see that you use a CRT with liniar shape of luminophores. This would be a nice comparative work from triangular and liniar CRTs. I'll also create a grid image and will post here the results for different shape of magnets.

I'm glad to hear that you managed to finally create a 3D visualizer for magnetic fields. I don't understand why you need a patent, instead to release it free to general public, but I respect your will.

Here are my thoughts about a method to measure/visualize in 3D the structure of magnetic fields. Maybe you are well aware of the work of Howard Johnson and its method and results by plotting on a computer the magnetic field using a Hall sensor! I also thought to make this thing but using three Hall sensors, positioned on XYZ axes, as closer as they can be positioned, to measure the magnitude and sense of the magnetic flux. But it still remained just in the phase of project. More easier is to do this thing using three small ball compasess, with three degrees of freedom each one, and which will let me see any variations in the three coordinates. I also thought to use ferrofluid for this task, but my finall consclusion was that regardless of the method chosen, it is impossible to see in all its splendor a 3D movement, with me being part of the same 3D world. For this I have to use the imagination, or another method, beyond the 3D realm!


Now, back to your book, cause I have to really understand the role of dielectric plane and its utility in everyday life!

SaDAng
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 07-13-2014, 09:07 AM
TheoriaApophasis's Avatar
TheoriaApophasis TheoriaApophasis is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Florida, Europe, and NY
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadang View Post
Maybe you are well aware of the work of Howard Johnson and its method and results by plotting on a computer the magnetic field using a Hall sensor!
Yes, I know about Howard, he is so incredibly INCREDIBLY dead dead wrong on almost every level imaginable. Ive read his work, he does'nt understand anything.
Just reading his work makes me furious at his ignorance


but at least he tried.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sadang View Post
I also thought to use ferrofluid for this task, but my final conclusion was that regardless of the method chosen, it is impossible to see in all its splendor a 3D movement

Nope on that one, I created some time ago a special suspension using ferrofluid to show 3D mechanics of vortex motion.

Its not "impossible" at all, I have the "100% REAL" (5 copies of the device) only a few feet from me ..

Its all about the suspension material the ferrofluid is in and its suspension viscosity

THAT however is not what I invented earlier this week, which is not ferrofluid based.



Nice video playlist, watching NOW.


I myself have about another 12 or more videos to make on stuff nobody has seen before on magnetism.
__________________
 

Last edited by TheoriaApophasis; 07-13-2014 at 09:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 07-13-2014, 09:56 AM
Netica's Avatar
Netica Netica is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 142
Hello TheoriaApophasis,

I am now well into your book, but going quite slow as I usually have to re-read paragraphs over many times, I think it's great stuff, and thank you very much for sharing your book and research for free.

I just have a question with something I'm thinking about,

As I understand it, you are saying that the field goes out centrifugally on the outside of one side of the magnet and then centripetally goes in at the middle on the other side of the magnet. If the field is continuous from one side to the other and there are two opposite at the same time then these fields must cross each other going through each other in opposite directions. My question is how are these fields doing this and what effect does it have?

Thanks
netica
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

For One-Time Donations, use admin@ this domain > energeticforum.com

Choose your voluntary subscription

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers