I just disproved ken wheelers magnet theories

[ldrancer]

But dont nobody explain my thoughts i brought up only wait until im wrong then call me names out on it ok and bring me up over and over in this defunct theories that you have that didnt get fully fletcheted out. Now tha tthey are, will you all apologize to me? Time wasting to time wasting.

Now that we've discussed his measurements discuss mine. Magnet bismuth and heat that supposed comes out.
The problems seems to be getting the heat, measureing it, in the source it comes out of. This is non-zero point unlike the topic title states. Unless you call oil zero point too. Caues it was just dug up also. It runs out. So does load stone.. Both lose their, charge. So who has a real idea that that load stone is going to make some real power, thats worth the time to build a machine to contruct a machine to harness it with? Is it feasible? I say no. Since it comes from a magnet. Magnets copy motors, but they arent motors. So until one is explained like the other, leave th etopic alone.

[ldrancer]

what happens the second im right again in a thread, you go bringing up old threads. http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...light=ldrancer

time dialation proven false. if all you fo you believing in time dilation would flal off acliff or jump off a clicff, none of us not listening to you would nnothing happen from that. becuase your stupid.

you would rather not have a debate and speak on the subject but have many people so you can throw insults at people. you think time can dialate. you think theres a relativistic time dialation, the twin paradox. both are debunked. by 2 year olds. your bsing your wasting of tie here on these. i show you guys ryour wrong on magnet bismuth threads and you brting this back up.

you guys wont test any of your theories to check them out ever.

to speak of the 2 versions of timedialation, one has to do with weight. so a clock i space would act different. and the twin paradox, if somonee left in a ship and took off and came back, how many times would the earth go around the sun when they came back. was it 5 times? when they come off, are they, younger? or older?

[ldrancer]

The special theory of relativity has been proven. Look up "time dilation relativity GPS" you will see that clocks run slower when moving faster. or else your tomtom will stop working.

Einstein's Principle of Gravitational Time Dilation depends on the type of clock used

Einstein's Twin Paradox crashes against the definition of 'year'

[bistander]

Two magnets into one

For example, Classic Physics related to magnetism says that whenever we get two magnets attached by attraction we get this result as seen on image below:

[IMG][/IMG]

I found an interesting graphic here: Magnets in Motion



So now click here to see how the fields behave in animation. Magnets in Motion 01 You can see the are no poles in the middle of the newly formed single magnet as Ufo showed.

bi

[bistander]

Bloch wall thickness

they are talking about cesium atomic clocks. where did you find that the bloch wall is 100nm thick?

That was a screenshot copy and paste from the link just above it in my post #75. I have seen that figure elsewhere. I also saw one treatise claim 3 molecules thick although that seems far thinner than 100nm.

[microwatt]

they are talking about cesium atomic clocks. where did you find that the bloch wall is 100nm thick?

[ldrancer]

there are 2 types of time dialation. when they bring up time dialation they are referring to two things. relatiavistic time dialation and gravitation time dialation. i think theyre using gravitational time dialationhere, becuase their talking about gps. depends on what kind of clock. hour glass? pendulum clock?

[microwatt]

I want to prove some facet of kens theories. I do understand that ken based his work off of eric dollard. SO perhaps we should start out there.
Before my experiment I was really in favor of what he theorized. I base it off kens experiment of pushing a plastic rod through the hole of a magnet. Thinking that if there was a resistive force on the rod it must be separating charge into dipoles in the plastic analogous to dropping magnets through a copper pipe. except that the direction of dipole separation is perpendicular to the axis and direction of movement. All we need to do is find some sort of provable aspect

[bistander]

What now?

Lets not digress and ruin this thread.

Sorry dude. I was just trying to get a definition of the dielectric inertial plane so we could figure out how to test for it. I applaud your effort even though I dissed the method. Where do you want to see this thread go? I'd like to help.

bi

[bistander]

Plural?

Which I think is obvious. You agree that a Bloch wall separates domains.

You have me here???? I wrote the word domains as plural, with the S. Not singular. So what is your problem?

I found this domain and boundary description here: THOUGHT CRACKERS: Magnetic Domains It is in close agreement with my thoughts on the subject. As noted by the size of domains, a one cubic centimeter magnet would have on the order of 8 million domains* and a similar number of domain boundaries. So yes, we have plural.


bi

[microwatt]

Lets not digress and ruin this thread.

[bistander]

You said I said

I have never said nor wrote...that a magnet has "Two Domains"...as it is not written either by Ken Wheeler's book...

So, I don't know where are you getting that info about what I write from?...

Domain Wall was named "Bloch" Wall ...

If you revisit my posts you will find that I never said (or wrote) that you said or wrote "Two Domains". What I said is clear:

You tend to illustrate the magnet as having 2 domains, a North and a South.

What's the difference between "2 domains" and "Two Domains"?

There is no difference between two and 2 in this context. The difference I pointed out was between your "said nor wrote" and my "tend to illustrate".

bi

[Ufopolitics]

The special theory of relativity has been proven. Look up "time dilation relativity GPS" you will see that clocks run slower when moving faster. or else your tomtom will stop working.

That does not "prove" Einstein complete Theory...and what speed are those clocks traveling?...near "C"?...LOL

The very essence from that theory is enclosed within a simple formula...E=MC2 ...do you know what that means?

Anyways...Is up to you to change the topic and start with Einstein Theory...maybe a smart idea since you can't comply with your original topic to disprove Ken's ..

Sorry but I will not enter in this Einstein "new" debate now.

[microwatt]

Einstein Theory of Special Relativity has not been proven yet and has been around since 1905...However is being taught in many Universities around the World.


Ufopolitics

The special theory of relativity has been proven. Look up "time dilation relativity GPS" you will see that clocks run slower when moving faster. or else your tomtom will stop working.

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

If you revisit my posts you will find that I never said (or wrote) that you said or wrote "Two Domains". What I said is clear:

You tend to illustrate the magnet as having 2 domains, a North and a South.

What's the difference between "2 domains" and "Two Domains"?

Which I think is obvious. You agree that a Bloch wall separates domains.

And you specifically identify the separation of the red and blue areas on your illustrations as the Bloch wall (and dielectric plane). So would not the reader assume that the red and blue areas are domains?

Nope, Negative, the Red-Blue areas denote the alignment-formation of all domains in that region, known as a Magnetic Pole

On the other hand you previously wrote, and I am bolding out the main parts:

Yes, I agree what you show is wrong. But it does not show how I was taught "Classic Physics" related to magnetism. You tend to illustrate the magnet as having 2 domains, a North and a South. I learned the magnet, or the ferrous material, has a multitude of tiny domains. These domains are composed of dipoles (atoms or molecules) having the same magnetic orientation. The domains are on the micrometer scale in size. Domains are separated by domain walls. A Bloch wall is a type of domain wall.

This is an example of the domain theory as I understand it. From: ?Presentation "1 Magnetism The term magnetism comes from the name Magnesia, a coastal district of ancient Thessaly, Greece. Unusual stones were found by the Greeks more."



Inside the magnet there is not an all North domain on one end and an all South domain on the other end divided by a wall down the middle. I don't believe there is anything "in" the magnet in the middle which shows as the white line on your images.

And those links above show an image that reflects the way you understand a Magnet:

[IMG][/IMG]

Those images above are completely WRONG!

And as you have stated on above quote (I will repeat it below):

Inside the magnet there is not an all North domain on one end and an all South domain on the other end divided by a wall down the middle. I don't believe there is anything "in" the magnet in the middle which shows as the white line on your images.

Now I see that even within the wrong Theory about magnetism, established for so long, you are still not understanding that Theory in full. Then it is very obvious you will not be capable to understand Ken's Theories, which renders a far more advanced and dynamic data within the real 3D Magnetic Fields. At least the basic fundamentals are required to understand the complexity of Ken's Book, and am sorry but you are confused still in this ancient concepts.

A Magnet Domain Wall is the three dimensional region where All the aligned Micro domains make a spin and change directions, forming each pole at the ends of magnet:

[IMG][/IMG]

On above image the Domain Wall Region is the grey center area, where all domains turn, twist or shifts. This area contains almost zero magnetism, and has been identified originally (1919) by the Barhausen Effect, before [/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

The number of related images, text books, images, pdf's, etc,etc you could find on line is impressive...so, you are welcome to start searching, then reinforcing your knowledge related to old classic magnetism.

You will need those concepts very clearly defined in order to understand Ken's Theories, much less to start debating about such Theories.

Back to the topic: You can not describe an experiment to prove or disprove the existence of this dielectric plane, can you? Images from viewing film or ferrocells is not proof in my opinion. Or can you show such images from other "known" dielectric planes?

Regards,

bi

I did not open this Thread, trying to "disprove" nor "prove" Ken's Theories, the proof to disprove is entirely on microwatt's end, and you wrote yourself, his poor testing did not demonstrated absolutely nada.

This Dielectric Plane that Ken relates to, is exactly located geometrically where the previously Domain Wall is located, -explained for your knowledge "Enlightenment" above - except that Old Magnetism Concepts do not define if it its from this domain wall region outwards or inwards (from ending poles towards center) that magnetic poles are formed/generated. Ken's Theory clearly states it is from this dielectric plane outwards, being the center origin of magnetic spatial polarization...Plus, the above old images related to domain walls you could find render each pole as having a straight vector (in 2D), not in spiral and 3D like Ken shows and demonstrates in his vast text references and images.

Ken introduced several text books as references that confirms his theories...one of them is the suppressed Davis Rawls on Magnetism where the spinning of the polarized ends of a magnet are clearly demonstrated:

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]


In time I will do prove his theories are correct, not now, not on this Thread, I know perfectly well how to open a dedicated Thread on this Forum to display my proof for the purpose.

Einstein Theory of Special Relativity has not been proven/demonstrated/tested as of now and has been around since 1905...However, is being taught in many Universities around the World.

Finally...I really do not have the time to waste here until there is a solid proof to "disprove"...so, excuse me but I must return to building...


Ufopolitics