I just disproved ken wheelers magnet theories

[microwatt]

I have carefully watched kens videos on his theory of magnetism. He states that each magnet has a dielectric plane where the bloch wall is. the vortex coming out is centrifugal and the vortex coming in is centripetal. So i did a bit of research and designed an experiment. If there is really a dielectric plane as he suggests then a moving magnetic field should induce a charge separation at right angles to the direction of the moving magnet field when moved through a insulating substance like plastic.
I bought a plastic tube
put copper foil on the inside and outside of the tube connected this to an oscilloscope and dropped a right magnet through it. No net polarization. busted!!

[ldrancer]

i seriously dont udnerstand unless I see it, but ask him how a magnet works. start askign quesitons. and he won't answer and only will throw insults to keep the minions of people insulting going. he won't respond. eh wont take himself being questioned unless he can insult you on a basic simple question. like what is load stone.

considering the context of the discussion. he cant simply answer yes or no it has to include an insult. i could care less if he shares his knowledge with me. without reading his, stuff when i go to do work to research i would spend my time figuring out these things better, and then i would share them with people.

[Ben2503]

I have carefully watched kens videos on his theory of magnetism. He states that each magnet has a dielectric plane where the bloch wall is. the vortex coming out is centrifugal and the vortex coming in is centripetal. So i did a bit of research and designed an experiment. If there is really a dielectric plane as he suggests then a moving magnetic field should induce a charge separation at right angles to the direction of the moving magnet field when moved through a insulating substance like plastic.
I bought a plastic tube
put copper foil on the inside and outside of the tube connected this to an oscilloscope and dropped a right magnet through it. No net polarization. busted!!

Good thinking.

Could you please make a video of that?

[aljhoa]

"I just disproved ken wheelers magnet theories" - microwatt

This Will Be The Day


Al

[microwatt]

I will upload a video very soon with my experiment

[microwatt]

https://youtu.be/QVoZC0XVkUs

here is the video folks. lets discuss. I hope ken chimes in to refute or clarify.

[Ufopolitics]

Unbe...FU*ING...lievable!!

I have carefully watched kens videos on his theory of magnetism. He states that each magnet has a dielectric plane where the bloch wall is. the vortex coming out is centrifugal and the vortex coming in is centripetal. So i did a bit of research and designed an experiment. If there is really a dielectric plane as he suggests then a moving magnetic field should induce a charge separation at right angles to the direction of the moving magnet field when moved through a insulating substance like plastic.
I bought a plastic tube
put copper foil on the inside and outside of the tube connected this to an oscilloscope and dropped a right magnet through it. No net polarization. busted!!

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVoZC0XVkUs&feature=youtu.be[/VIDEO]

First thing I must write here is:

UNBELIEVABLE!!

Unbelievable the Balls and Ignorance displayed on the title and "supporting proof" behind... (sorry but I do have to laugh) , which is a lousy experiment, plus a lousy four seconds video...to "disprove" a full book plus all kind of videos proving everything written there by Ken Wheeler is pure truth.

However, I will DO answer to your experiment (if we could call that thing...a "scientific" experiment.)

First off, magnetic polarization is not linear, but manifest through space in a SPIRAL Shape fashion.

Therefore, your experiment of a straight, single laminate of copper on either sides will not produce nada, zero, they will cancel every nano second of fall.

Why don't you replace the copper lamination by two coils, one CW and second CCW, whichever inside-outside...attach each terminals to two separate channels from your scope...then show it...but please, if you are trying to prove through a millisecond fall video...then redo it afterwards in SLOW MOTION, 200X or 400X ...capturing all the signals during the fall timing.

However, above "experiment" was done, maybe about two hundred plus years ago...so, you did not "discovered" absolutely nada.

Ken calls this a 'dielectric' plane, however, it is not expected to behave just like the dielectric "material" that you could find in between capacitor plates, storing static charges coming from an Electric Field......This is counter space Magnetic Field Dielectric, Aether...a completely different approach...and charges -which are absolutely no static, but VERY Dynamic- are not "expected" to separate when you just drop a magnet down your PVC tube with copper laminate.

You absolutely disprove nada, nothing...zero.

This is about a question or doubt that you could have easily approach by posting it on Ken's Thread, but nope, you need sensationalism right?...then open a whole Thread to "disprove" his work. Bad attitude dude, and I hope Ken would not waste his time to even answer your ridiculous Thread.

What a poor way to let everyone knows about you...still, can not believe your "junior" member attitude dude, making your "debut" on a Forum like this !


Ufopolitics

[BroMikey]

I have carefully watched kens videos on his theory of magnetism.
I bought a plastic tube
put copper foil on the inside and outside of the tube connected this to an oscilloscope and dropped a right magnet through it. No net polarization. busted!!

Did you understand his books? I wonder if I do. If you studied his

books post me a link. Or do people have to pay money for Ken's

books? Either way you are probably not skilled enough to call Ken

out and scientifically scold him. Maybe Ken will come around some

day or not who knows. This is your way of getting Ken to respond?


Ken wouldn't want to hurt your feelings. And many of the junior

classmen who only see university level dogma.


Your experiment is not a thorough investigative analysis. Better look

at Ken's Book. Where is that Book? If I find it I'll post it for you.

You made a mistake, so what, keep trying.

[microwatt]

Coils? for one thing lenz's law states that a counter induction current will be produced in any conductor near a moving magnetic field. I have read kens book backward and forward. I respect that he wants to delve into the truth but real scientific research does not use toys such as ferrofluid and magnet field viewers.
If there is such thing as a dielectric plane. Then there should be dielectric polarization at right angles to the movement of the magnet. If ken used improper nomenclature to describe some sort of airy fairy going ons that happen with a magnet that scientists do no know about. then perhaps he needs to reevaluate how he terms his theories.

You think my experiment is bunk? Tell me how i should prove kens theories without toys. I have many years of electronic experience and could bould many things.

[Ernst]

Typical

You do not need to have read anything about relativity to post here that you have proven Einstein wrong.
You do not need to understand anything about Newton to post here that you have proven him wrong.
You do not need the faintest understand of thermodynamics to post here that you have proven these laws don't apply.

But don't touch our counter-space heroes, such as Kenny.

Ken wouldn't want to hurt your feelings.

That is certainly one of the most hilarious things I have read here.

Kenny will respond,
Kenny will try to hurt you, and
Kenny will add numerous references to where he got his knowledge from.



Ernst.

[Ufopolitics]

Dielectric Material Versus Dielectric Plane...

I respect that he wants to delve into the truth but real scientific research does not use toys such as ferrofluid and magnet field viewers.

Of course not..."real scientific research" utilizes "iron filings" to "see" magnetic fields...

Ferrocell, Film Viewer and CRT screening uses Polarized Light to reveal magnetic fields...excuse me but if I remember well, Faraday discovered that magnetic fields and light are directly related...a "while" back, known as the "Faraday Effect".

You think my experiment is bunk?

I don't "think" so...I am sure...

And...you could read the same book over and over...a thousand and one times...and still do not understand absolutely nada...which seems to be your case...

What you are "trying" to attack is just your poor interpretation based on a word (dielectric) while ignoring "plane" (which is NOT "material" at all, but means Spatial Geometry) ..So, your "starting point" to "disprove" all the extensive material related to magnetism disclosed by Ken on this Forum does not have any other category but ridiculous.

In ANY part of Ken Wheeler's book, I recall he mentioned Dielectric "Material" existing at the center of every magnet...where the domain wall is...but He refers to a Dielectric Plane.

I could recall "Counter Space" as a cited parallel to Dielectric Plane in a magnet...but then I believe your already bad understanding of Ken's Theory would get even worst.

[BroMikey]

Coils? for one thing lenz's law states .................................
You think my experiment is bunk? Tell me how i should prove kens theories without toys. I have many years of electronic experience and could bould many things.

I respect your abilities on the subject of electronix but other fields

of inquiry are at stake here. When you go over into what Ken is doing

you have to study astrophysics for about 40 years so you can see

what the line of bull is being spread a foot thick.

I have spent many years of my leisure traveling to library's with book

shelve on many floors. There is so much to know.

There is a gift in each of us that can wade into deep waters where

truth's are mixed in with lies and understand how it got that way.

If you go back and study the metaphysical doctrines of the ages

you will see why men will lie to keep their standing in the scientific

community.

Great thinker pride themselves in being right, this is why books are

full of errors. Why? Because the upper crust of power hungry controller

love to pick and chose their so called adepts to be elevated in the public

eye through media such as your school books.


You and I have been lied to. Ken like all men have gifts, these gifts

come from the gift giver and it is HIS GOOD PLEASURE to watch the

outcome. I state all of these things first before going into electrical

or lines or force because I sense people are irritated with Ken on other

levels that they consider weakness.

We all have faults and I am sure Ken will be the first to agree that he

does not know everything. So if you see a failure in one area try to

find the strong points at the same time.


Ken knows the terminology of the upper level thinker in the scientific

world today and I like the way he redefines those terms to make some

sense out of THEIR gibberish. When I say "THEIR" I mean the lying

controllers. Those who have been running governments for thousands

of years and hide the truth. You will never get the whole truth from

"THEM"

This is why Tesla was buried alive by the media, he went against "THEIR"

truth, the only one YOU know.

I can't tell you how many times sitting in classrooms that a place in the

text was an out right misconception and the teachers could see it too.

One building block made out of a lie is used in the foundation of the

structure to insure that it falls. I think UFO gave you some hints

for a more proper test and even though we don't have Ken's credentials

we can still do experiments to prove or disprove anything.

The Gifts and callings given to men are given to measure them so if you

think Ken is doing something wrong you will need to supply more data.

[BroMikey]

You do not need to have read anything about relativity to post here that you have proven Einstein wrong.
You do not need to understand anything about Newton to post here that you have proven him wrong.
You do not need the faintest understand of thermodynamics to post here that you have proven these laws don't apply.

But don't touch our counter-space heroes, such as Kenny.



That is certainly one of the most hilarious things I have read here.

Kenny will respond,
Kenny will try to hurt you, and
Kenny will add numerous references to where he got his knowledge from.



Ernst.

I would love to entertain your viewpoints on anything but fortunately for me

I see your slanderous and malicious intentions on display on the forum has

easily disqualified you as an objective judge, beyond any reasonable doubt.


Almost everyone can see that.

Now what did you say?

Your data collection will need to be based on a more complex line

of reasoning and you never have any.

[ldrancer]

yea your right about the read the book a 1000 times and never understand it. its like quantum right?

maybe he just wants to understand and wants a simple explanation.

no matter how advanced your theory is yuo should be able to explain yourself, simply without resorting to attacks, especially if you think your so right. and kens not known for proving himself. or answering questions. if you act the way you do and say people can read it a 1000 times and not understand it, your sounding like einstein and quantum. and that whole group, or pretend group as it happens to be.

[microwatt]

Theories are theories. lets see a physical experiment. Just because it sounds beautiful and conforms to your beliefs doesn't mean its true. Just once please
find a way to measure the vorticity of a magnetic field.