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

[BroMikey]

I'm completely fine with Ernst disagreeing with what I said, but his response to me with the bulletpoints is literally changing the history of what has been said here and I find that dishonest.

I'll try to get a conversation on counterspace definition according to Eric, but dR_Green pretty much already said it in his post.

Hey Aaron
Yes I know that Green is cool, had to check him out. He is a smart man
as for the rest of your post about the other guy, I'll have to say you pretty
much hit the nail, planned disruptions.

I really am looking forward to the kindness you spoke about where
you and Eric are going out of your way to help these drowning souls
get their heads above water. That's what it is like you know? I am
pressed to assimilate much of these well thought out conclusion
while at the same time raking up all of the trash drilled into me
from dogma central.

It is much appreciated. Tell Eric I said thank you for his continued
instructions. Many of us are learning more than we ever thought
possible. You have given yourself to this work many years and
had great instructors. This is why I can understand everything you
say as you have had enough experience delivering the message.

It's all up hill, but you will reap many rewards. Your time to excel
is here.

[ldrancer]

(Quote:
"You talk about counterspace like as if though its a field. if something does something then counterspace will come in and take over."

Counterspace doesn't just "come in"...it don't take over nothing...it is "Inwards" instead of "Outwards".)


Inwards is a field. A concept. in to what? there has to be something holding this field you speak of that it is in that it goes from not being in to going into. Your speaking of a field and a field isnt a physical object. It's a concept. Come in and Inwards are the same thing.

[Aaron]

counterspace

Yes Aaron what you have said simple

I'm completely fine with Ernst disagreeing with what I said, but his response to me with the bulletpoints is literally changing the history of what has been said here and I find that dishonest.

Anyway, on the subject of counterspace, I'm taking a break right now while Eric Dollard sets up the next step for the video, which is a comparison between the transverse network and longitudinal (counterspace) network. Right now, we're not going much into his definition of counterspace, just that the longitudinal "high-pass" network is the counterspace network.

I'll try to get a conversation on counterspace definition according to Eric, but dR_Green pretty much already said it in his post.

[BroMikey]

You're talking about people looking at conventional theories that have their own foundation based on flawed fundamentals.

it is believed that potential was indeed stored in the object as it was lifted to that height. The equation gives the right answer ..................


100% of all the energy used to lift the object is 100% gone at the peak of the lift and is dissipated right back to the environment.


Nothing is stored in the object .................................

You can't - and the premise that is broken, which needs to be FIXED


The Einsteinian garbage paradigm................................
conventional theories are the real crackpots who believe in magically storing potential and disbelieving that gravity is a source of energy.


Conventional theory falls flat on its face and does not explain where the energy comes from when the object is dropped. common sense.

Sorry, but the conventional theories do not cut it and are ................... committed to the same flawed premise as these "brilliant minds".

Furthermore, you are simply unwilling or incapable of allowing yourself to listen to anything I have said and are only talking in circles.

Counterspace is not an area void of the aether .......................


Your multiple bulletpoints show that you have taken what I have said and simply made it mean what you want it to mean .................................................. ..and your bulletpoints also throw out what Eric said counterspace is. This is looking more like planned confusion than a conversation.

Yes Aaron what you have said simple

A child in 6th grade can grasp this. I am always thrilled
when i see the good stuff(Sane thinking) being reviewed with
a vengeance. I'm on this side of common sense also.

The entries you make clear up so many episodes where in class
everyone is looking around and asking each other
"DOES THIS MAKE ANY SENSE"??

But it makes sense now. And if the smallest foundational cause
and effect doctrines are nothing more than "TEACHER TOLD ME"
then what does that say about our ability to reason???

You are the star of this website Sir.

[dR-Green]

The Einsteinian garbage paradigm wants to make the energy and potential energy intrinsic to the object and magically storing potential energy in an object when potential energy cannot be stored to begin with shows that the "brilliant" minds reviewing the conventional theories are the real crackpots who believe in magically storing potential and disbelieving that gravity is a source of energy. Conventional theory falls flat on its face and does not explain where the energy comes from when the object is dropped. Again, it did not come from lifting the object because that energy was used up to lift the object - common sense.

Tesla's view on Einstein's theory is that it's like saying you can derive extra (free) energy from something simply through allowing an object to fall at a greater velocity than you lifted it.

[Aaron]

counterspace and a flawed conventional premise

There are hundreds of brilliant minds that have gone over these conventional theories. Now that doesn't make it perfect, but you should at least point out a flaw before you try to fix it.

On counterspace. What I have learned so far:
- it is space without ether and there for it does not exist.
- its closest approximation can be found in very cold/empty and remote regions in space.
- it can not hold anything and nothing can pass through it, therefor nothing can go into or come out of counterspace.
- the empty and remote regions in space (with a very low ether density) would make it impossible to see stars that are behind them (light is bent around these regions distorting and blurring the image of the star)
- according to the 'counterspace theory' the Lorentz contraction caused by gravitation applies to all directions not just the direction of acceleration/force

I do not yet see how this could explain anything about magnetism, but I await Ufopolitics explanation.


Ernst.

PS: To our lil'bro': I believe you are still trying to put words in my mouth, but now you are more than 3 doors down I can not hear your tiny voice anymore.

You're talking about people looking at conventional theories that have their own foundation based on flawed fundamentals. Basic equations for work, etc. work just fine for most of what people need to calculate and because they do work for most practical things, it gives a very false illusion that they are somehow correct - that is a common human trait, but it is psychologically defective at face value.

mgh (mass x gravity x height) is used to determine the potential energy in an object of a certain weight at a certain height. In the popular conventional model, the context that is used it to show how much potential energy is claimed to be stored in the object as it was lifted to that height. Because this equation does indeed properly show how much energy will be demonstrated by the object once it is released back to the ground in heat, etc. it is believed that potential was indeed stored in the object as it was lifted to that height. The equation gives the right answer as to how much energy will be dissipated on impact so the equation does work for practical use, but the premise for the belief of where that potential resides is completely false and this is an example that applies to those "brilliant minds" that have been over the conventional theories you're talking about.

100% of all the energy used to lift the object is 100% gone at the peak of the lift and is dissipated right back to the environment. Nothing is stored in the object and the what the input work did was create a new potential difference between the object and the ground. When the object is released, energy will be dissipated when the object hits the ground. None of that potential came from the energy input, it came from gravity. How can you store potential energy when you just used it all up when lifting the object? You can't - and the premise that is broken, which needs to be FIXED is exactly what is explained above. 1 unit of energy in the lift and we get 1 unit of energy as a freebie from gravitational potential and it is indisputably measurable as a total of 2 units of work and we input 1.

The Einsteinian garbage paradigm wants to make the energy and potential energy intrinsic to the object and magically storing potential energy in an object when potential energy cannot be stored to begin with shows that the "brilliant" minds reviewing the conventional theories are the real crackpots who believe in magically storing potential and disbelieving that gravity is a source of energy. Conventional theory falls flat on its face and does not explain where the energy comes from when the object is dropped. Again, it did not come from lifting the object because that energy was used up to lift the object - common sense.

Sorry, but the conventional theories do not cut it and are wrong in their very foundation and what is being proposed to you does not make sense to you as you said because you are appear to be committed to the same flawed premise as these "brilliant minds".

Furthermore, you are simply unwilling or incapable of allowing yourself to listen to anything I have said and are only talking in circles. Counterspace is not an area void of the aether - we have already determined that Eric's use of counterspace does not mean that and I have already stated that I should refer to that as a void or as a true vacuum, but not counterspace even though it is the inverse of space, literally.

Your multiple bulletpoints show that you have taken what I have said and simply made it mean what you want it to mean disregarding everything said about it thus far making it look like what I have defined is counterspace when it is not. Again, I have already conceded that my original use of counterspace terminology is not what Eric is using, you even pointed that out and your bulletpoints also throw out what Eric said counterspace is. This is looking more like planned confusion than a conversation.

[dR-Green]

Ok.... new definitions again, we start from scratch...

Eric describes counterpsace, at least in terms of being able to think about it, as in a capacitor where apparently the situation becomes counter-intuitive. The more space you have between the plates, the less capacitance you have. The more counterspace, or the less space you have between the plates, the more capacitance you have. It's the inverse situation of storing stuff in a room/space, less space gives you more room for storage.

Also in the interest of maintaining facts and real progression of events, much of what's presented here as "Ken's theories" is in fact Walter Russell's work. He is the one who says that like attracts like through voidance, and opposites oppose. It's all explained in his work. He says words to the effect of:

The north and south poles of a magnet don't attract each other, they void each other. If the poles attracted each other then the north and south poles would be together at the centre of the magnet. Instead they are at the far ends of the magnet trying to get as far away from each other as possible. When the north and south poles of two magnets are brought together they void each other and both cease to be, the two magnets cease to be, and become one magnet consisting of one north and one south pole.

(Because everything has to exist as balanced opposing rhythmic (cyclic) interchanging pairs).

If like didn't attract like then the material universe could not be, because it would be impossible to gather one ounce of matter together.

On a side note as you may know Tesla and Russell knew each other and it's written in one of Russell's books that Tesla told him he should lock his work in a vault for a thousand years until humanity is ready for it.

Also you are now witnessing the perversion of the term "counterspace" in real-time. Soon everyone will be using the term "counterspace" to describe everything and it will have a thousand different meanings. It has already spread beyond this thread. Now counterspace is responsible for what was last week due to "the ambient" or the aether or whatever phrase happened to be popular at the time, doesn't really matter. It's the new phrase to use. Soon it will be everywhere like "scalar waves". Eric has been using the term counterspace for a long time and no one saw any need to pay any attention, now they're all over it and it's already being substituted in explanations for things that don't necessarily have any relation to it.

[SlickDick]

I just got a another idea, Ufopolitics.
You have seen a little bit of who I am now and how I think. Based on that, do you believe your proof can convince me or at least provide a new insight to me?
Or... do you want me as a test case to see if your proof is complete?
If the answer to both questions is no, then we could safe eachother a lot of time.

I also tried to read the pages that you posted from Ken's book, but
- dielectric gravitative centre
- mirror membrane ether deflection
- negative pressure counterspatial voidance sink
- dielectric inertial plane
- the vacuum seeking equilibrium must trace itself CW to the CCW or CCW to the CW to the Bloch wall
- the hourglass shaped Ether bubble travels centrifugally as high pressure either CCW or CW and travels centripetally towards low pressures to CCW or CW directed at the null-point fulcrum of the counterspacial dielectric inertial plane.
- The 'shrinking sphere' of polarization voidance is then completed
- a magnets 'desire' to self fold is enormous, dielectricity seeks its counterspacial homeostasis and CW on CW or CCW on CCW fileds are polarized against a non-polarized 0-point dielectric seeking like on like for collapse as against its own created space,....

All this are words combined in an obscure manner which do not trigger any image or thought in my mind. It might as well be Cantonese...

Can I be saved or should I let it go?


Ernst.

Maybe this picture wil trigger an image.



Now where have i seen this before ...

[erfinder]

I just got a another idea, Ufopolitics.
All this are words combined in an obscure manner which do not trigger any image or thought in my mind. It might as well be Cantonese...

Can I be saved or should I let it go?


Ernst.

Let it go.....

[Ernst]

I just got a another idea, Ufopolitics.
You have seen a little bit of who I am now and how I think. Based on that, do you believe your proof can convince me or at least provide a new insight to me?
Or... do you want me as a test case to see if your proof is complete?
If the answer to both questions is no, then we could safe eachother a lot of time.

I also tried to read the pages that you posted from Ken's book, but
- dielectric gravitative centre
- mirror membrane ether deflection
- negative pressure counterspatial voidance sink
- dielectric inertial plane
- the vacuum seeking equilibrium must trace itself CW to the CCW or CCW to the CW to the Bloch wall
- the hourglass shaped Ether bubble travels centrifugally as high pressure either CCW or CW and travels centripetally towards low pressures to CCW or CW directed at the null-point fulcrum of the counterspacial dielectric inertial plane.
- The 'shrinking sphere' of polarization voidance is then completed
- a magnets 'desire' to self fold is enormous, dielectricity seeks its counterspacial homeostasis and CW on CW or CCW on CCW fileds are polarized against a non-polarized 0-point dielectric seeking like on like for collapse as against its own created space,....

All this are words combined in an obscure manner which do not trigger any image or thought in my mind. It might as well be Cantonese...

Can I be saved or should I let it go?


Ernst.

[ldrancer]

This magnetism theory is plain as day to me another black hole theory painted up and switched around the definitions continously. You do know people get paid to do this all day since they can't keep a theory. but i keep reading the same thing over and over again, and again you put it. "Magnetic Fieldsare not solid objects...not liquid either...not gaseous...not plasma...so what are they?...not studied by Science then?

How do we know they exist?...because we can feel their presence when INTERACTING with some kind of metals...or between them...Oh!..."

like a black hole huh? field? its a concept. you tried to use all your ways you respond to everybody on me by pickign my reply apart into parts instead of reading everything i said. trying ot make an arguement but you didnt achieve that one time.

I know the back of my head is there cause I can feel my head. I take a magnet and it pulls but you can't explain Pull, not with concepts. why does one object pull another object? not using counterspace, what actually attracts the iron to the magnet? why does it do that. thats the question.

why when you jump up, you dont fall up in to space? why does the earth pull you to it?

[Ernst]

Sorry Ufopolitics, I was trying to understand Aaron's counterspace to which I thought you subscribed. Ok.... new definitions again, we start from scratch...

-Negative, Ether IS Counterspace, lives there, however when disturbed by specific processes it could come into Space, Polarized.
Wait... wait.... wait...
"Ether IS Counterspace"
and
"(ether?) lives there (in ether?)"
I am trying to get a clear understanding and you are not making it easy.
We have a thing (ether, I suppose) and a location (counterspace?) and then you say this thing IS its location?
"however when disturbed by specific processes it could come into Space"
Does that mean that without disturbance space is devoid of ether?
"Polarized."
How? magnetically or electrically or ....? What poles are created in this ether?

-Negative, it can be in Space at normal, Room Temp... right in front of your face.
Again, it looks like there can be space without ether. Correct?

-Please, Ernst, read carefully my above post, take your time...all wrong above...it can pass through EVERYTHING IN SPACE, just because it exist in another "non spatial dimension"
Ok... in order to create a mental picture of this, I imagine 3 spatial dimensions collapsed into a plane (2 dimensions, let's say x and y). Next I add a third, non spacial dimension and this is where counterspace/ether resides? From this new dimension things can pop up anywhere in our 2 dimensional space. Does that match with your idea?
If so, is ether actually 3 dimensional in this example? Having 2 spatial dimensions and one more non-spatial dimension?
Or in the real world, is ether actually 4 dimensional? Having 3 spatial dimensions and one more non-spatial dimension?

-Can You imagine an IMPLOSION of a Solid Mass to the tiniest particle in the shape of such small sphere that would look just like a Point?
Yes, but how does that relate to the above? Some believe that stars in their later years implode and can become a neutron star or even a black hole.
BTW. I am NOT a supporter of such theories, but I can envision such a process.

I am trying to read your posts Ufopolitics, but you use words like "counterspatial Field Plane" that have absolutely no meaning to me. I'm a new kid in the world of counterspace, build it up slowly, please.


Ernst.

[Ufopolitics]

im just gonna make a quick, thing here.

...And so do I...

You talk about counterspace like as if though its a field. if something does something then counterspace will come in and take over.

Counterspace doesn't just "come in"...it don't take over nothing...it is "Inwards" instead of "Outwards".

[IMG][/IMG]

That would put it in the definition of a field. I don't know where to really pull that out in these replies, but its out there. For someone to state because we cant see it doesnt mean it's not there? Like are you talking about black holes? do you believe in black holes, too?

Let me ask you something...when you look at your arms...or when you look at your head in a mirror...can you see behind/through your skin...all your skull shape, your bones and muscles as each joint in your hands?

No right?...but you know for sure you have all of that there and more... don't you?

So, let me ask you...if you can not see your skeleton...how do you know is there?

You LEARN IT somewhere...maybe when you were very young...you studied Human Biology from a Book...or maybe saw it on some pictures...or on line...the point is that you know it because of one simple reason...Knowledge Transfer, from generations to generations...

Now you can even know where your liver is...but what about a very primitive man...that didn't have access to that knowledge?...maybe he saw a dead body and started to investigate...open it up...and practice forensic medicine...but what about the names?...how did they come up with names for each human part?

Years, time, and more time of development, investigations...as what does this jelly dark red "thing" does?...Oh, that is called "the Liver"...Oh really?...WOW!

I believe everything can be explained with physics if we use the definition of physics which is that everything that has shape is a thing, a geometric shape. Everything that is an idea is a concept. Physics deals with objects. We can't make a car from concepts. We make them with circles and squares and rectangles. You can't drive a concept.

Magnets can't be used to explain themselves. We've asked how do magnets work, and giving the explanation of itself doesnt explain a magnet.

You explain about a magnet by interactions with other objects, materials, equipments...trying to seek for materials that could be able to screen them...and so on and on...then start building their learned "Properties"...

Magnetic Fields are not solid objects...not liquid either...not gaseous...not plasma...so what are they?...not studied by Science then?

How do we know they exist?...because we can feel their presence when INTERACTING with some kind of metals...or between them...Oh!...

I don't believe this explains how a magnet works. Counterspace isnt the answer as what is this? it's a field. what holds this field? what is the thing this field is in that gives it shape? so, counterspace isnt used to explain things that way.

Can you make an Implosion right now?...can you imagine an implosion instead of an explosion in open space?

Do we see Implosions everywhere we go?

The answer to those is NO, We can not make an Implosion that simple...

However we could make an explosion very simple...just gather the right liquids...seal them and light them up...BANG...exploded.

Why do you think an Implosion is not that easy to make nor to imagine?

Because it takes place in Counterspace.

And We are all in Space...so can not see things that are not in our Dimensional Space.

Doesn't this fact sounds kind of uncomfortable?

We can't even see the inner parts of things...we just see the exterior, the parts that are in our space...we imagine, the interiors, untill we reach the dimension where that interior is...but then we are already within that interior space...E.g: A House...a building...can you see inside of it? NOPE.

However,IF I PUT in front of your eyes, in Your Space...a SOLID STATE working Machine, which does something said it cannot be, something that up to now theories can not explain...then they all will collapse, fall and become dust...then you may start thinking I was kind of right...right?


Good night


Ufopolitics

[BroMikey]

VOIDANCE/ATTRACTION

Ok, let me put it as simple as I could,

On previous post pages is briefly shown (all text, not just High Lighted, as Ken keeps repeating it throughout the entire book) the main and HUGE differences between Attraction (Voidance) and Repulsion (Countervoidance)

Ken Wheeler's Theory on Magnetism Centers/Focus in the Dielectric as being the counterspatial Field Plane from where Magnetic Polarizations (Poles) are generated into Space.

In this Theory is very well defined the completely different processes/nature/origins between these two Opposite/Counter Interactions: Attraction(Voidance) and Repulsion (Countervoidance)

Two Polarizations (Poles) are nothing more than Two Ether Bubbles in Space, counter spiraling in order to keep balance between themselves.

Voidance (Attraction) is nothing more than Two Opposite Ether Bubbles accelerating back to its normal environment (Counterspace/Dielectric Field), it is entirely Negative Pressure, seeking to Re-Balance and to re-establish into a bigger Dielectric Field when those two polarizations accelerating against each others will actually "disappear" (to void)....[Disappearance= Voidance]


Above image are Two Magnets in Attraction seen through an Electron Gun projected to a Fluorescent Screen...that we all know as Cathode Ray Tube (CRT), on right image I over imposed a 3D CGI Layer following their curves in space....note both Bubbles?

I bet You all...that if I ask anyone of you...Is that an Attraction or a Repulsion?...You will tell me that is a Repulsion right?...Now, be honest!!...

It seems like the two bubbles are pressurizing between each others...like repulsing and compressing each others...but nope...it is an Attraction.

BUT WE ARE ALL RIGHT...IT IS A COMPRESSION ...EXCEPT THAT IS TAKING PLACE IN COUNTERSPACE, NOT IN SPACE...We normally think in Space...NEVER in Counterspace.



Above are the same Radio Shack Ceramic Rectangular Magnets in Attraction under Viewing Film (I use double adhesive tape to adhere magnets to screen or glass/plastic surfaces)...We all can see very clear Both Ether Bubbles denoted by the dotted white lines over the light green spectrum revealed by viewing film. Note I also contour magnets shape color coded with Red=South Blue=North (like I always do it.)


Above Image: Attraction of same type of rectangular magnets comparison between two different screening methods and far right is the fusion/blending of both...SAME, IDENTICAL RESULTS.



Above is a hollow (no rotor) Two Pole Stator Motor Housing assy where the two Arc Segments are facing opposite polarities N-S...on top of a CRT and with Magnetic Viewing Film on top...note the perfection in the alignment results from the two completely different magnetic field screening methods...showing both the same middle line in the perfect Spatial Center.

Now You tell me, where are in all of the above screening methods images...The "IMAGINARY LINES OF FORCE", between North-South attraction fields?!without any losses.

Any Single Magnet is always "trying" to execute Voidance between its own Opposite Polarizations. Magnet finds balance between both Ether Bubbles because of self alignment of Dielectric Counterspatial Field right at is Equatorial Plane.

Therefore, no matter how irregularly you cut-brake, shatter any existing magnet...it WILL ALWAYS figure out in zero time... how to RE-ESTABLISH its Dielectric Field EXACTLY at the Total Mass PERFECT CENTER/GRAVITATIONAL PLANE between both Polarized Spiral Vortexes.

No Spatial Geometry Calculation, no matter how advanced and fastest hardware is used running on the most sophisticated and expensive 3D CAD Software could do this process as fast as a magnet does it.

Notice that Voidance/Attraction, separated by an air gap...is an "Operation in the Process to Execute, to "Extinct", to "Die""...remember this.

Please, note that I am using my own words and terms as my own diagrams/CAD and Pictures from my own experiments trying to add more explanations to this beautiful work from Ken Wheeler.

I started first testing as Ken displayed on book, and every single test results were identical and on the right on spot...Then I started concentrating more with magnetic Interactions at a Distance for the applications to Machines.


Regards to All


Ufopolitics

Yes, I agree, there is nothing hard about conventional theory except for
the fact that many of those theories do not jive with one another. Like
you pointed out in your reorganizing descriptions.

It in deed is religion at a gov run school, since they can be shown
in black in white right in front of their noses and still academia refuses
to rewrite their books.

They will always be to proud to do that.

It's just the "mother may I yes you May" non-cohesive doctrines
with "Hey Diddle Diddle the cat and the............

The recipe of present day theory is missing major ingredients
like bread changing to cake by the addition of sugar but I am
afraid we will just have paste for now in the schools.

Teacher says copy and PASTE this and you will pass. yuck.
And all the head start going up and down.

I mean it could be explained by something as simple as your
cooling system on your car with the coolant representing the
Aetheric fluid keeping everything happy and normal. Then a
disturbance comes and instead of the medium flowing just
spewing all over we have a reservoir or a counter space to
take up the slack "so to speak" keeping good order.

Your analogies are much better than mine.


Great going UFO, good work, it's impossible to refute.

[ldrancer]

im just gonna make a quick, thing here.

You talk about counterspace like as if though its a field. if something does something then counterspace will come in and take over. That would put it in the definition of a field. I don't know where to really pull that out in these replies, but its out there. For someone to state because we cant see it doesnt mean it's not there? Like are you talking about black holes? do you believe in black holes, too?

I believe everything can be explained with physics if we use the definition of physics which is that everything that has shape is a thing, a geometric shape. Everything that is an idea is a concept. Physics deals with objects. We can't make a car from concepts. We make them with circles and squares and rectangles. You can't drive a concept.

Magnets can't be used to explain themselves. We've asked how do magnets work, and giving the explanation of itself doesnt explain a magnet.

I don't believe this explains how a magnet works. Counterspace isnt the answer as what is this? it's a field. what holds this field? what is the thing this field is in that gives it shape? so, counterspace isnt used to explain things that way.