ENLIGHTENED MAGNETISM (The Full Proof of Ken Wheeler's Theories)

[Ufopolitics]

If others concept of magnetism are welcome in this thread other than ken wheelers, I'd like everyone to inspect Joseph Newman theory on magnetism in general and how he perceived and visualized the Magnetic field. (especially UFOPolitics).

I have read Ken wheeler's book and to me It's much better to subscribe to Newman's Model... in his book and writing.. there is less hatred and criticizing of the existing model, and rather than "Redefining" magnetic field in general, he instead identified a missing piece and just made the existing model much more understandable..
there is still the lines of force..
the geometry of the magnetic field is still the same..
there is only the addition of the "gyroscopic" action instead of just a flux lines..

there are some explanation that can be explained using newman's model of magnetism..
one is the..
"why is there no current when there is no changed in flux"..
based on my understanding, the reason why there is no current because the "thing" (electrons.. that movement of it is called "current") has already been displaced by the gyroscopic action of the flux line and cannot go back to its original position since the gyroscopic flux is still there... no "thing" movement = no current..

In UFO Politics CRT display light displacement... the phenomenon can be explained without distorting the geometry of the Magnetic Field portrayed by iron filings method, by taking into account this "gyroscopic" action.. the light that is seen on the CRT is being deflected because the stream of electrons are being deflected by this "gyroscopic" action..

so basically from my point of view, the geometry of the magnetic field "visualized" by others who experiment with ferocells+magnet+light is an illusion made by the "Light" to trick the mind in perceiving a different geometry of the magnetic field other than what is clearly portrayed by the Iron filings method..

a static straight loop with gyroscopic action is much closer to reality rather than a magnetic field with orthogonally misaligned flux (sorry for the term no offense intended.. I can't describe it properly)..

Hello Ricards,

The Gyroscopic action, related to magnetism is widely covered on Ken Wheeler's book

Now, CRT do not show "light" but an Electron Beam reflected on fluorescent (phosforic) screen, then rastered into a 2D flat plane... I call SCANLINE PLANE.

Now, this plane TWISTS under the FRONTAL POLE INFLUENCE AS A GEOMETRICAL TORSION.

IMO, Gyroscopic action has "axis freedom" or RANDOM SPINS...Where CRT reflects each pole with CONSISTENT TORSIONS which are opposite for each pole spins.

Therefore, there is ZERO "Freedom" of axis rotation on magnetism, related to pole spins.

And...I can not believe...after all the proof that has been shown by all videos and experiments here...that you still believe in "true iron filings revealing magnetic fields"


Regards



Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

I really want to see this empirical data. If the OP objects to posting here, please start a thread where we can examine this data.

Thanks,

bi

Green light ...go for it.

Regards

Ufopolitics

[mikrovolt]

The point about having dynamic equilibrium or neutral plane at the center of a permanent magnet
appeals to me from an instrumental aspect.

I found the Felix Bloch paper called nuclear induction 1946. ( there are differences with EM )

https://sites.fas.harvard.edu/~phys191r/References/c4/bloch1946.pdf

An image related to Bloch equations. The reader can add the exterior fields.
nuclear induction felix bloch equation.JPG

[Gambeir]

Dear Gambeir,

Thank you for your kind words, a lot of labor and care is put in your writting and I really appreciate this.

However, i kindly disaagre with you. Dark matter does not hinder our understanding and enlightenment and don't get confused by its exotic name.

No more than 500 years ago the invisible electromagnetism and atoms could evenly be described with these terms dark matter and dark energy by people of this age.

Scientists and researches are today at a dead end. So we must try not to look at the tree but at the whole forest picture in order to find the truth.

Our theory accounts only for a tiny part (5% the say) of all of what is actually out there.

We will never solve the puzzle without all of its pieces.

For 2000 years and more now we are playing with 5 from the total 100 pieces of the puzzle.

All i am saying is THAT WE ARE MISSING 95 PIECES!!

... and ask you to explore unexplored territory... what more exciting than that as Faraday and Tesla did! chewing the same gum all the time is boring and no new discoveries will be made ever. Discovery is the search of unknown territory.



Take care,

EM

Nope, they is telling you a big fat lie: I'll explain. See here now, without dark energy and dark matter then the conventional explanation for why the entire galaxy you've been spending you life living in, and why it has stayed together, won't hold up to their explanations for gravity: That's the bottom line. See, you have to understand that this is a giant lie; without which the theory of gravity holding order in the Universe is kaput! Dark matter/energy is designed to support the existing paradigm which claims to understand our Universe, and which hinges on this idea of matter creating gravity.

However there is a little problem with this concept, and it's that it don't work because there's not enough matter to create the necessary gravitational forces, which even if there were, still wouldn't work because of the distances between objects and the inverse square law of gravitation. So now they want you to swallow down a load of witchcraft about dark matter and dark energy, rather than explain it rationally by using the Electric Universe because if they do that, then all their hidden knowledge starts to become revealed. Without gravity explained by mass then we run a risk of you freeing yourself from the control paradigm, hell you might even begin to think that some UFO's are man made objects.

Now I ask you what's more rational? Believing in witches and dark energy, or believing in electricity, magnetism, and plasma? Which now do you think really explains why the Galaxy holds together? See, dark matter and dark energy and black holes all belong in the waste bins with witchcraft. Anyone who tells you these things are real is either stupid, gullible, or an enemy agent. It is that simple because if I can finally figure it out, then there's not one reason in a thousand that any of the rest of you shouldn't also be able to eventually come to the same realization.

See, if they admit that gravity doesn't hold the planets and stars to the core of the galactic center of our own Milky Way then what? Ya have to realize this problem extends far outside of sick science to the halls of the almighty, because ~don't ya know~ power must always claim to know all and to have a vision for the future and solutions to all problems. Well so anyways, they can't explain it without inventing an explanation, because they also cannot acknowledge the Electric Universe as the correct explanation since this crosses over into national security and UFO's and the corporate rulers private playgrounds.

To admit that gravity isn't explaining things adequately is a huge ass problem. That's where the invention of dark matter comes in. This is a complete invention designed to turn the wheel spokes of the the Galaxy in to a kind of solid rubber tire so that no one has to explain how the Electric Universe is correct and the other is wrong, and who then will understand and be the certified experts if not the clowns at Stanford, Yale, Princeton, ect?

Ya see now that this is giant fantastic lie? Understand now why it's BS? Those people are all vested in the existing ruling paradigm. Understand now why someone like Ken has to give his knowledge away while liars sell theirs for 40K a semester at the officially certified halls of power?

Like I said, I didn't realize that myself for a long time, but that is the lie and that's where and why this crazy as hell story about dark matter and dark energy sprung from. Don't you believe it for one second: Go check on it yourself. No one was around to give me clue or to tell me I was having my hat filled with cow crap. I'm just lucky to have enough personal experience in dealing with criminals to be able to see through the BS lies half the time, so I eventually uncovered what this crazy lie was all about and why it has to be told in the first place, which really pisses me off since good people accept that these other sources must be Ok since they are coming out of the halls of the Ivy League Towers: Hopefully soon to be joining Fox, CNN, and all the local news as the paid liars of crime inc.

Don't ya see that all these things really have to do with keeping you and everyone else in the dark, it's not called dark matter for nothing, it's a sick joke. Please don't buy into this without proving to yourself it's more rational than the Electric Universe is. Might there also be other energies? Well of course, I've said that myself haven't I? It's just that it isn't dark energy, dark light, which are also sick oxymoron's BTW, designed to make those who buy into them all the greater butts of this sick joke. See, it's like so many other things which are hidden signs people wear and don't realize it. Signs that label you as a tool, as gullible, and ultimately as fodder for use as seen fit by those whom invent these and other things.

I'm not asking you to chew the same gum, I'm telling you to put the BS detector glasses on, and to look at all people equally as any good criminal investigator would do. Nobody has more to lose than those whom hold PHD's: These are the people you need to question the most and trust the least. Almost all of them have a reason to make you believe this lie and few of them have any reason to convince you it is a lie.

[bistander]

Data please

Empirical data shows only two opposite separate twisted toroid vortices hyperboloids generated out by the secretion disc on the ground state middle of magnet namely its diamagnetic plane or else Bloch region domain wall.

I really want to see this empirical data. If the OP objects to posting here, please start a thread where we can examine this data.

Thanks,

bi

[ricards]

Other concept visualization of Magnetic field

If others concept of magnetism are welcome in this thread other than ken wheelers, I'd like everyone to inspect Joseph Newman theory on magnetism in general and how he perceived and visualized the Magnetic field. (especially UFOPolitics).

I have read Ken wheeler's book and to me It's much better to subscribe to Newman's Model... in his book and writing.. there is less hatred and criticizing of the existing model, and rather than "Redefining" magnetic field in general, he instead identified a missing piece and just made the existing model much more understandable..
there is still the lines of force..
the geometry of the magnetic field is still the same..
there is only the addition of the "gyroscopic" action instead of just a flux lines..

there are some explanation that can be explained using newman's model of magnetism..
one is the..
"why is there no current when there is no changed in flux"..
based on my understanding, the reason why there is no current because the "thing" (electrons.. that movement of it is called "current") has already been displaced by the gyroscopic action of the flux line and cannot go back to its original position since the gyroscopic flux is still there... no "thing" movement = no current..

In UFO Politics CRT display light displacement... the phenomenon can be explained without distorting the geometry of the Magnetic Field portrayed by iron filings method, by taking into account this "gyroscopic" action.. the light that is seen on the CRT is being deflected because the stream of electrons are being deflected by this "gyroscopic" action..

so basically from my point of view, the geometry of the magnetic field "visualized" by others who experiment with ferocells+magnet+light is an illusion made by the "Light" to trick the mind in perceiving a different geometry of the magnetic field other than what is clearly portrayed by the Iron filings method..

a static straight loop with gyroscopic action is much closer to reality rather than a magnetic field with orthogonally misaligned flux (sorry for the term no offense intended.. I can't describe it properly)..

[Markoul]

Dear Gambeir,

Thank you for your kind words, a lot of labor and care is put in your writting and I really appreciate this.

However, i kindly disaagre with you. Dark matter does not hinder our understanding and enlightenment and don't get confused by its exotic name.

No more than 500 years ago the invisible electromagnetism and atoms could evenly be described with these terms dark matter and dark energy by people of this age.

Scientists and researches are today at a dead end. So we must try not to look at the tree but at the whole forest picture in order to find the truth.

Our theory accounts only for a tiny part (5% the say) of all of what is actually out there.

We will never solve the puzzle without all of its pieces.

For 2000 years and more now we are playing with 5 from the total 100 pieces of the puzzle.

All i am saying is THAT WE ARE MISSING 95 PIECES!!

... and ask you to explore unexplored territory... what more exciting than that as Faraday and Tesla did! chewing the same gum all the time is boring and no new discoveries will be made ever. Discovery is the search of unknown territory.



Take care,

EM

[Gambeir]

[QUOTE=Markoul;309663]Dear Ufopolitics,

Thank you for you valuable insight concerning these matters and fields.

The debate about matter generating field or field generating matter reminds the old, the chicken made the egg or the egg made the chicken.

I am not disputing Ken's theory and I am intrigued by his intellect. However, this does not take me the right away to notice some discrepancies in some points of his theory shown by empirical data we have so far in order to improve the theory.

See it as my small contribution to Ken's theory.

For example the are no flux reciprocating direct from the two poles.

Empirical data shows only two opposite separate twisted toroid vortices hyperboloids generated out by the secretion disc on the ground state middle of magnet namely its diamagnetic plane or else Bloch region domain wall.

[B]These directly implies that since magnetic radiation originates from a specific region and we can not see the interaction taking place in this region, that it must get ejected in someway from an invisible not known yet energy or matter domain interacting with our know matterial word thus as we call it ordinary matter and energy.

Call it aether or dark matter, doesn't really matter.


Markoul;
This isn't intended to be nit~picking: That isn't my intent: I can see that you're making honest explanations based on what you believe right now, some of which I find useful and interesting, and I want you to be aware of that so that you understand I appreciate your work since writing is labor intensive. Your labors are not in vain, and not un~appreciated, which I think is important to communicate to you personally.

However, as painful as writing these posts often are, they do come with the benefit of refining knowledge, even as our errors are exposed by doing so, which then enable the refinement of ideas we ourselves hold: None of us are immune to the way the blade slices. Markoul, I agree with you in the sense that the magnetic field is flowing out of an un~recognized energy field. I do not, however, feel it is an unknown energy field, merely it is an un~recognized energy field.

There is a significant difference between unknown and un~recognized; what I've suggested is it is likely we already do know aspects of the this field because it already has exposed itself in some forms in the existing space around us right now. So I have to disagree with you when you say that it doesn't matter how we define the space from which the magnetic field flows out from. It matter a great deal in my opinion. What is likely is that there is a cross correlation between what we think we know and what we haven't yet thought of which spans across to explain cause and effect, and so it's likely that neither the known or the unknown is entirely correct; if that makes any sense at all?

Dark matter/energies is a concept that puts us in the realm of witchcraft, where nothing is known, and so I have to reject it and revert to other known means which puts us back in the realm of honest science where we at least have some knowledge and proven concepts. One of which appears to be time frame dragging which shows that speed and time are correlated to each other and that both are correlated to distortions in time and space.


The problem with dark matter is that it is a manifest invention with a primary function designed to up~hold conventional explanations about the way things work on a galactic scale. Thus, dark matter/energies is an invention designed explicitly as an expedient; a back~door way to block more rational explanations from gaining their proper station in the realm of scientific discussion. Simply put, pure mumbo~jumbo, whereas if we divest ourselves in this spectral suppositions, which are honestly drawn out of the historical context of witchcraft trials, and instead revert to the tried and true, then supportable notions drawn from known physics and the interaction of matter and energy in motion will get us much further along with understanding phenomena through experimental tests and hypothetical suppositions than reverting to explanations where in witchcraft is used to explain an unknown result, and that's all dark matter is. It's just pure nonsense is what it is. It isn't even remotely rational in my opinion, even though I once also thought it was rational~ LOL~

If we instead take time as a model to try to explain the outcome then here we have an explanation for cause and effect. We already know that time exists, that it can be altered, we know this. We know that speed and time are correlated. If we all would divest ourselves of this dark energy babble then I think we all might see where other things you've written make sense. So in no way am I saying all that you've posted is gibberish at all. What I am saying is that dark matter is more than just anything. It's a veil in a very wide sense and it's blocking and obscuring clear thinking, just as it was intended to do when it was invented. That is it's purpose.

Ya know the main problem I'm seeing, beyond the intentionally designed plots of the powers that be, which includes this dark matter witchcraft, is that people cannot get past this evident highway formed by the re~aligned crystalline patterns in a magnet. Ya look at that and it's all lined up like a one way road, and that's the trick to this thing, it is a one way road with all roads leading to the center: All roads lead to Rome. It's that kind of highway system. It's why I've said it's like a bunch of magnifying lens all focused upon the center, or like a mass array lens in this sense.

So magnetic field of dipole is 3D geometrically essentially not a sphere but two hemispheres separated by the Bloch domain wall.

There is no direct connection from North to South pole. Look it as two monopoles joined via the ground state domain wall.

What if it isn't a wall Markoul, but rather the ingestion intake point; the realm of an accretion plane, the point where in space there exists a so~called "event horizon." In that case then both hemispheres are joined, they just appear to not be, and the illusion is due to the description of a "Bloch Wall" (which is incorrect). It isn't a wall, it's something akin to a vacuum point such as an accretion disc induces in space.

NASA's idea of a Puslar.

https://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/science/objects/images/ns_pulsar_diagram.png

Russia's idea of a black hole accretion disc ~ well maybe...just guessing really.

To say otherwise without empirical data available to support it, is plain wrong.

Also notice gyromagnetic ratio of of magnetic dipole is preserved since field geometry elementary is not changed since it consists from two hemispheres.

So i am not an disputer of Ken's theory but merely a contributor.

Also i find injustice to project on me when there are real disputers of Ken Wheeler's theory in this thread here.

Nevertheless, i would like thank anyone in this thread who coped with me and wish you the best for finding enlightenment.

Kind Regards,

EM

Well I hope that this post, despite taking a general position of opposition, does nevertheless also show that I do find you have contributed which, personally speaking, I found useful and which helped me to have another view on the whole.

[Markoul]

Dear Ufopolitics,

Thank you for you valuable insight concerning these matters and fields.

The debate about matter generating field or field generating matter reminds the old, the chicken made the egg or the egg made the chicken.

I am not disputing Ken's theory and I am intrigued by his intellect. However, this does not take me the right away to notice some discrepancies in some points of his theory shown by empirical data we have so far in order to improve the theory.

See it as my small contribution to Ken's theory.

For example the are no flux reciprocating direct from the two poles.

Empirical data shows only two opposite separate twisted toroid vortices hyperboloids generated out by the secretion disc on the ground state middle of magnet namely its diamagnetic plane or else Bloch region domain wall.

These directly implies that since magnetic radiation originates from a specific region and we can not see the interaction taking place in this region, that it must get ejected in someway from an invisible not known yet energy or matter domain interacting with our know matterial word thus as we call it ordinary matter and energy.

Call it aether or dark matter, doesn't really matter.

So magnetic field of dipole is 3D geometrically essentially not a sphere but two hemispheres separated by the Bloch domain wall.

There is no direct connection from North to South pole. Look it as two monopoles joined via the ground state domain wall.

To say otherwise without empirical data available to support it, is plain wrong.

Also notice gyromagnetic ratio of of magnetic dipole is preserved since field geometry elementary is not changed since it consists from two hemispheres.

So i am not an disputer of Ken's theory but merely a contributor.

Also i find injustice to project on me when there are real disputers of Ken Wheeler's theory in this thread here.

Nevertheless, i would like thank anyone in this thread who coped with me and wish you the best for finding enlightenment.

Kind Regards,

EM

[Ufopolitics]

Finding a "Common" reasoning between Two Theories...

Now, related to my opinion about all arguments here:

1- ELECTRIC VERSUS MAGNETIC FIELDS

I do NOT think that "JUST ANY" Electric Field will generate a Magnetic Field.

Electricity (or an Electric Field) is just "ONE OF THE MANY COMPONENTS" to build ("put together", if you like) a Magnetic Field.

But that Electric Field MUST COMPLY WITH A SPECIFIC GEOMETRY in order to create a Magnetic Field.

That "Geometry" anyone knows what it looks like: A COIL OF CONDUCTIVE WIRE WINDING, or call it a SPRING LIKE SHAPE but that spring type shape MUST BE WRAPPED AROUND THE FERROMAGNETIC CORE.

If that spring is just around the "sides" of core, but not including it WITHIN (like we all know) then, even there is an Electric Field...there would NEVER BE any Magnetic Field generated, PERIOD.

Conclusion: Electric Field Geometry must be SPECIFIC to generate a Magnetic Field, hence we can not just consider that "any electric field" will generate magnetism.

Much less the term "Electricity" (or electrical flow) is completely incorrect to say it will create magnetic fields, "just like that".

Otherwise, if true, then by just connecting two terminals positive and negative to any iron bar ENDS...will magnetize that IRON core...True?...of course NOT, NEVER!!

2- FERROMAGNETIC MOLECULAR POLARIZATION (DOMAIN ALIGNMENTS) VERSUS MAGNETIC FIELD SPATIAL SPECTRUM

Here I would like you to, please, try to "see in the invisible"...

I believe -like I wrote before- that the molecular ferromagnetic alignments due to the presence (Influence) or CARRYING a Magnetic Field are true, as we have been taught, meaning, FERROMAGNETIC CORES do not establish any difference in their molecular center.

This Particles, molecules or as you like to call them...are completely STATIC, meaning they can NOT MOVE within the core material, therefore all they do is to get polarized.

Sprinkling Iron filings over a ferromagnetic bar magnet will ADAPT, AND SHOW AN EXACT ALIGNMENT as that Bar "assumes".

All of the above does NOT mean at all, that we are looking at the REAL MAGNETIC FIELD SPECTRUM, based on either inner core or outer particles alignments.

Only way I can find, so far to example this is by comparing it with a light bulb...it could be an incandescent or even an LED would do...

When we send electricity through the Light Bulb terminals, right at the Incandescent Filament is where we can "see" an Electrical Flow, due to all the properties of that conductive metal, plus the vacuum of the environment...we get very dark glasses and we only see a straight and flaming bright wire...a line.

But now, Does that incandescent short and fine FLAMING wire represents the LIGHT SPECTRUM, or the REAL LIGHTING VOLUME OF THOSE TRILLIONS OF PHOTONS ILLUMINATING THE ENTIRE ROOM?

OF COURSE NOT!!

In an LED we also have two elements, like the two terminals holding the Tungsten Filament, except here cathode-anode are not connected by any wire...but kind of a "semiconductor" a diode...all those COMPONENTS make the Light Spectrum Volume

Same way as when we apply a specific electric flow around a ferromagnetic core...and that core will show a flow...that we can see with some specific instruments (domains alignment)...but that alignment does not represents the MAGNETIC FIELD SPECTRUM SPATIAL VOLUME, even though they are both (MASS ALIGNMENTS-SPATIAL SPECTRUM) using same Dimension, same Space-Time.

Hope you all understand this analogy.


No more time...end


Regards to All


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

The Purpose of this Thread...

Hello to All,

Now, to all posting here:

Guys, the main reason of this Thread, as all others I have put together related to Magnetism and the True Magnetic Field, is to reach an Enlightenment, just as Title says...hoping that we ALL reach an Agreement.

So, "agreeing to disagreeing" WILL NOT GET US ABSOLUTELY ANYWHERE!

@Markoul: It is great to have you here posting , besides all your knowledge... you belong to the "Academy"...or call it "The Scientific Establishment" ...and it really pleases me to see someone like you seeing Magnetic Fields different than Conventional Physics.

However, arguing about the "ORIGINS" or whatever Magnetic Fields "step out from", like now - according to you- Magnetic Fields are not coming from the Aether, but from "Dark Matter, or Dark Energy"... this arguments does not contribute to HELP UNDERSTAND MAGNETIC FIELDS.

Arguments about where the Field COMES FROM, ORIGINATES FROM, is kind of "The Origins History of the Magnetic Field" and that is fine and dandy, "nice book"...but serves like a big ZERO to help understand the Magnetic Field.

Second; If You re-read the Title of this Thread it reads clearly that is SUPPORTING K. Wheeler THEORY in a 100%, Therefore, and please, do NOT come here to write that Ken's Theory is wrong...and you are right.

With all due respect, the Day that You put together a STANDALONE NOVEL THEORY BOOK ABOUT MAGNETISM (meaning not "backed up" by Quantum Physics, nor ANY other one) BUT YOUR OWN THEORY, in a BOOK, like Ken did, of as many pages, illustrations, REAL EXPERIMENTS, etc,etc...then you could open a Thread and render all your findings there.

And so, I will be more than happy to read it and offer all my opinions about it.

But so far, HERE, that's all we have.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Markoul]

no i am explaining electromagnetism at its genesis

as for EM waves these are due free electrons.

Electromagnetism is caused always by a electrons unbalanced distribution on a medium either if its due free electrons (waves) or polarized bond electrons (static) it is still called electromagnetism as such is a magnet it is a quantum electromagnetic machine.

EM

[bistander]

EM wave vs magnetic field

EM,

I think your problem is you confuse electromagnetic waves and static magnetic fields.

Electromagnetic radiation consists of waves of electric and magnetic fields, but not all configurations of electric and magnetic fields are described as "radiation." Certainly static fields, like the Earth's magnetic field and the other fields you describe, are not called "radiation."

From:

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/4637/electromagnetic-fields-vs-electromagnetic-radiation

bi

[Markoul]

The above is correct using electromagnetism general theory.

Magnetization and magnets are however better explained today by quantum mechanics therefore a better illustration of the magnetization process and a magnet is the bellow illustration:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TCa...ew?usp=sharing

notice the two opposite ejected jets or vortices North and South are what we call dipole magnetism, however both get ejected from the monopole scalar magnetic field of the dark matter domain, that is why it is called domain wall (Bloch wall).

Why this is hapening at the Bloch region?

Electric fields act as a barrier for magnetic radiation (think about it like a shield), the don't like each other and repel each other.

Only where electric field is nullified E=0, magnetism ejects out of the dark matter domain and pushes back and shrinks electric field in both directions. That is why you will not able to measure any voltage across a ferrite magnet. To demagnetize you have to apply via a coil to the magnet an external electric field which will close the cap on the Bloch region and stop the magnetic radiation poring out.

take care,

EM

[aljhoa]

that's a hoax

So are these:

the bar transforms into two domains, one at each end...

Is this a hoax and is it only fluid dynamics?




Al