I just disproved ken wheelers magnet theories

[Ufopolitics]

A Magnet Dielectric Field/Plane

Hello to All,

It is very sad to observe that must of members participating on this Thread do not clearly understand Ken's Theories......therefore, agree on the silly test/experiment(s) conducted by microwatt.

All I can do about this...is to cite...or say "freshen up" some of the essential paragraphs from Ken's Book, related to his definitions of the Dielectric Plane in a Magnet, and I have set in bold the main and basic statements as underlined the essential meanings, which defines with clarity why the way is trying to be tested will never show absolutely any charge nor signal on that scope...:

(Page 54)

“Magnetism is the dielectric field” – Michael Faraday

“Magnetism is the discharge Ether modality of dielectricity in termination. Dielectricity is counterspatial, magnetism is spatial. All
radiation, all discharges in the universe are spatial by nature and definition. Magnetism, therefore, is the necessitated polarized (creates space) co-eternal conjugate to dielectricity. Electricity terminates AS magnetism , not INTO magnetism, by losing its dielectric component as necessitated; electricity is the product of Phi (magnetism) and Psi (dielectricity), is definitionally a hybrid Ether modality of the product of Phi and Psi.” – Author

(Page 67) The negative terminals, as meant the discharge-planes or dielectric are counterspatial and terminate into spatial magnetic phenomena; in magnetization there is inter-atomic nucleal-charge and discharge-plane contraction from the increased electrostatic capacitance (dielectric) and expulsion of the magnetic. Dielectric saturation causes magnetism to increase, as the two are mutually repellant conjugates and both approach higher spatial and counterspatial inductances.

(Page 68)That the dielectric terminal in counterspace is necessitated to be capacitance and that magnetism’s terminal of space is necessitated to be polarized inductive motion are self-reinforcing definitional absolutes, such that any discharge into a spatial medium terminal must be both polarized Ether movement and magnetic induction by definition and any discharge into a dielectric medium of counterspace itself must be both capacitance and create a counterspatial dielectric momentum and tend towards spatial contraction as is the nature of dielectricity to be multiplicative in –space and magnetism to be naturally additive in +time.

Magnetism is additive in +time and multiplicative in + space, and dielectricity additive in –time (no-time, not reverse time), and multiplicative in –space (counterspace).

(Page 70) While electromagnetism is paired with magnetism in the model of TEM, this is not an indictment that magnetism is the conjugate to electricity, dielectricity is the conjugate of magnetism as co-eternal principles and the mediator for electrification and the medium for electrifications termination into, or as the Ether-modality we call magnetism.

(Page 92) Since a magnet is inter-atomically dielectrically charged in creating a powerful inertial counterspatial centripetal plane, which, definitionally resists change, this “lab stirrer” of ours, the “magnet”, continues to stir AFTER the electrification, or power has been turned off due to the magneto-dielectrical ‘elasticity’ of iron and iron crystalline compounds (neodymium magnets), just like squeezing a ball of clay around its radius (squeezing = electrification, the constriction = dielectric inertial counterspatial plane) will create a permanent dumbbell formation. Our pre-“magnet” lump has been magneto-dielectrically ‘squeezed’ into this formation. There is nothing “in a magnet” that makes it a magnet; everything is field pressures in nature. Everything. There is nothing pre-“magnet” of the mass, or post-“magnet” of the mass repelling, accelerating, only Ether field pressures.

Anyone could really draw their conclusions related to this Theory and the specifics from a magnet's dielectric plane, from above quoted statements...it is simple, very simple...Magnetism is the RESULT, the "Product" from the Dielectric, Counterspatial (Minus Space, Minus Time), Terminating (dying, ending, finishing), Centripetal (Towards Center, NOT Centrifugal or outwards forces) Field ...Therefore, this Dielectric Field, can NOT, and NEVER send, absolutely no charges towards any dielectric object placed on the exterior of ANY Magnet, and tried to be measured by a fall in T/S (time/space), no matter the positioning related to that plane.

The Dielectric Plane (as I see it) is an Open Gate, that "bleeds" the Aether by means of a Perturbation - in the case of a magnet- by a "momentary electrification" which opens this "Gate-Plane" perpetually for the lifetime of the magnet. Of course (Duh) unless demagnetized, by known means like; heated above their spec's...beat/hit or by reversed electrification... in which case what has been done is just to "close" that gate. period.

I have TWO MAIN REASONS why I defend this Theory like I do...but unfortunately -at this time- I can NOT reveal them yet...sorry.

Since "Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary Proof"...the later is the stage where I am actually now, "Building" to prove beyond doubt all this so called "theories" are nothing but the hidden truth for more than Two Centuries.

...and it is not about simple and silly experiments...but the building of clever Machines that work based on those "theories".

I have no other person on this world to thank primarily for my discoveries that to Ken Lee Wheeler and his book... without it...I would have never pictured what I have achieved so far.

Thanks for reading this.


Ufopolitics

[microwatt]

magnetic induction direction should be perpendicular to any dielectric induction field.

It took one experiment to prove that there is not electrostatic induction field
with a magnet. when I did those experiments the scale you saw on the o scope was 50 mv per division.

[Ernst]

IMHO magnetic and electric fields are always at right angles to each other.

To be more precise:
A changing magnetic field creates an electric field (at right angles) and a changing electric field or electric current creates a magnetic field.

A static electric field does not produce a magnetic field and this is particularly interesting because this holds a key for a direct conflict with relativity.


Ernst.

[Ben2503]

cause or effect

I really can not understand your reasoning related to your expectations from your experiment(s)...ending up in the wrong conclusions.

A Dielectric, either a plane or material is just a transition/insulation stage between two main terminals where polarization would be either stored (for static case in any capacitor) or flow "from and to" for a dynamic state case like magnetism.


For the case of Static Charges in a Capacitor, there are two end plates (to put it simple) between the dielectric material...and, if you could access that dielectric with say a very fine needle, after cap has been charged...there would not be absolutely any reading changes captured either no matter how sophisticated the scope would be set. You ONLY would get a steady differential reading between both end plates, but NOT in the dielectric itself.

The only "possible" way your scope would sense some very fast signals in a capacitor dielectric, is, if you set that needle into the dielectric just at the very moment of capacitor receiving a charge. And that would take all kind of very precise measurements, plus settings.

A Magnet is a completely different thing than a static Capacitor storage application. In a Magnet, the dielectric plane serves also as a "Transition Plane" between two polarizations, except, that according to Ken Theory- which I happen to also agree in a 100%- this dielectric plane is NOT only a transition stage, but from where magnetic flow emanates and returns.

A magnet seating by itself, including when falling down a PVC tubing is a perfectly Stabilized System, (unless we start interaction with other medium or materials, AND in specific ways) meaning, there are not any "extra" accumulation of charges at what we could compare as the end plates from a capacitor, which would be their very ending poles.

Do you really wanna get a reading?...well, then follow my instructions...:

Cut that copper lamination in a long strip, of about 1/2 inch, then wrap it around tube from top to bottom (no matter what direction), using a piece of paper or tape to prevent each turn to touch with next...and the finer you make that strip, and the more turns you make, the higher that signal would be. Now, make sure the clear tube is suspended at a distance from magnet landing surface, in order that the travel would be complete through tube and strips.

This method, which is the basic origin from what we all know as a coil, would not only be the only way to excite charges outside from a magnet, but also would demonstrate the "spinning vortex" origin from both polarizations are identical in rotation sense, related to magnet main, center axis.

Then, you could reverse the magnet direction when dropping it through the tube...and watch the signal then...

This is THE REAL AND ONLY principle of Magnetic Induction, and I could only explain it with a "screw comparison":

If you get a screw, mounted in your power drill drive end, and while turning it you could go through a piece of wood very easy, however, in order to extract it from the wood, you MUST reverse the power drill rotation...or will never pull it out right?...Well, this is exactly what happens when you insert a magnet inside a cylindrical coil, except, you don't need to spin the magnet...it is spinning by itself, and while going inwards it will deflect a meter needle the positive way...all the way in...however, when you pull it out...THEN your meter will reflect a negative signal...guess why?...same exact thing as that screw...it will induce a reversed flow while you are pulling it out.

I will help you picture all of the above in your mind...:

[IMG][/IMG]

Step One...we start getting magnet and the way field really looks like... inside coil, galvanometer needle is at zero.

[IMG][/IMG]

Step Two: As we get the magnet all the way in, the needle deflects positive.

[IMG][/IMG]

Now, Step Three, as we pull away magnet (and magnetic field keeps always spinning in the same exact direction) we get the "Lenz Law" effect...reversed flow, reversed deflection on needle.

Think about this...



Ufopolitics

Hi there UFO. I love your work and again you give us very nice pictures.
However I think these show us the principles of magnetic induction and not
the dielectric field Ken is talking about.
I agree that if there is magnetism, there probably is a current somewhere and there must be an (di)electric field somewhere.
If this dielectric field is static (DC) and sufficient large, perhaps it can be detected with an electroscope. If it is a LF dynamic (AC) and sufficiently large, an ordinary voltmeter could work.

I may be mistaken, but I don't recall any picture or video from Ken that "proofs" his dielectric theory.
In my view claiming that something doesn't exist because you cannot see or measure it, is as soft as a theory that cannot be proven. Both are then just philosophies and nothing more than that.
On the other hand, one only needs 1 failed testcase to falsify a theory and an infinite number of test to proof a theory.

IMHO magnetic and electric fields are always at right angles to each other. Therefore I rather expect the electric field to be along the axis (north-south) rather than east - west. I think the "blogwall" is an effect and not a cause of the magnetism. The fact that this wall moves if you add magnets or remove (break) a part of a magnet, seems to support that.

Please share your thoughts (too bad Ken isn't)

Best regards,
Ben

[RAMSET]

You are on the same page

Yes , caloric measurement has been unable to substantiate the claim.

And to be clear , this would be a very big claim .

[ldrancer]

The claim of heat produced with bismuth
??? A LOT of heat
How is that not measurable ??

Likewise it would imply there is indeed quite a bit to measure in the claim that you are investigating here

To be clear I am not adverse to Kens theory's however the bismuth claim has not withstood
Independant investigation .

Respectfully
Chet

where is this coming from? i read you say that a proper caloricmetric measurement hadnt been succeeded in testing yet. You said that. I dont know where yur getting yur reply here from. that its not measureable. ??

my point is he calls it, zero point. oil and fire. whats that? heat. where does neodymium and bismuth come from zero point. i did ask that and he did not respond to it, and insulted me about me askign about the load stone.

[RAMSET]

immeasurable ?????

The claim of heat produced with bismuth
??? A LOT of heat
How is that not measurable ??(added!!!! We could not find this heat with caloric measurement technique)

Likewise it would imply there is indeed quite a bit to measure in the claim that you are investigating here

To be clear I am not adverse to Kens theory's however the bismuth claim has not withstood
Independant investigation .

Respectfully
Chet

[microwatt]

It's like trying to prove an electron is an actual physical body that can
be viewed with the naked eye, and no electron microscope.

so you admit that kens theories are totally untestable. That my friends is called religion.

[BroMikey]

would an experiment where I use the same apparatus as before but amplify the signal 1000x help change some minds?

It's like trying to prove an electron is an actual physical body that can
be viewed with the naked eye, and no electron microscope.

[Ufopolitics]

Ok i did another experiment to do concerning the block wall and dielectric inductance. in the first experiment I have a large area of capacitance through the tube. It is possible that the extra capacitance is drowning out the signal produced by the bloch wall passing through a dielectric. In this experiment i will use a ring of copper tape inside and outside. i made sure the connections were good using ohmmeter. i used a smaller magnet since the big one wont fit becuase of solder connections.

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

still no voltage change.

I really can not understand your reasoning related to your expectations from your experiment(s)...ending up in the wrong conclusions.

A Dielectric, either a plane or material is just a transition/insulation stage between two main terminals where polarization would be either stored (for static case in any capacitor) or flow "from and to" for a dynamic state case like magnetism.


For the case of Static Charges in a Capacitor, there are two end plates (to put it simple) between the dielectric material...and, if you could access that dielectric with say a very fine needle, after cap has been charged...there would not be absolutely any reading changes captured either no matter how sophisticated the scope would be set. You ONLY would get a steady differential reading between both end plates, but NOT in the dielectric itself.

The only "possible" way your scope would sense some very fast signals in a capacitor dielectric, is, if you set that needle into the dielectric just at the very moment of capacitor receiving a charge. And that would take all kind of very precise measurements, plus settings.

A Magnet is a completely different thing than a static Capacitor storage application. In a Magnet, the dielectric plane serves also as a "Transition Plane" between two polarizations, except, that according to Ken Theory- which I happen to also agree in a 100%- this dielectric plane is NOT only a transition stage, but from where magnetic flow emanates and returns.

A magnet seating by itself, including when falling down a PVC tubing is a perfectly Stabilized System, (unless we start interaction with other medium or materials, AND in specific ways) meaning, there are not any "extra" accumulation of charges at what we could compare as the end plates from a capacitor, which would be their very ending poles.

Do you really wanna get a reading?...well, then follow my instructions...:

Cut that copper lamination in a long strip, of about 1/2 inch, then wrap it around tube from top to bottom (no matter what direction), using a piece of paper or tape to prevent each turn to touch with next...and the finer you make that strip, and the more turns you make, the higher that signal would be. Now, make sure the clear tube is suspended at a distance from magnet landing surface, in order that the travel would be complete through tube and strips.

This method, which is the basic origin from what we all know as a coil, would not only be the only way to excite charges outside from a magnet, but also would demonstrate the "spinning vortex" origin from both polarizations are identical in rotation sense, related to magnet main, center axis.

Then, you could reverse the magnet direction when dropping it through the tube...and watch the signal then...

This is THE REAL AND ONLY principle of Magnetic Induction, and I could only explain it with a "screw comparison":

If you get a screw, mounted in your power drill drive end, and while turning it you could go through a piece of wood very easy, however, in order to extract it from the wood, you MUST reverse the power drill rotation...or will never pull it out right?...Well, this is exactly what happens when you insert a magnet inside a cylindrical coil, except, you don't need to spin the magnet...it is spinning by itself, and while going inwards it will deflect a meter needle the positive way...all the way in...however, when you pull it out...THEN your meter will reflect a negative signal...guess why?...same exact thing as that screw...it will induce a reversed flow while you are pulling it out.

I will help you picture all of the above in your mind...:

[IMG][/IMG]

Step One...we start getting magnet and the way field really looks like... inside coil, galvanometer needle is at zero.

[IMG][/IMG]

Step Two: As we get the magnet all the way in, the needle deflects positive.

[IMG][/IMG]

Now, Step Three, as we pull away magnet (and magnetic field keeps always spinning in the same exact direction) we get the "Lenz Law" effect...reversed flow, reversed deflection on needle.

Think about this...



Ufopolitics

[aljhoa]

LIQUID SPACETIME (AETHER) VISCOSITY, A WAY TO UNIFY PHYSICS

5. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we tried to apply fluid mechanics concepts in theoretical physics.
Even if this approach is not new, our originality was to consider space time as a liquid.
Using this assumption and a comparison between Einstein general relativity equation and
viscous liquid flow equation, we found that space time can be considered as a highly viscous liquid.

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Unification%20Theories/Download/5296

Al

[Dingus]

Nothing & Everything

No, it's "nothing & nothing". Now I remember why I put you on my ignore list.

Have You Done Experiments in Fluid Mechanics Lately? by Ionel Dinu

Again, that has nothing to do with how aether is a fluid, but not a liquid.

[microwatt]

would an experiment where I use the same apparatus as before but amplify the signal 1000x help change some minds?

[aljhoa]

What the hell did that video have to do with my post?

Nothing & Everything

And the video incorrectly used the word 'liquid' to refer to the aether, when it's technically a 'fluid'.

Have You Done Experiments in Fluid Mechanics Lately? by Ionel Dinu

Al

[BroMikey]

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!!

Maybe you are looking for a measurable amount that is to high for your

meter to read. In other words you are expecting enough to power a large

device such as a 1 watt bulb with an available source of a few thousandths

of a micro volt? I think what you are trying to measure is much to small.