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

[Dog-One]

Uncovering the Missing Secrets of Dielectricity

electricity is the product of BOTH mag and dielectricity.

Well Ken, you have done a nice job with "Uncovering the Missing Secrets of Magnetism", you think you could or have a desire to do something similar for dielectricity?

Because this is counter-spatial, my grey brain has a bit of a difficult time taking the concepts and evolving them into useful structures. Take for example lightning. To look at a strike, all I see is a very large spark plug zap. Now I know the two are entirely different, but I can't break the association between a man-made event scaled-up and the natural event.

If you have the desire, certainly count me in as a student.

[TheoriaApophasis]

Pyramid Magnets - Focusing Flux to a Point - YouTube

3 teslas

how about charged bodies the E field must be similar to B field of magnets

Phi (magnetism) X Psi (dielectricity) = Q (planck, ELECTRICITY)


electricity is the product of BOTH mag and dielectricity.





Thus Electricity, in order to manifest, a
UNION must develop. This is the union of the "male", or projective, and
"multiplied by" the "female", or receptive. Hereby, the male is the dielectric
field in counterspace (of per centimeters), and the magnetic field or female
in space (of centimeters squared). Space in cm squared is what you pay for
in "real estate", counterspace in per cm is the space between the lines on a
ruler, or between molecules in a crystal.
For the Electricity extant between a pair of wires in your lamp cord, the
closer the wires, the more capacitance, and thus the more Dielectricity.
Conversely, for the same cord, the farther apart the wires, the more
inductance and thus the more Magnetism. Therefore it is seen that the
smaller the space (the more counterspace) the more Dielectricity that can be
stored, and conversely the larger the space between the wires (the more
real estate) the more Magnetism that can be stored. Very simple, do not let
your mind make it any more complicated than that!

Continuing then it has been given that the total electrification Q is the
union, or product, of the total dielectric induction Psi, and the total
magnetic induction Phi. In other words, the dimensional relationship Q,
the total electrification, is the product of the dimension of total dielectric
induction Psi, and the dimension of total magnetic induction Phi. Hence we
have FOUR primary dimensions in electrical engineering. These are:
1) Time
2) Space
3) Dielectricity
4) Magnetism
Every other relation, quantity, or expression, Volt, Amp, Ohm, etc. is
derived from these FOUR dimensions. Time and Space are the metrical
dimensions; Dielectricity and Magnetism are the physical dimensions. It is
that basic!

----Eric P Dollard




You should buy his book

[tachyon]

Pyramid Magnets - Focusing Flux to a Point - YouTube

3 teslas

how about charged bodies the E field must be similar to B field of magnets

[TheoriaApophasis]

I'm jumping in here without being certain this is related but long ago I read (and found from experience) that ceramic magnets have a longer 'reach' than neo's while not being nearly as strong at close distance. Ceramics seem to have more effect at a distance than neo's.

[TheoriaApophasis]

Hi Ken,
SaDAng

Oh , and i forgot, you used a ring magnet

[ewizard]

Hi Ken,

Yes, I accept your criticism (I made it in a hurry because I have to go out) and I'll repeat the experiment using spherical and discoidal neodymium magnet, but unfortunately using only the scalar method of measurement with the Hall sensor from my phone and an another external sensor. I did not have any professional gaussmeter in home right now, but taking into account that actual gaussmeters use the same Hall sensor as detector I am sure the results will be the same even using a dedicated gaussmeter. Anyway, excluding physical deformities of the magnet I don't see any reason the spatial geometric shape of a ceramic magnet to be different from that of a neodymium magnet. I'll keep you informed.

Thanks,
SaDAng

I'm jumping in here without being certain this is related but long ago I read (and found from experience) that ceramic magnets have a longer 'reach' than neo's while not being nearly as strong at close distance. Ceramics seem to have more effect at a distance than neo's.

[sadang]

Hi Ken,

Yes, I accept your criticism (I made it in a hurry because I have to go out) and I'll repeat the experiment using spherical and discoidal neodymium magnet, but unfortunately using only the scalar method of measurement with the Hall sensor from my phone and an another external sensor. I did not have any professional gaussmeter in home right now, but taking into account that actual gaussmeters use the same Hall sensor as detector I am sure the results will be the same even using a dedicated gaussmeter. Anyway, excluding physical deformities of the magnet I don't see any reason the spatial geometric shape of a ceramic magnet to be different from that of a neodymium magnet. I'll keep you informed.

Thanks,
SaDAng

[TheoriaApophasis]

Hi Ken,
How do you interpret this result?
SaDAng

not a real gauss meter and a poor ceramic magnet

[sadang]

Hi Ken,

I understand the aspects of CW and CCW very well. It is just a mean of expressing the same helical dynamics ends seen from the same point of reference. I also understand well your concept of space inside fields, and also the gradient pressure of ether. And I agree space concept is a fallacy of the actual science, and it don't exists beyond our needs of defining static references (in an empty space) as points of further development and shaping the external reality (forgeting there is no external or internal, just human dualistic way of thinking).

Now, here is a simple home experiment using the Hall sensor from my phone. According to this, one pole is stronger than the other, or in another way of expressing and with your theory concepts one magnetic geometric shape is larger than the other diametrically opposed geometric shape. How do you interpret this result?

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ciqcga8rxc

Sorry if I bother you with maybe silly questions, but my goal of understanding goes far beyond the magnetism. Much more far!

Thanks,
SaDAng

[TheoriaApophasis]

as the closest dynamics to the static ether membrane and also eliminating the concept of empty space, and replacing it with the notion of fields as dynamic manifestation of the ether.SaDAng

Very accurate.

However, why the magnet has one pole stronger than the other one? Not perhaps even because of this required asymmetry? Because manifestation of dielectric inertial plane can not exist without an asymetry of strenght ebtween CW and CCW ether dynamics? Both should collapse in the ether fulcrum point. Is this asymetry relatred to the magnet internal factors or to the external medium (medium as complex dynamic ether) factors?
SaDAng

Who said one pole was stronger than the other? Polarity is just a reification of the creation of space posterior to radiative fields.

That space is "something" that "does things" that "acts on things" is an attribute reification which Tesla railed against.


According to the math of Dr. O. Jefimenko and countless other examples, the notion of "fields expanding in space" is insane.


Space has no definition or existence outside of fields.


CW and CCW has no meaning, spin anything, you cat your dog, your wife, its all moving, and in the same direction, only a spatial perceptual flaw as CW from one end, and CCW from the end.



That "asymetry" of "why ANYTHING at all" was solved by myself 10 years ago as found buried in Platos works (509d Rep.)


That formula is 1/Phi^-3

[sadang]

Hi Dog,

I was also very interested in TPU sometime but now it shows no interest to me, only possibly as a hobby device. I found an article I believe it brings an explanation consistent with current electromagnetic theory. It is about the Pointing vector and its handling. I think this article deserves attention.

- the webpage of article
- the article in PDF format
- the magazine "Chemistry and Life Nr.5, 1995" in which the article was published

Now back to the Ken theory of magnetism.

Regarded the dielectric inertial plane and where it goes when a long bar magnet is bent in a circle, here is a video using 9 ball magnets. As you can see the dielectric inertial plane is still present on each magnet, but in the case of a single long rod magnet with a sigle dielectric inertial plane, and according to my understandings of Ken's theory, this will be disipated along the entire physical lenght of the magnet. Or with other words, there will no longer be a dielectric inertial plane, there will no longer be a polarization, there will no longer be a magnet!

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNzutanXYas

SaDAng

[sadang]

Hi Dog,
...

[sadang]

Hi Ken,

Not so, all imperfection are just overlapping symmetries causing resultant asymmetries.

This is an interesting ideea, I'll get it as deep as I can. But right now my belief formed over years of searching, is that there must be a unique pattern of ether dynamics that must be respected from the micro to macro scale. Now, the new aspect that your theory brings to the forefront, is the concept of dielectric inertial plan as the closest dynamics to the static ether membrane and also eliminating the concept of empty space, and replacing it with the notion of fields as dynamic manifestation of the ether. That is an interpretation closer to the intrinsic reality of observable phenomena, and opens the way for huge understanding of the intimate mechanisms of functioning of what we call matter.

However, why the magnet has one pole stronger than the other one? Not perhaps even because of this required asymmetry? Because manifestation of dielectric inertial plane can not exist without an asymetry of strenght ebtween CW and CCW ether dynamics? Both should collapse in the ether fulcrum point. Is this asymetry relatred to the magnet internal factors or to the external medium (medium as complex dynamic ether) factors?

Thanks,
SaDAng

[TheoriaApophasis]

Hypothetical question...

If we had a fairly long cylinder magnet that was flexible,

No, you cannot "stretch" the polarization against the incommensurate geometry, you would only find that all the polarization is occurring (almost all) at the center of the LONG magnet.

Now suppose we bend this flexible magnet and connect the two ends together. We no longer have any ends for the fields to exit.

You can do the SAME THING with a string of BALL magnets after which in making them into a ring, A LOT of the magnetism is gone


It always moves to the center of in opposite to all polarized discharges.

the same way magnetic putty "eats" up a magnet and drives it to the center

You should buy some for $10 on EBAY


See the latest 2 video uploads going up now.

[Dog-One]

Hypothetical question...

If we had a fairly long cylinder magnet that was flexible, in the center we would find the dielectric inertial plane would have centered itself within the fields, just as the case with any solid cylinder magnet.

Now suppose we bend this flexible magnet and connect the two ends together. We no longer have any ends for the fields to exit.

Based on pressure gradients, where would the dielectric inertial plane migrate to, would move at all, or would it be free to move anywhere within the now closed magnet? Or...

Would it no longer be a magnet--the dielectric inertial plane spins down and stops?

This all seems like the answer should be obvious, but I just can't see it yet in my head. I see all sorts of things that seem possible, but nothing that stands out.