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

[SlickDick]

Een beetje jammer Ernst.

Pedante kwast

This whole thread is unfortunate. It is all based on pseudo-profound bull****. Bull**** in, means even more bull**** out.

Arguing over something which founded on pseudo-profound bull**** is futile and a waist of time, especially arguing with those who lack discernment of deceptive vagueness.

The result is evident, one pedantic calling the other pedantic... go figure.

[Ben2503]

pedante kwast

You may agree with me, but I do not agree with you. Reread my previous post and note:
electric field - acts on - electric charges - in the direction of the electric lines of force
magnetic field - acts on - magnetic poles - in the direction of the magnetic lines of force
gravitational field - acts on - mass - in the direction of the gravitational lines of force

I won't because I could inadvertently disprove some of Ken's wisdom.

The answer is in my previous post. BTW I did not say that the field is strongest in the blochwall.

Great! Thanks! I will disagree with Distinti then, and with Ken, and with UFO, and with you.

I have another fascinating proof for you all:
Proof that 3+3=15 and that all our math is backwards:

First we take an amorphous one and munificently yoke an anachronistic anathema.
We then notice a pellucid pejorative paucity, whose pertinaciousness can be relegated by rescinding the hyperbolic subjugate turpitude.
The ubiquitous truculent two leaves a vestige of sanguine requisition.
This gives us a proclivity to the sinusoidal presage of preponderance of legerdemain which is easily recognized in the imaginary domain.
This portent plethora is however ostensible, therefore we must release the obstreperous four, leaving a multifarious modicum.
One would expect this to instigate a heterogenous equanimity, but the exigent five foils this execrable embezzlement.
We all know that sixes don't exist. They are a fabrication of vile and punicious shills thrying to dumb us down.
So it must be 15.
(and all the rest of whom for which to when-so-never of partially indeterminate biochemical degradation seek the path to the sudsy yellow nozzle of their foaming nocturnal parametric-digital whole-wheat/inter-faith geo-thermal terpsichorean ejectamenta)

Enjoy!

Ernst.

Een beetje jammer Ernst.

Pedante kwast

[bistander]

Comments

Hi Ufo,

I have a couple of comments on your post.

LET'S REMEMBER THAT THE MAIN, OLD FARADAY THEORY STATES THAT:

...By the Lines of Force (understood ONLY in ATTRACTION MODE) "cutting" the conductor(s) in a Perpendicular Fashion, this action will Induce a spinning charge within conductor's mass.

That is not the normal way of stating Faraday's Law. But the thing that bothers me the most is

(understood ONLY in ATTRACTION MODE)

I have never seen such a qualification. Where did that come from?

THAT LIGHTER LINE MEANS THERE IS NO FLUX IN THAT REGION!!!.

On the subject of the magnetic viewing film, the white area indicates no perpendicular flux passing through the film. There may be (and is, in your example picture) magnetic flux and therefore a magnetic field below the viewing film. So there are magnetic lines of flux running from the North pole of one magnet to the South pole of the other magnet which are parallel to and below the plane of the viewing film. Also, there is a field and lines of flux inside the magnets below the viewing film where the white lines are in the middle of the magnet shapes. These are also parallel to the viewing film.

To prove there is flux (and field) between the two magnets, turn the film on its side and place it between the magnets. It will be dark because the flux is cutting it perpendicular now.

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

And so...the story continues...

Here is the Viewing Film RESULT-GRAPHIC ANALYSIS on a Single Cube Magnet:

SEEN ON THE SIDE

[IMG][/IMG]


And Viewing Film clearly confirms Ken's Theory...at Center, there is NO FLUX, THEREFORE, NO SPATIAL FIELD.

NOT A SPATIAL FIELD THERE...JUST COUNTERSPATIAL ONE, THE DIELECTRIC FIELD...

The very overwhelming confirmation of all this views...is that ALL OF THEM HOLD TRUE, CONSISTENT IN THE OTHER TWO MORE METHODS, FERROCELL, CRT IMAGING.

WHILE THE CLASSIC THEORY ONLY HAVE "THE DUSTY" IRON FILINGS METHOD...WHICH THE WIND WILL BLOW AWAY VERY SOON.

DUST IN THE WIND...


Ufopolitcs

[Ernst]

I do agree with you that charge will indeed follow the 'classical' force lines. This is what is used in old TV sets. The electrons from the 'canon(s)' are deflected by magnetic fields. If you place a magnet properly on an old b&w tv, you will see just that.

You may agree with me, but I do not agree with you. Reread my previous post and note:
electric field - acts on - electric charges - in the direction of the electric lines of force
magnetic field - acts on - magnetic poles - in the direction of the magnetic lines of force
gravitational field - acts on - mass - in the direction of the gravitational lines of force

How do you explain that if you put a small disc magnetic on one of the poles of a larger cylindric magnet, the small magnet doesn't flip, nor moves to the edge of the pole. Instead it moves to the centre of it. Which indicates to me that there are repelling forces rather than attracting.

I won't because I could inadvertently disprove some of Ken's wisdom.

Are you saying that the magnetic fields are stronger at the edges of a magnet? If thats true, why isn't the ball then following the field line, overshoot the middle of the magnet (where the gblochwall is supposed to be, and in your theory the field is the strongest), move back again towards the middle and the after some cycles settle in the middle?
This is what actually happens with a magnetic ball when you place off centre on one of the poles. It will move towards the middle, overshoots it etc...

The answer is in my previous post. BTW I did not say that the field is strongest in the blochwall.

You may or may not agree with Distinti, but his explanations make more sense to me that yours. Actually his gives a rather acceptable basic explanation of what causes magnetism and how the attraction works, whereas you only make statements. IMHO similar to dear Ken's way of explaining things.

Great! Thanks! I will disagree with Distinti then, and with Ken, and with UFO, and with you.

I have another fascinating proof for you all:
Proof that 3+3=15 and that all our math is backwards:

First we take an amorphous one and munificently yoke an anachronistic anathema.
We then notice a pellucid pejorative paucity, whose pertinaciousness can be relegated by rescinding the hyperbolic subjugate turpitude.
The ubiquitous truculent two leaves a vestige of sanguine requisition.
This gives us a proclivity to the sinusoidal presage of preponderance of legerdemain which is easily recognized in the imaginary domain.
This portent plethora is however ostensible, therefore we must release the obstreperous four, leaving a multifarious modicum.
One would expect this to instigate a heterogenous equanimity, but the exigent five foils this execrable embezzlement.
We all know that sixes don't exist. They are a fabrication of vile and punicious shills thrying to dumb us down.
So it must be 15.
(and all the rest of whom for which to when-so-never of partially indeterminate biochemical degradation seek the path to the sudsy yellow nozzle of their foaming nocturnal parametric-digital whole-wheat/inter-faith geo-thermal terpsichorean ejectamenta)

Enjoy!

Ernst.

[BroMikey]

Did you also see part 2.

Yes, here it is.

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgHfW8fqqXI[/VIDEO]



Newton's 3rd Law is false
[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lxCeu6WgO4[/VIDEO]


[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nt6fiLV2UgU[/VIDEO]



Today's scientists have substituted mathematics
for experiments, and they wander off through
equation after equation, and eventually build a
structure which has no relation to reality.

[Ufopolitics]

About Magnetic Viewing Film...revealing the True Fields Interactions

Source:VIEWING FILM FOR DC MAGNETIC FIELDS
A DISCUSSION
By: Vincent A. Ardizzone, EE
Executive President Product Development
Magne-Rite, Inc.

A unique process of micro-encapsulation was developed which allows a very thin 2-mil layer of magnetically sensitive slurry to be bonded to a 5-mil sheet of plastic film. In the encapsulation process, colloidal nickel particles suspended in the slurry become engulfed within gelatinous membranes. The slurry is then coated onto the plastic film and allowed to dry. After complete drying, the particles maintain freedom of movement within the gelatinous membranes.

When a dc magnetic field is applied to the bonded film, the nickel particles congregate in alignment with the flux lines emanating from the dc magnetic source. This mass grouping together of nickel particles causes a darkened appearance to the film directly where the magnetic field is impinging on the film. As a result, an exact two-dimensional image or impression of the magnetic pole or pole pattern (if there are more than one) is produced. This image is easily erased once the film is removed from the magnetic source and the nickel particles are allowed to freely re-disperse within their gelatinous cells. A common bar magnet can be swiped across the film to ensure complete erasure of the previous image, or by reapplying the film to another magnetic source the new image produced will completely replace the old one.

It should also be pointed out that, due to the small size of the colloidal nickel particles, the film can detect fields as low as only a few gauss and still produce and clear image.

A particularly useful application of this viewing film is in the identification of changes in magnetic polarity. As an example, if two magnets identical in size and shape were placed adjacent to each other, as shown in figure 1, and one wished to quickly determine if they were identical or opposite in polarity, for instance, placing the film on the magnet's surface would immediately reveal the answer. If the magnets were opposite in polarity, for instance, the film would show the typically darkened areas where each magnetic pole is located but would also clearly reveal a much lighter line where the magnetic fields change polarity. See figure 2. The lighter line is produced because no flux lines are present at the border where magnetic fields change over in polarity and hence the nickel particles in the film do not congregate along that line. If the magnets were of the same polarity the film would show a solid darkened region over the entire area of both magnetic poles with no line of separation.

I don't just go to Wikipedia to Copy/Paste There/Here an "abstract" with many errors and wrong names trying to short cut the real definitions, then creating confusion galore by not explaining the deeper and truthful reactions from a much more trusted source:...The designers and makers of the product.

(In above text I have bold and underlined the essential parts that concern ME to Explain to You ALL here.)

FIRST OFF, there are not one single description above, telling Us the Magnetic Viewing Film Nickel Volume shape is based on "Flakes"...but PARTICLES

SECOND, this particles are submersed in a COLLOIDAL GEL forming a Slurry compound (Slurry definition:a semi-liquid mixture, typically of fine particles suspended in a viscous liquid).
RESUMING, PARTICLES WERE NOT FLAKES ROTATING "FREELY" INSIDE OIL...NOT AT ALL!

Why go so much in detail?

Just because the movement of this particles is very limited once they are encapsulated within the gelatinous membranes.

NOW GOING TO THE ATTRACT INTERACTION BETWEEN A NORTH-SOUTH IMAGING BY VIEWING FILM, AS DESCRIBED ABOVE:

if two magnets identical in size and shape were placed adjacent to each other,If the magnets were opposite in polarity, for instance, the film would show the typically darkened areas where each magnetic pole is located but would also clearly reveal a much lighter line where the magnetic fields change polarity...The lighter line is produced because no flux lines are present .

Above is a briefing from previous main quoted text, same words, same paragraphs, just arranged to compact them for analysis below:

OK, now if we have two magnets (N-S) in attraction, adjacent (next) to each others, and we throw iron filings, then the "Imaginary Lines of Force" would reveal...right?...Right,

However, Magnetic Viewing Film will NOT DEFINE ANY LINES OF FORCE AT ALL, between two attracting magnets., JUST A GAP, THAT CONTAINS NO FLUX, (SO, COMMUNICATION BREAKDOWN, My Friends...

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoqQnR8NOVI[/VIDEO]

[IMG][/IMG]

Magnetic Film WILL DEFINE just Two Magnets opposite poles, which are approaching each others, HOWEVER, still keeping their respective polarities VERY WELL DEFINED BY BEING SEPARATED BY A LIGHTER LINE, Where BOTH FIELDS CHANGE POLARITIES, BUT MAINLY, THAT LIGHTER LINE MEANS THERE IS NO FLUX IN THAT REGION!!!.

CONCLUDING That IF both Fields poles in attraction maintain their polarities separated BY A "NO FLUX GAP" until reaching contact, then there could absolutely NOT EXIST ANY FIELD PRESENCE AT ALL.

[IMG][/IMG]

IN ORDER FOR A FIELD TO EXIST, THERE MUST BE A CORRELATION, AN EXCHANGE OF FORCES BETWEEN BOTH OPPOSITE POLARIZATIONS, WHICH "SUPPOSEDLY" CREATES THE SO CALLED "LINES OF FORCE" or LINES OF CONSTANT EXCHANGING FLOW/FLUX...AND EXACTLY NONE, ZERO, ARE REVEALED BY THE MAGNETIC VIEWING FILM.

LET'S REMEMBER THAT THE MAIN, OLD FARADAY THEORY STATES THAT:

...By the Lines of Force (understood ONLY in ATTRACTION MODE) "cutting" the conductor(s) in a Perpendicular Fashion, this action will Induce a spinning charge within conductor's mass.

The ONLY REALITY is that there are absolutely NO STRAIGHT LINES OF FORCE , My Friends, in ANY Magnet, In ANY Coil, BUT SPINNING VORTEXES OF FORCE for each polarization...AND THREE DIMENSIONAL, NOT TWO DIMENSIONAL FLAT PLANE AT ALL!

And so far NONE of You have the slightest Idea what this could mean...and how we could have been able to manipulate this Fields...!



Regards to All




Ufopolitcs

[BroMikey]

Evasive Mind Control

Don't look at this hand, look at that hand, watch me pull a rabbit
out of my hat. See I told you everything is happen stance.




What is known as Occam's razor was a common principle in medieval philosophy and was not originated by William, but because of his frequent usage of the principle, his name has become indelibly attached to it. It is unlikely that William would appreciate what some of us have done in his name. For example, atheists often apply Occam's razor in arguing against the existence of a god on the grounds that any god is an unnecessary hypothesis. We can explain everything without assuming the extra metaphysical baggage of a divine being.

[bistander]

Disc magnet

How do you explain that if you put a small disc magnetic on one of the poles of a larger cylindric magnet, the small magnet doesn't flip, nor moves to the edge of the pole. Instead it moves to the centre of it. Which indicates to me that there are repelling forces rather than attracting.

Are you saying that the magnetic fields are stronger at the edges of a magnet?

Hi Ben,

Perhaps this can help visualize that the field is strongest at the edge. Here is a FEMM of a half inch diameter disc magnetized along its axis (poles top and bottom on the diagram).



That was found here: https://www.kjmagnetics.com/blog.asp...nets-are-weird

Towards the bottom of that page there is an explanation and diagram of a small disc on a large one.

The white circle seen on the viewing film around the edge of the disc magnet is due to the flux bending tightly around the edge heading to the opposite pole and not traveling perpendicular upwards to the film.

from wiki:

It is a translucent thin flexible sheet, coated with micro-capsules containing nickel flakes suspended in oil.[1] When magnetic lines of force are parallel to the surface of the carrier sheet, the surfaces of the flakes are reflective, and appear bright. When lines of force are perpendicular to the sheet, the flakes are edge-on, and appear significantly darker. When the film is placed on a magnet's pole, the latter case applies.

That should help to understand what you see using that film.

Hi Ernst,

I agree with that and tried to inform Ufo about similar behavior with ferrocells here:

I think the line on the images results from the directional flow of magnetic flux which is all parallel to the magnet's axis at that location meaning no flux in the perpendicular direction to intersect with the viewing film and react with the medium and light. * A quote from Timm@Ferrocell USA at the Ferrocell reply #4 appears to support my thoughts.

A Ferrocell will pass light where the flux "isn't" (the lowest potential), and appears in a different vector in relation to the location of incoming light.

He wasn't interested in that even though it appears to be supported by Timm who invented and makes the ferrocells.

Regards,

bi

[Ben2503]

Double Dutch

The ball goes right to the edge! Of course, remember what I said about iron? It turns into a magnet along the lines of force. So put the ball in the middle of a north pole, the lower half will become S and the top will become N. This top N is attracted by the other side of the disk magnet! And therefore the ball will move to the edge where the magnet N and S are closest together and also, for that same reason the field is strongest!
Now can you look me in the eyes and tell me this is difficult to grasp?
I am at 1/3 of the video now and my hopes for humanity are fading.
Do I have to continue?


Ernst.

I do agree with you that charge will indeed follow the 'classical' force lines. This is what is used in old TV sets. The electrons from the 'canon(s)' are deflected by magnetic fields. If you place a magnet properly on an old b&w tv, you will see just that.

How do you explain that if you put a small disc magnetic on one of the poles of a larger cylindric magnet, the small magnet doesn't flip, nor moves to the edge of the pole. Instead it moves to the centre of it. Which indicates to me that there are repelling forces rather than attracting.

Are you saying that the magnetic fields are stronger at the edges of a magnet? If thats true, why isn't the ball then following the field line, overshoot the middle of the magnet (where the gblochwall is supposed to be, and in your theory the field is the strongest), move back again towards the middle and the after some cycles settle in the middle?
This is what actually happens with a magnetic ball when you place off centre on one of the poles. It will move towards the middle, overshoots it etc...

You may or may not agree with Distinti, but his explanations make more sense to me that yours. Actually his gives a rather acceptable basic explanation of what causes magnetism and how the attraction works, whereas you only make statements. IMHO similar to dear Ken's way of explaining things.

Ben

[Ben2503]

Hello Ben,

Nice video, same guy like previous , and I do agree with him, basically about the Non Real Model rendered by the iron filings "Lines of Force".

However, he ignores that what he calls lines of force when observed through Viewing Film...is the very center division from both poles but seen from above (top view)...if he would have observed sideways with film, would notice they are exactly at the center of the magnet. So, from a wrong concept he starts developing all kind of interactions...which are true to certain extent...but are not the main and stronger forces that rule magnetism...actually that center or top viewed "ring" is the weakest magnetic field part.

Still I see that many smart people are reacting to these ancient methods to observe magnetic fields as rejecting in the open about the WRONG AND NON EXISTING LINES OF FORCE supposedly revealed by iron filings.


Therefore, I give Video a plus, basically for that part.


Thanks and Regards


Ufopolitics

Hi Ufo.
Did you also see part 2.
If not please do.
Best regards,
Ben

[Ernst]

SO NOW TELL US ALL HERE GENIUS...WHY IF THE LINES OF FORCE ARE PARALLEL TO VIEWING FILM...THERE IS THIS LIGHTER STRIPE RIGHT AT EXACT CENTER SPACE BETWEEN BOTH ARC SEGMENTS?

Aren't all the flakes on top of that center space supposed to be positioned in a uniform alignment? So according to that Theory they supposedly be all shaded evenly...whatever darker or lighter.

Maybe a defect from factory?...The Flakes got stuck in the oil...for that precise region?



Actually Viewing Film is CONTRADICTING THE VERY EVEN LINES OF FORCE that supposedly travel from pole to pole...?



So according to the Theory of the flakes in Oil, lighter/darker...then the above picture tells us that Lines of Force" are EMANATING from the very CENTER of the cube magnet above going two directions upper/lower.?

While the lighter stripe at center is where they are parallel to film?

DON'T MAKE SENSE UH?

Listen Ernst, while you were constructing Tesla Coils...I have been working on MAGNETISM and ELECTRODYNAMICS and then some BIG time prior to it.

I have not idea what went wrong with your sudden frustrations and those experiments, but it is not my problem at all.

Well Ernst, unfortunately for you, this Thread is mainly about proving a Theory, NOT disproving it.

OK, point taken. Everything must be explained in accordance with Ken's theory and different opinions/views do not belong here.

And the way I am going to prove it in the end is with Electrodynamic Machines where this Theory specifically applies, basically on Electric Generators.

Well, in the light of the above, there could be people who would not accept this as a valid proof. But this is your thread, you are the king.

So, since You do not have the experience in those fields, or building capabilities, sincerely, you will not be of any help here at all.

I found, I do have something that you are lacking and that would (under normal circumstances) be helpful in a proof. But indeed, not in the way you try to prove things.

Your participation here so far has been only to object, to contradict or keeping your stubbornness that is really becoming annoying.

No, I see that different. I think the classical theories can explain your experiments perfectly well and that is what I am showing you.
Also I have tried to get some clear definitions of the terminology that you are using. So far the score here is 1 term "counterspatial" and its opposite "spatial". I have shown how the terms "polarized" and "ether" can (in my understanding) not be used together. And that "counterspace" remains undefined.
Then there is something called the "occam's razor", saying that if two theories can both explain a phenomenon, the simpler one is to be preferred. Seeing the complexity of Ken's theory it should come with overwhelming supporting evidence!
Further I have tried to show you the meaning of field lines, a concept that escapes you, but I failed to get that across.
But I can understand how all this annoys you.

So, I really appreciate if you either try to OPEN YOUR MIND AND COOPERATE POSITIVELY or then Good Bye Guy.

In my opinion my mind is open and I am cooperating positively, but not if you wish to provide a half-baked and invalid proof. Full proof should be able to override all my objections and answer my questions.
Well, we are going to leave it here then, I am not here to upset or annoy you!

Ernst.

[BroMikey]

Hello to All,

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCAWPIRc7q0[/VIDEO]

ANALYZING MAGNETIC SENSOR BEHAVIOR

Ok, above is an Unlisted Video just for this Thread only (I have no intentions to broadcast it on YouTube since must of my subscribers will have no idea what's going on here...

On this video I am showing the way this Magnetic Seeker Sensor reacts under some fields influence...


Hoping this will Enlighten some minds.


Ufopolitics

Keep it up UFO people will catch on in time. Your video is so clear
and so we can not use the old models to build things, we must go
with what we are observing in the video. It's the only way to go
and the math will come after a new model has been confirmed.

[BroMikey]

Your participation here so far has been only to object, to contradict or keeping your stubbornness that is really becoming annoying.

So, I really appreciate if you either try to OPEN YOUR MIND AND COOPERATE POSITIVELY or then Good Bye Guy.


Sincerely


Ufopolitics

Hey UFO this is the way you talk to a resident genius.

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuUTABLz1Vk[/VIDEO]

[Ufopolitics]

Originally Posted by Ufopolitics
Ernst, let me ask you...Have you ever been able to get out from Wardenclyffe Projects to do any other kind of experiments, basically referring to the field of Electric Generators or any kind of Electrodynamic Machines at all?

Hi UFO,

Hardly. I did build an electromotor once. DC-type.
I did some other experiments when I was younger, but I do not really recall much about those.


Ernst.

Well Ernst, unfortunately for you, this Thread is mainly about proving a Theory, NOT disproving it.

And the way I am going to prove it in the end is with Electrodynamic Machines where this Theory specifically applies, basically on Electric Generators.

So, since You do not have the experience in those fields, or building capabilities, sincerely, you will not be of any help here at all.

Your participation here so far has been only to object, to contradict or keeping your stubbornness that is really becoming annoying.

So, I really appreciate if you either try to OPEN YOUR MIND AND COOPERATE POSITIVELY or then Good Bye Guy.


Sincerely


Ufopolitics