Uncovering the Missing Secrets of Magnetism. 92 pages. Free new book

[TheoriaApophasis]

Yes, concentrating all of the magnets flux into one small area kinda like a Halbach array?

thats a description.


now the explanation


The REAL question is, what is the physical boundary that restricts the magnetism and causes HIGH gauss ratings at the "pointy end"


The physical MAGNET shape isnt constricting the magnetism, rather something else present at the boundary of the physical magnet.


one is translational to the other, but the shape is one thing, what the shape affects is another. Magnetism is secondary to a primary , so what is in the shape that alters the primary and resultantly the secondary.

[nutzNvoltz]

Yes, concentrating all of the magnets flux into one small area kinda like a Halbach array?

[TheoriaApophasis]

Just watched the video. Very interesting effects. Would there be a pancake coil involved anywhere in this experiment?

Here is one I will leave a mystery for the 3rd edition to be answered.


VERY FEW PEOPLE even know these exist....


I wonder if people can figure THIS OUT......PYRAMID magnets, simply by changing the shape of a square magnet to a pyramid >>>>>>>>>>>>RADICALLY increases its gauss rating



Theyre used for medical testing, experimentation


See video here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNtZUFhjquw&list=UUh3cY-IW8QsEFmAh-TAWwrw

Pyramid Magnets - Focusing Flux to a Point

SuperMagnetMan



Yes, he even built a pyramidal array that reaches 3 TESLAS in power from just permanent magnets.


No "pyramid power" etc etc. etc. You can do the same thing by stacking smaller and smaller magnets into a pyramid as well.



Well, really IT IS "pyramid power!" ((( NO, I dont do any new age nonsense)...


( i know how, but lets see if others know)

[TheoriaApophasis]

Just watched the video. Very interesting effects. Would there be a pancake coil involved anywhere in this experiment?

Ehh, I wont comment on that video. I merely state effects that are present.


I leave it at that.

I can assure you of one thing, the effects easily felt really ARE THERE.



Now I have to wait until the 25 of August when the moon is under the earth again. ....late at night.

[nutzNvoltz]

Fascinating video!

I assume by that comment you havent seen my video #22


however i WILL NOT comment on that video

Just watched the video. Very interesting effects. Would there be a pancake coil involved anywhere in this experiment?

[TheoriaApophasis]

The problem with your book is that it doesn't explain anything

This slot machine doesnt accept baseless claims as payment.

additionally, there are roughly 140 more pages to add to the book. Likewise another 100+ videos.

So, you have said absolutely nothing.

I have read Eric Dollard's books and seen his videos, but it left me with more questions than answers and so far I haven't seen anything of practical use in his writings.

That comment alone speaks volumes about your "capacitance"

[Ben2503]

"magnetism is the dielectric FIELD" - Faraday





I explain PM in the book rather well, suggest you read it, its free. Or dont, I couldnt care less.

The circulatory NON SPIN nature of an electrical current was well


Suggest you read JC Maxwell and look at his diagram of magnetism in a current.

Its an electromagnet he is using, NOT a solenoid.



Suggest you read Eric P Dollards work, since its apparent you dont know the difference between dielectricity and electricity (most dont)

LONE PINE WRITINGS.


Education of yourself would be a good suggestion.

The problem with your book is that it doesn't explain anything, the same applies for most of your posts.
You show how to construct the circles using phi and call that proof.
You stick a magnat on a CRT screen and call that proof. To me it just shows how the magnetic fields inside de tv are distorted by a PM. Something we knew for decades. What's the effect of the PM on an old fashioned oscilloscope trace??

You are a self educated (autodidact) specialist that seems to have all the answers so please:
could you explain the difference between a solenoid and a PM?
What would we see if we used a pancake coil?

I have read Eric Dollard's books and seen his videos, but it left me with more questions than answers and so far I haven't seen anything of practical use in his writings.

[TheoriaApophasis]

You can repeat yourself another 1000 times, it won't make any difference.
If it precession, you still need a force to make the gyro precess.

"magnetism is the dielectric FIELD" - Faraday

Please explain the differences between the permanent- and electromagnet experiments of Tinman, without personal attacks.

I explain PM in the book rather well, suggest you read it, its free. Or dont, I couldnt care less.

The circulatory NON SPIN nature of an electrical current was well


Suggest you read JC Maxwell and look at his diagram of magnetism in a current.

Its an electromagnet he is using, NOT a solenoid.



Suggest you read Eric P Dollards work, since its apparent you dont know the difference between dielectricity and electricity (most dont)

Eric P. Dollard – Official Homepage | The only man who has replicated Tesla's wireless transmission technology. LONE PINE WRITINGS.


Education of yourself would be a good suggestion.

[Ben2503]

You need to learn a few things son.


A: I have proved the Math for it, and have the videos for it.


I have made 62 videos in the PAST MONTH ALONE


With another 100 more to add.


Take a look at the video here, and you will see it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHDsnO3y7CA

VIDEO 39 Uncovering the Missing Secrets of Magnetism. NEW DISCOVERY! FORMULA FOR MAG FIELDS!





You are ripe with pedestrian conclusions and assumptions. Not a good way to travel.

You can repeat yourself another 1000 times, it won't make any difference.
If it precession, you still need a force to make the gyro precess.

Please explain the differences between the permanent- and electromagnet experiments of Tinman, without personal attacks.

[TheoriaApophasis]

Hi TA.
Normally a vortex is formed as a result of a (horizontal) circular movement combined with a linear (vertical) movement.
Ben

You need to learn a few things son.


A: I have proved the Math for it, and have the videos for it.


I have made 62 videos in the PAST MONTH ALONE


With another 100 more to add.


Take a look at the video here, and you will see it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHDsnO3y7CA

VIDEO 39 Uncovering the Missing Secrets of Magnetism. NEW DISCOVERY! FORMULA FOR MAG FIELDS!





You are ripe with pedestrian conclusions and assumptions. Not a good way to travel.

[TheoriaApophasis]

Hi TA.
This picture doesn't proof anything wrt your theories. It just confirms what has been written in the old textbooks.
so far I haven't seen any proof of your theories in your book or posts, just a bunch of statements.
The permanent- and electromagnet experiments of Tinman show clearly that something is indeed spinning, but it isn't magnetism.
blah blah blah

blah blah
Ben

I never claimed THAT mere picture proved anything at all. I created it to make people THINK

I have at LEAST another 140 pages to add, over 2 more editions.



Sorry, but yes, magnetism IS spinning, rather reciprocating. So you are dead wrong in the extreme


A: you cannot explain anything

B: Youve just main 3 claims without substantiation.




That "spinning" is called GYROMAGNETIC PRECESSION......... also called the LARMOR FREQUENCY. Suggest you educate yourself before making anymore pedestrian claims.


Magnetism is CIRCULAR around DC and AC lines........it is PRECESSING in a magnet.






I remind you that children and fools make claims, .....the wise back them up and prove them.

[Ben2503]

Heres one for you, WHEN YOU CAN EXPLAIN THE PIC BELOW, THEN YOU UNDERSTAND MAGNETISM A LOT BETTER



HINT: it wouldnt matter if the ring and disk were square , round doesnt matter.


2x2x1" BLOCK magnet


disk magnet can ONLY rest on the inertial plane, and the KNIFE EDGE THIN steel ring can ONLY rest perpendicular to the inertial plane


no glue, no tape, no tricks, all VERY VERY EASILY balanced.

Hi TA.
This picture doesn't proof anything wrt your theories. It just confirms what has been written in the old textbooks.
so far I haven't seen any proof of your theories in your book or posts, just a bunch of statements.
The permanent- and electromagnet experiments of Tinman show clearly that something is indeed spinning, but it isn't magnetism.

Other issue are the vertical and horizontal components of the vortex. Normally a vortex is formed as a result of a (horizontal) circular movement combined with a linear (vertical) movement. Please explain in more detail.

Regards,
Ben

[TheoriaApophasis]

I also think that gravity consists of both forces (centripetal/centrifugal) that balance each other out. If we could just figure out a way to offset that balance we could have some control over it

I assume by that comment you havent seen my video #22


however i WILL NOT comment on that video

[TheoriaApophasis]

Great question! The first thing that came to mind when thinking about it was ying/yang. You have to have both forces to balance each other out. If you only had centrifugal/radiating forces wouldn't the universe have died out long ago? I don't know, just my two cents (not worth much). And dang, I was just about to go to bed! Now it looks like I'll be awake for awhile now thinking about this

[nutzNvoltz]

I also think that gravity consists of both forces (centripetal/centrifugal) that balance each other out. If we could just figure out a way to offset that balance we could have some control over it ( I mean besides climbing a ladder or jumping in an airplane that is)