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

[bistander]

Responding to Ufo

Bistander,

Got you...But, can You prove it by experiment?

Because obviously the Magnetic Viewing Film "missed" or "failed to reveal" those two North Faces on Iron Cube facing the two South Faces on both magnets, otherwise there would be two thin light green lines right at those two gaps...

but they weren't there...

Now, remember that Magnetic Viewing Film captures the "changes of polarity" (note I did not used Dielectric Plane or else) on any magnet defined with that light green line...we already went through that part with Mr Ardizzone, the Chief Engineer at the Film Development place...remember?

Hi Ufo,

We've been through this magnetic viewing film discussion before, see in this thread post #273 and a few pages prior to that. I still say your take is incorrect. Mr Ardizzone has given bad information which is contradictory to many other references which can be found on the subject. As this:

e-Magnets UK - Supplier of Neodymium Rare Earth Magnets

And Wikipedia.

The viewing film only shows the effects of flux which impinges on it. Not below it. Not next to it. So it may indicate the poles below it but not necessarily.

I can't think of a method to prove it to you. That's why I mention Gauss's Law and the accepted definition of magnetic poles.

Sorry, do not buy that example...The fact that there is or not an opposite pole at each iron rotor surface attached to magnets does not affect at all the functioning of the motor...so we fall into the same thing...prove it or it will fall into a Theory.

Here again, by title of this thread, you need to prove something, not me. I think the rotor example is excellent.

You are returning to the same, never ending story...Ok, so South is an "Inward Flux Gate" only...then again...why two South Poles repel each others when both have flux going inwards?

Two Vacuum ends will repel each others?

Absolutely not, they will attract each others into a final connection/attachement.

Been there; done this. See my post # 356. You continue to talk like magnetic flux flows or moves. When we refer to stationary magnet(s) and iron as we are here, it is a static magnetic field. There is no flow. Nothing is moving. No vacuum. Just the static field. Like a static gravitational field between two masses.

I never said anything about gates. The magnetic field impinges a surface. Again study Gauss. Think of the magnetic line of force in the flux field as a street. That street passes across the border between two countries. If there is no traffic on that street, there is no flow, but the street still crosses the border.

The arrow heads on diagrams of magnetic fields and lines of force do not represent direction of flow or travel. They assign polarity. Just as N and S. Like I was telling Al, we could just as well use B and C. Two N poles react exactly as two S poles. That street example above: Put a one-way sign on that street. If it never has any traffic, the sign is meaningless. In fact, the border is meaningless. Kind of like magnetic poles. It is the field that is of importance, not labels we stick on concepts.



Here is how magnetic fields and lines are used. There is no need for direction arrows and North & South.

Regards,

bi

[ldrancer]

go play with a gun, loaded pointed in your mouth

[ldrancer]

how does a concept answer how a magnet works? you dont answer science questions with concepts, that belogns in religion

[ldrancer]

"there aint no magnets"

Al

know what this so called slang im using is? its shortened very high level grammar speaking,

so you dont even add a thing to my comment. this topic being VORTEXES: is the best thign said in this waste of everybodys time.

and i wouldnt give you an explanation of what i said cause your too inbred. You didnt add to my statement which shows you dont know even understand what im saying or even capable of communication. which is why you harass everyoen with this ****ign topic. VORTEX the topic

[Ufopolitics]

Can You prove it by experiment?

Hi Ufo,

On the iron cube, there will be North poles on the 2 square surfaces facing the the South poles of the 2 magnets. It does not matter that they are touching. Further, on the iron cube, the other 4 square surfaces become the South poles.

Bistander,

Got you...But, can You prove it by experiment?

Because obviously the Magnetic Viewing Film "missed" or "failed to reveal" those two North Faces on Iron Cube facing the two South Faces on both magnets, otherwise there would be two thin light green lines right at those two gaps...

but they weren't there...

Now, remember that Magnetic Viewing Film captures the "changes of polarity" (note I did not used Dielectric Plane or else) on any magnet defined with that light green line...we already went through that part with Mr Ardizzone, the Chief Engineer at the Film Development place...remember?

This is very much like the 4 pole rotor in a PMSM. See the diagram below. I added the Ns and Ss to the diagram. The member identified as the rotor would be your iron cube. In the case of the rotor, 2 additional magnets are put on to the core surface but my polarity indications would remain the same had they not been added. By adding them (using 4 magnets (N-S-N-S)), the leakage (unwanted flux paths) on the ends of the rotor is minimized therefore those end surfaces (unlike the cube example) would be polarity neutral.

Sorry, do not buy that example...The fact that there is or not an opposite pole at each iron rotor surface attached to magnets does not affect at all the functioning of the motor...so we fall into the same thing...prove it or it will fall into a Theory.

You can apply Maxwell's 2nd equation on Gauss's Law for Magnetism and the definition of magnetic poles as: North = surface with flux direction outwards of the subject volume and South = surface with flux directed inwards to the subject volume.

Regards,

bi

You are returning to the same, never ending story...Ok, so South is an "Inward Flux Gate" only...then again...why two South Poles repel each others when both have flux going inwards?

Two Vacuum ends will repel each others?

Absolutely not, they will attract each others into a final connection/attachement.


Cheers


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Where's Waldo?

Thanks Al, perfect example!

There is no Monopole on both magnets...they still have their South Poles, no doubt about that...


But, hey, the question here is about that piece of iron sandwiched between both South Poles?


That piece of Iron only have a South Pole influenced from both sides...


The question(s) here is(are)...


Is that piece of Iron a Momentary South Monopole?

If the answer to above question was a "no"...Then could you tell Us where is the North Pole on that Iron Cube?

Hi Ufo,

On the iron cube, there will be North poles on the 2 square surfaces facing the the South poles of the 2 magnets. It does not matter that they are touching. Further, on the iron cube, the other 4 square surfaces become the South poles.

This is very much like the 4 pole rotor in a PMSM. See the diagram below. I added the Ns and Ss to the diagram. The member identified as the rotor would be your iron cube. In the case of the rotor, 2 additional magnets are put on to the core surface but my polarity indications would remain the same had they not been added. By adding them (using 4 magnets (N-S-N-S)), the leakage (unwanted flux paths) on the ends of the rotor is minimized therefore those end surfaces (unlike the cube example) would be polarity neutral.



You can apply Maxwell's 2nd equation on Gauss's Law for Magnetism and the definition of magnetic poles as: North = surface with flux direction outwards of the subject volume and South = surface with flux directed inwards to the subject volume.

Regards,

bi

[IndianaBoys]

Is solder wire magnetic?
Are jar lids magnetic?


Magnetic "monopole"
Iron Rods with Monopoles

Al

What did the compass needle do in the video?

magnetic monopole discovered, monopole magnet, conductor, and dielectic, "key to free energy"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOdTDkgEdAY

[aljhoa]

And you certainly don't understand no magnet.

"there aint no magnets"

Al

[aljhoa]

That is something different than what was created in MrTeslonian's video.

The materials you referenced in your video example were already existing materials with a defined charge/polarity.

For those that did not watch MrTeslonian's video, he split the charges/polarity using the Lord Kelvin Water Dropper technique and instead of using water he heated up solder to flow like water through the system creating monopole substances. This can be perfected for wire to be processed this way along with a list of other materials. This is an incredible breakthrough. For example, a UFO Motor constructed with monopole parts!

magnetic monopole discovered, monopole magnet, conductor, and dielectic, "key to free energy"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOdTDkgEdAY

Is solder wire magnetic?
Are jar lids magnetic?


Magnetic "monopole"
Iron Rods with Monopoles

Al

[IndianaBoys]

How to make a "monopole" magnet




North-red arrow seeks the South Magnetic Pole of the Earth, which is located in the Northern Hemisphere.


Al

That is something different than what was created in MrTeslonian's video.

The materials you referenced in your video example were already existing materials with a defined charge/polarity.

For those that did not watch MrTeslonian's video, he split the charges/polarity using the Lord Kelvin Water Dropper technique and instead of using water he heated up solder to flow like water through the system creating monopole substances. This can be perfected for wire to be processed this way along with a list of other materials. This is an incredible breakthrough. For example, a UFO Motor constructed with monopole parts!

magnetic monopole discovered, monopole magnet, conductor, and dielectic, "key to free energy"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOdTDkgEdAY

[ldrancer]

Start a vortex topic. N S doesnt matter its point of view, from the observer, if north is opposite of south, then what is wrong with calling a north end or south end of a magnets, you know, ends, that? using those terms since they go with the earths north south poles, which one goes up, with north america situated in a certain way?

what stupid arguement was you guys wanting to make on that, to call me stupid or something again?

**** you. Hey make a topic and call it vortexes cause you guys arent doing no science here, you're only making up, things. And you certainly don't understand no magnet.

also, isnt cw and ccw just opposite? you guys worshp clocks eh? cant use teh entire world for a concept? how is yours better?

[Ufopolitics]

Thanks Al, perfect example!

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iEnQw2Wt7w[/VIDEO]

There is no Monopole on both magnets...they still have their South Poles, no doubt about that...


But, hey, the question here is about that piece of iron sandwiched between both South Poles?


That piece of Iron only have a South Pole influenced from both sides...


The question(s) here is(are)...


Is that piece of Iron a Momentary South Monopole?

If the answer to above question was a "no"...Then could you tell Us where is the North Pole on that Iron Cube?





Cheers


Ufopolitics

Here is the Magnetic View Film result on N/S>IRON<S/N cubes:

[IMG][/IMG]

No center line at iron cube at all...


Cheers


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

How to make a "monopole" magnet
Al

Thanks Al, perfect example!

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iEnQw2Wt7w[/VIDEO]

There is no Monopole on both magnets...they still have their South Poles, no doubt about that...


But, hey, the question here is about that piece of iron sandwiched between both South Poles?


That piece of Iron only have a South Pole influenced from both sides...


The question(s) here is(are)...


Is that piece of Iron a Momentary South Monopole?

If the answer to above question was a "no"...Then could you tell Us where is the North Pole on that Iron Cube?





Cheers


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Viewing Film and Monopole Momentary Status

Hello to All,

A simple analysis...

If we get a sheet of Magnetic Viewing Film...we can clearly see that there is a light green line right at center of any magnet. Dividing Poles exactly at center.

[IMG][/IMG]

If we get two magnets attracted we see how each center light green line from each magnet ends up becoming just one right at the gap where they are join together.

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

simple observations...

Now if we get a piece of iron and contact it with a magnet, we do not see two center light lines but just one, moved a bit off center, but still on magnet's embodiment, while we see a larger dark area showing an expansion from that pole next to iron.

[IMG][/IMG]

If we use a gap between Iron-Magnet, we see under view film there is no green line at iron's center, therefore, no dual poles in iron...just an extension and expansion of that pole into the Iron Mass.

[IMG][/IMG]

Now You, or We could call it Pole Redirection, Monopole Status, Polarization Expanding or whatever you please...However, the fact is that on that Iron Piece there is Only One Pole expanded from magnet's.

Simple conclusions...


Cheers


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Ufo,

I don't know what you're going on about. I was totally referring the iron in the influence of the magnet's field. Hence my question: Why does retentivity matter?

Bistander,

Retentivity does matter.

If You have a piece of Iron which retains magnetism, once you take it away from the magnetic influencing from a single pole, Nature automatically creates that opposite pole by bringing dielectric field right to middle of iron bar.

If Iron does not retain magnetism, after removed it goes back to be just a piece of inert iron. So it is much easier to observe under the compass, magnetic viewing film and other methods.

This Monopole Status I was referring to, only exist under the influence of single magnetic pole(s).

There are more Radical ways to test this phenomena, and that is by using Like Poles sandwiched between a piece of iron. You will only see that "like" pole reflected on iron.

Monopoles do not exist; in the field or outside. Or anywhere.

bi

That is what you think, and what has been thought for too long...but it is wrong!


Cheers


Ufopolitics