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

[Ernst]

Now I see that even here people have different definitions of counterspace.
Ufopolitics seems to follow Steiner. Aaron says (?) to follow Eric, but doesn't. Eric describes it mathematically as something with a unit of 'per meter' (as I did in my countertime example, which is NOT time in reverse, plse reread my post) but in words he describes it more like the opposite of space (which is completely different from his mathematical description): bring two plates closer together then the space between them decreases and the counterspace increases.
The latter is in the direction of what Aaron says but 'space devoid of ether' (if my interpretation is correct) again is something else.

Can you have space without ether?
Theoretically (mathematically) yes! no problem. And I would call that space. Why would it be the opposite??? Is a car without gas the opposite of a car?
Physically, no! as that would conflict with the definition of ether.
Ether does not reside in counterspace (wherever that might be) it is here everywhere filling up space. It conveys electric and magnetic forces which could not exist without a medium filling up the space (not counterspace!) between objects that act on each other without physical contact. (so in a way you could say that ether creates that physical contact)
Back to the car without gas, space without ether would be dysfunctional space. It has all the properties to call it space (it can hold objects), but it does not function in a physical sense as 'normal' physical space would (light can not pass). Exactly as the car, it is still a car, only it does not drive.

I do not believe that we (mankind) invented space by inventing a way to describe it (Cartesian or polar coordinates), nor did we invent time by inventing a clock and calendar.
Time and space were there already and we invented ways to measure and describe it.
It could be possible that there are more than the 3 (space) dimensions that we perceive and it is possible that time, as we perceive it, is part of a larger multidimensional system, we can not possibly know for sure.
So now I am out of that established BOX, ready for a deeper analysis?
How does this relate to counterspace?

Well... you guys sure keep me busy this Saturday!


Ernst.

[Aaron]

Dollard - Counterspace

is defined in a 'male' manner so he wants to add a 'female' counterpart to it. But if you read it carefully both describe the same space, he just changes the way of describing it.


Ernst.

The Steiner concepts I believe are early inspirations about these concepts in general and are not meant to be identical comparisons to Eric's work. There were early Borderland's articles on Steiner's Counterspace concepts that are probably still on the web.

The concept of the male/female are still analogous to Eric's perspective. Here is a quote from the first chapter in A Common Language for Electrical Engineering (Lone Pine Writings)...

"Energy, in its most arch-typical form, is embodied in the phenomenon of Electricity, but what is Electricity? Now our wheels even more stuck in the mud! But we have important clues, namely that of polarity, not plus or minus so much but more like male or female. This thought follows from Goethe to Tesla and Steinmetz. Thus Electricity, in order to manifest, a UNION must develop. This is the union of the "male", or projective, and "multiplied by" the "female", or receptive. Hereby, the male is the dielectric field in counterspace (of per centimeters), and the magnetic field or female in space (of centimeters squared). Space in cm squared is what you pay for in "real estate", counterspace in per cm is the space between the lines on a ruler, or between molecules in a crystal." - Eric Dollard

I'll see Eric in a few days and if time permits, maybe will try to do a video interview going over some of these topics.

[Ernst]

http://kathodos.com/PhysicalEtherealSpaces.pdf

Lecture: On the Dimensions of Space

is defined in a 'male' manner so he wants to add a 'female' counterpart to it. But if you read it carefully both describe the same space, he just changes the way of describing it.


Ernst.

[BroMikey]

Fun with Geometry.

Art since cashed in all of his chips.

Back in the olden days...... AAA? ERNST?


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


[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gu7c70t9pc[/VIDEO]

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufopolitics,

Please don't worry too much about my understanding of Euclidean geometry... I'll manage, trust me.

Euclidean Geometry basically the part that concern Us about Counterspace...is the fact that from a Point...he can start drawing very complex 3D Volumes...just by "extrusions", projections, rotations, as linear and curve paths...that by leaving behind a solid trace...they form solid objects.

A fact is...that Euclidean Geometry is exactly the way Nature creates everything around us...

I am a firm believer in ether (or aether if you prefer the old ways), but also there I see no need for counterspace.

That is a VERY good advance!...to -at least try- to believe in Ether...and if you do so...please, note that Ether "lives" in Counterspace.

I am fully aware of the fact that the word 'dimension' is not fully understood by many and that some of those have given it different meanings. But in mathematics and physics it is clearly defined, and I stick to those definitions. If you mean to say something else, use another word. Space as we perceive it has 3 dimensions, which are all measured by the same unit (meter). The fact that they are all measured by the same unit or the fact that they are interchangeable does not make it 1 dimension. So if someone says space has 1 dimension, then he redefines the word 'dimension'.

Ernst.

Ernst, please realize that We, (mankind) have only created/invented an "Encasement", based on only three parameters to define -by space limitation- a very complex word as is Dimension...

When we set those three x,y,z axis, we are actually tending a spatial limitation, a "fence" to say that volume exist there, be able to draw it, build it etc,...or whatever "fits" within those parameters, based on also "an invented coordinate system" to then say that IS "Our Three Dimensions"...

The same exact thing happens with TIME...we invented a Clock...the hours, the minutes, the seconds and so on...BUT, is that really Time as in our Universe?...or is it a System invented to be able to define just a "local" fraction of its immense real meaning?

Will our conceived "Local Earth Time" could predict far away Galaxy events or planets rotations, displacements taking place in our whole Universe Space?...or it would only be "applicable" to Earth Time?

I know it is very hard to get out of an "Established BOX" my friend...but only if you could step "outside" for a little bit of time only...then look at it...you will realize we are all enclosed in a fictional, man invented reality.

So, could we step out of it for just some brief, but deeper analysis?

Later on you could return back to it, and throw away the keys if you prefer...


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Aaron]

counterspace

I am a firm believer in ether (or aether if you prefer the old ways), but also there I see no need for counterspace.

I am fully aware of the fact that the word 'dimension' is not fully understood by many and that some of those have given it different meanings. But in mathematics and physics it is clearly defined, and I stick to those definitions. If you mean to say something else, use another word. Space as we perceive it has 3 dimensions, which are all measured by the same unit (meter). The fact that they are all measured by the same unit or the fact that they are interchangeable does not make it 1 dimension. So if someone says space has 1 dimension, then he redefines the word 'dimension'.

Rudolf Steiner is an example of someone who thinks deeply but not clearly, and I have the impression that his counterspace again differs from both EPD's and Nick C.'s, but until I can find his definition I have no absolute proof.
Aarons piston with vacuum and pressure, escapes me completely. I read the words and an image of a gasoline engine forms in my mind, but how that relates to space-counterspace... I have not the faintest clue.

A piston wasn't part of what I personally posted, what I did post is still in my post.

You say you believe in the aether and see no need for counterspace. However, you would have to define what qualifies something as space? Can there be space with no aether and if not what do you call it? It would be the opposite of space.

[Ufopolitics]

Why it is important to understand Counterspace?

Some words I consider necessary to bring here for you all to consider...

I know the Counterspace or "Ethereal" or "Negative Space" concept lingers in the Metaphysics, and the "unreal -not scientific-processes"...we could even compare to some kind of "spirits" or "souls" (according to some literature you could be reading right now) something completely "abstract" and that from the Scientific point of view it looks very much like a false and not to be trusted claim...

But then, We all must realize the Real Properties of Magnetic Fields that could be tested by simple experiments...like a magnetic field could go through any metal, solid mass, just like a "ghost" could go through a solid wall in a Science Fiction movie...and so move around the whole house......that field could spin and mutate from mass to mass...and at a speed that NO Physical counter reaction could be able to stop, much less to slow down...

Always think that for every directional force, there could be an opposite one, or maybe the same kind of "magnetic force" if we are talking about Repulsion... that will bring it to a point of zero effort to spin, zero drag...however, BOTH of those forces are STILL present, even if they don't feel like they are.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ernst]

Hello Ernst,

May I suggest a very interesting literature about Space and Counterspace relations?

You could start taking a "quick review" in below link, however the full book is not available in a free e-book (at least I have not found it)

Science Between Space and Counterspace

In order to easier understand the difference between this two Spatial definitions you must have some pretty good idea about Euclidean Geometry, plus more complex, modern perspective and volumes geometries.

The hard copy is only around 25.00 USD and available at many stores.

And just like Aaron mentioned...You must have at least a "wishful desire" to get to understand the existence of the Ether or Aether presence as the basic State of aether is in counterspace...Nick C. Thomas, The Author, recognizes its existence.

There is a Chapter called LIFE (There are many more interesting ones like TIME, LIGHT, etc,etc...required to grasp a good understanding)...where you see the relation established through what is a "Membrane" in a living being related to this topic...simple or complex living forms. As the Membrane is the "Plane" that divides both spatial states.

Aaron explained with an excellent example..."If there is Pressure on one side, then there is Vacuum on the other side" or something like...best is to cite a typical Piston-Compression Engine...it has a Ring or several in order to seal the spatial state between both opposite forces, pressure and vacuum...So in this case the Piston and Ring(s) act like the previously cited "dividing membrane"...Now the Vacuum State Volume in this Engines is all over the interior side of the main Block and Head(s)...While the pressure is confined to the internal chambers...to do what they are generated for...to explode at high pressures...then they exhaust at lower pressures...while the Vacuum is present as long as there is existing pressure.

And I could go to more complex structures...but why don't you start "massaging your brain" in that direction...it will help a lot...

Regards


Ufopolitics

Hi Ufopolitics,

Unfortunately the part of the book where counterspace is defined is not available. From the little that is available I can not make up what is actually meant, but I have a distinct feeling that his definition differs from EPD's.
Please don't worry too much about my understanding of Euclidean geometry... I'll manage, trust me.
I am a firm believer in ether (or aether if you prefer the old ways), but also there I see no need for counterspace.
I am fully aware of the fact that the word 'dimension' is not fully understood by many and that some of those have given it different meanings. But in mathematics and physics it is clearly defined, and I stick to those definitions. If you mean to say something else, use another word. Space as we perceive it has 3 dimensions, which are all measured by the same unit (meter). The fact that they are all measured by the same unit or the fact that they are interchangeable does not make it 1 dimension. So if someone says space has 1 dimension, then he redefines the word 'dimension'.
Rudolf Steiner is an example of someone who thinks deeply but not clearly, and I have the impression that his counterspace again differs from both EPD's and Nick C.'s, but until I can find his definition I have no absolute proof.
Aarons piston with vacuum and pressure, escapes me completely. I read the words and an image of a gasoline engine forms in my mind, but how that relates to space-counterspace... I have not the faintest clue.

Anyway, don't let my disbelieve stop you from proving Ken's theories! Maybe in that proof I will find a reason to change my opinion...

Hey lil' bro, saw you brought your sis aboard? Maybe when you play your ucalaly (ukulele) she can sing us a song?

Ernst.

[Ufopolitics]

And...I am NOT saying this would be a principle to build a new type of generator machine...this is just a set up to test in order to expand the signal over time in a full rotation of the main exciter causing this displacement.

It could be done, of course, and multiply the number of "Modules" as you like...However, I have better new concepts-applications to demonstrate other claims from the Theory in discussion, which could NOT be explained by the Conventional/Classic Magnetism Model.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

[IMG]

Hey Ufo,

So in your experiment (post #1), if the magnetic field of the magnet is not static, it must be moving, or changing all the time. Why doesn't this changing magnetic field induce a voltage in the coil all the time, not just when you drop the iron slug on it?

Thanks,

bi

I missed this second question on my previous response...

The answer is simple, as Ken has written on his book...and I have quoted here on the first post of this Thread:

Now, if we all go to Page 91 from Ken Wheeler's book we read clearly:

Magnetism is dimensional, the dielectric is intradimensional, or in counterspace, and only when these two Ether fields move against each other over time is there electrification, which is the Ether in a modality of dynamic polarization.

Out of that statement above I will cite the most relevant part (in bold and underlined) that I have based all my Video testings:

ONLY when these two Ether fields move against each other over time is there electrification.

And by just making contact with a piece of ferromagnetic material volume to one of the magnet's poles, we are displacing this dielectric field, or moving it against the spatial polarity where the conductors are capturing the charges.

Hope this clears doubts.


Ufopolitics

[BroMikey]

Come on Ernie this is no time to pull your Eucalaly trick you ain't
dead yet so let's keep it working, hey?

Hey Aaron

I love this book, so simple.

Book Teaser

[Aaron]

counterspace - Steiner school of thought

http://kathodos.com/PhysicalEtherealSpaces.pdf

Lecture: On the Dimensions of Space

[Ufopolitics]

Science Between Space and Counterspace

Thanks Ufopolitics!
My problem with counterspace is not just the word itself. I could, and would, easily get over that if there were a valid concept behind it. I have read EPD's theories where he explains the concept of counterspace and redefines the word dimension.
The problem I have here is that the word dimension was perfectly well defined and the math behind and surrounding it is too. By redefining this word you cripple the math.
Now, even that could be acceptable if it would lead to a deeper understanding of things or point out errors or overlooked facts. But following EPD's theory, I can only say that this is the point where he loses me and I see him dashing off in fairy tales.
His mathematically constructed concept has no meaning in the sense of space or anything spacial. It is nonsensical.
Compare it to time, then 'per second' would be the measure/unit of countertime. If I give you 1 dollar per second, do I give you money in countertime? No, every second in real time I would be giving you a dollar. The concept of countertime does not make any sense.
Exactly the same goes for counterspace.
Calling it the vacuum makes it even worse, because a vacuum is a perfectly well defined concept, it is a space devoid of matter. By calling it counterspace only adds to the confusion.
Anyway... I am glad to read that you DO NOT have a long way to go, and you believe you indeed have full proof.
I'll be following your video's then, asking clarification where needed. You do have a long way to go to convince me , but that can't be your goal, can it?
Don't worry about it, maybe I am too old to learn


Ernst.

Hello Ernst,

May I suggest a very interesting literature about Space and Counterspace relations?

You could start taking a "quick review" in below link, however the full book is not available in a free e-book (at least I have not found it)

Science Between Space and Counterspace

In order to easier understand the difference between this two Spatial definitions you must have some pretty good idea about Euclidean Geometry, plus more complex, modern perspective and volumes geometries.

The hard copy is only around 25.00 USD and available at many stores.

And just like Aaron mentioned...You must have at least a "wishful desire" to get to understand the existence of the Ether or Aether presence as the basic State of aether is in counterspace...Nick C. Thomas, The Author, recognizes its existence.

There is a Chapter called LIFE (There are many more interesting ones like TIME, LIGHT, etc,etc...required to grasp a good understanding)...where you see the relation established through what is a "Membrane" in a living being related to this topic...simple or complex living forms. As the Membrane is the "Plane" that divides both spatial states.

Aaron explained with an excellent example..."If there is Pressure on one side, then there is Vacuum on the other side" or something like...best is to cite a typical Piston-Compression Engine...it has a Ring or several in order to seal the spatial state between both opposite forces, pressure and vacuum...So in this case the Piston and Ring(s) act like the previously cited "dividing membrane"...Now the Vacuum State Volume in this Engines is all over the interior side of the main Block and Head(s)...While the pressure is confined to the internal chambers...to do what they are generated for...to explode at high pressures...then they exhaust at lower pressures...while the Vacuum is present as long as there is existing pressure.

And I could go to more complex structures...but why don't you start "massaging your brain" in that direction...it will help a lot...

Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Hey Ufo,

I have been studying Albert Roy Davis' book and find a conflict between the vortex rotation direction for the magnet. The bottom two images are from his book and the top image is from you or Ken. Are they showing the same thing but in opposite directions? When trying to understand this theory, contradictions like that don't help. Any clarification is appreciated.

And another thing which maybe you can help me understand.



So in your experiment (post #1), if the magnetic field of the magnet is not static, it must be moving, or changing all the time. Why doesn't this changing magnetic field induce a voltage in the coil all the time, not just when you drop the iron slug on it?

Thanks,

bi

The Roy Davis Theory was cited because it is very close to Ken Wheeler's Theory, from the Eight Figure description plus the fact that both North-South Fields are two completely opposite and different forces. However Roy Davis Theories are not "identical" to Ken Wheeler's Theory.

1-Roy Davis makes reference to the rotation sense based on a reference frame from the center of magnet or domain wall looking at both end poles separately.

2-Roy Davis Theory believes the origination of both polarizations occur first then they both "run" towards the center of magnet

1a- Ken Wheeler's reference frame is exteriorly located to see the magnet like the figure you showed, and that was my drawing, not Ken's.

2a- Ken Wheeler's considers the origination of both polarizations are generated from the center of magnet towards the exterior or ends of both Polarized Spatial Fields...due to the Dielectric Counterspatial Field. Both running in opposite directions from the center origin.

[Ufopolitics]

https://archive.org/details/magneticcircuit00karagoog

A book for those that don't want to waste their time on wild theories.

That book is the SAME BS.

Besides, the main body of that book is about building THE SAME OLD Bs Machines that have not been able to get even closer to the farting machines power...not good.

Any Book that starts naming the famous "Lines of Force" from Faraday's time, and the "Iron Powder revelation of the magnetic fields" is gonna display the same BS that we have been hearing for 200 years.

And "SisMika" I don't appreciate your attacks towards me first on my main thread about Asymmetric Machines...and now coming here.

Did You ever built an Asymmetric Machine and did you have any losses due to that?

I don't recall seeing you around here before guy.

So why are your attacks?

My English is my English, and if you don't understand it Then you have a problem, not me.