An Inquiry in to the Alien Reproduction Vehicle

[bistander]

Magnetic field representation

There's no need to delete anything. ...

Thanks.

...
For me the issue is not so much what the magnetic fields behavior is, rather the issue before us really is a question; what is it composed of? ...

What is the magnetic field composed of? Sorry. I do not have that answer. Here is some information concerning how we represent it.

Key Points

• The magnetic field direction is the same direction a compass needle points, which is tangent to the magnetic field line at any given point.
• The strength of the B-field is inversely proportional to the distance between field lines. It is exactly proportional to the number of lines per unit area perpendicular to the lines.
• A magnetic field line can never cross another field line. The magnetic field is unique at every point in space.
• Magnetic field lines are continuous and unbroken, forming closed loops. Magnetic field lines are defined to begin on the north pole of a magnet and terminate on the south pole.*

Key Terms

• B-field: A synonym for the magnetic field.
• magnetic field lines: A graphical representation of the magnitude and the direction of a magnetic field.

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-physics/chapter/magnetism-and-magnetic-fields/

*I copied these points as they appear on the website. I take issue with this last bullet. The last sentence contradicts the previous sentence. How can field line be continuous and unbroken if it starts on the N pole and ends on the S pole. So I would alter that sentence to this:
External magnetic field lines are defined to begin on the north pole of a magnet and terminate on the south pole.

Confusion from the use of N & S poles and an example of why I prefer not to use that designation.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

2 forces?

...
Anyways, way I see it...and according to B Field theory, there are 2 forces pulling away beam (diverging) to right-left, equal forces, so nothing happens, beam remains at center.
...

Please tell me what 2 forces and what B Field theory.

Thanks in advance,

bi

[bistander]

Reply to Ufo

...
I will still ask you a simple question related to your image:

If you throw a symmetric line (axis) along magnet body which is parallel to beam center of screen, then, according to the "one way" B-Field Vector theory, this flux is supposed to expand in a 3D Volume ( as shown on your image) meaning, not only to the Right side of magnet axis, BUT ALSO to left side....No?
...

The flux lines go both left and right of center as shown.

...
So..then why is it deflecting beam ONLY to Right of axis?
...

What I show is a snapshot in time. I stated that the beam is sweeping right to left or left to right to make the horizontal trace on the screen. And I discuss the case where the beam is left of center. The left /right angles of the beam are due to the controls of the CRT, not the external field of the magnet in front of the screen.

My example was intended to explain the effects on the horizontal scan/trace as you asked in the post I to which I replied. Prof Denardo fully explains the deflection of the non-moving beam making a single point contact on the screen.

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

Here is a graphic attempt from me:



So this is a view from above with the CRT on the left and a bar magnet approaching it from the right. The magnetic field is represented by the field lines (lines of force or lines of flux) going through the magnet and then spreading and looping around in space outside of the magnet entering the magnet through the end opposite where they exited converging where they originated. The electron beam is represented by the curved line inside the CRT above the centerline in the image which would be to the right hand side if we viewed the screen of the CRT. The beam would be sweeping left to right to produce the horizontal scan line on the screen.

As the magnet is moved closer to the screen, the field lines will intersect with the beam. This will occur at all positions as the beam sweeps left to right or right to left. At each intersection of a force line and the beam will be an interaction between the magnetic field (B) vector and the moving charge in the beam (eV), velocity vector. The B vector direction will be tangent to the flux line at the intersection point. The interaction will be a Lorentz force equal to the vector cross product of B and eV. The direction of this force vector will displace the beam (as viewed looking at the screen) up on one side of the center point and down on the other side of the center. The horizontal scan line will appear to rise on one side and lower on the other. It will cross the center point because there is no intersection of a flux line with the beam. They are parallel as Dr. Denardo says. So the angle between B and V is zero, therefore the sin Θ = 0 and FB vector would be in the opposite direction and the deflection of the beam would be opposite. Note that the diagram of the magnetic field would appear the same.



He never says "forces cancel out". He says there is no force on the centered beam when approached by the magnet straight on. I explained this above.



When you approach with the opposite end of the magnet, the B vector is the opposite direction, so the force vector reflects that and the displacement is opposite.



When you work with the flux in terms of the field vector B, N and S are cumbersome and not often used. I do note the you can see the letter N on the red painted end of his magnet.

He explained the different deflections clearly using the right hand rule.

Regards,

bi

Hello Bistander,

Not good, not solid explanation on your image (btw, pretty good, but not showing your vectors)

I will still ask you a simple question related to your image:

If you throw a symmetric line (axis) along magnet body which is parallel to beam center of screen, then, according to the "one way" B-Field Vector theory, this flux is supposed to expand in a 3D Volume ( as shown on your image) meaning, not only to the Right side of magnet axis, BUT ALSO to left side....No?
So..then why is it deflecting beam ONLY to Right of axis?
But, as was shown by your teacher...when magnet is approached this way, there is no deflection of beam , however, you show a right of screen deflect...is it a trick Bistander?

Anyways, way I see it...and according to B Field theory, there are 2 forces pulling away beam (diverging) to right-left, equal forces, so nothing happens, beam remains at center.

Now, let me tell you, I have done this frontal approach to single beam (not rastered horizontal line)....and there is a point depending on shortest distance...that beam is "forced" to start a very short and fast SMALL circular spin...And of course it does it to either N-S...EXCEPT spins are opposite like I have previously shown.

If you have the CRT then you could do this simple test.
Now, you must approach magnet very slow, seeking for the right distance where beam starts to do partial spins on a very small circle...and always keeping magnet very well centered aligned to beam.
Distance where beam brakes into spin depends upon magnet size and strength.

Regards

Ufopolitics

[bistander]

deflection

Like the Teacher shows on your example video, whenever he approaches magnet (no matter which polarization) FACING E-BEAM, there is NO DEFLECTION AT ALL.

Now, the explanation he gives, is that Forces CANCEL OUT, because of being of opposed Vectors, and up to a point, I also could agree with that explanation...

...

When we have a RASTERED, HORIZONTAL SCANLINE (or it could be Vertical as well, just as reference for all, I used Horizontal Planes.) We then show a CLEAR SPIN.

Let's suppose that face to face, perfectly aligned opposed vectors Cancel Out...

But then, what about NOT AT EXTREMES ENDS OF SCANLINE, but at certain and EQUAL DISTANCES, (and here this distance varies EXACTLY AND ACCORDING TO MAGNET STRENGTH, fact I also show on that same video) we can clearly notice TWO OPPOSED AND EQUIDISTANT FORCES FROM THAT CENTER.



Why, when we approach a NORTH POLE...we have a DIFFERENT SPIN (OPPOSITE) as when we approach a SOUTH POLE??!!
...

Hi Ufo,

Here is a graphic attempt from me:



So this is a view from above with the CRT on the left and a bar magnet approaching it from the right. The magnetic field is represented by the field lines (lines of force or lines of flux) going through the magnet and then spreading and looping around in space outside of the magnet entering the magnet through the end opposite where they exited converging where they originated. The electron beam is represented by the curved line inside the CRT above the centerline in the image which would be to the right hand side if we viewed the screen of the CRT. The beam would be sweeping left to right to produce the horizontal scan line on the screen.

As the magnet is moved closer to the screen, the field lines will intersect with the beam. This will occur at all positions as the beam sweeps left to right or right to left. At each intersection of a force line and the beam will be an interaction between the magnetic field (B) vector and the moving charge in the beam (eV), velocity vector. The B vector direction will be tangent to the flux line at the intersection point. The interaction will be a Lorentz force equal to the vector cross product of B and eV. The direction of this force vector will displace the beam (as viewed looking at the screen) up on one side of the center point and down on the other side of the center. The horizontal scan line will appear to rise on one side and lower on the other. It will cross the center point because there is no intersection of a flux line with the beam. They are parallel as Dr. Denardo says. So the angle between B and V is zero, therefore the sin Θ = 0 and FB vector would be in the opposite direction and the deflection of the beam would be opposite. Note that the diagram of the magnetic field would appear the same.

Like the Teacher shows on your example video, whenever he approaches magnet (no matter which polarization) FACING E-BEAM, there is NO DEFLECTION AT ALL.

Now, the explanation he gives, is that Forces CANCEL OUT, because of being of opposed Vectors, and up to a point, I also could agree with that explanation...

He never says "forces cancel out". He says there is no force on the centered beam when approached by the magnet straight on. I explained this above.

...

But then, what about NOT AT EXTREMES ENDS OF SCANLINE, but at certain and EQUAL DISTANCES, (and here this distance varies EXACTLY AND ACCORDING TO MAGNET STRENGTH, fact I also show on that same video) we can clearly notice TWO OPPOSED AND EQUIDISTANT FORCES FROM THAT CENTER.

Why, when we approach a NORTH POLE...we have a DIFFERENT SPIN (OPPOSITE) as when we approach a SOUTH POLE??!!
...
So...Could You EXPLAIN IT, without a Spin, please?

When you approach with the opposite end of the magnet, the B vector is the opposite direction, so the force vector reflects that and the displacement is opposite.

...
I noticed, your teacher, does not specify polarization type, (He just refer to as "other side of magnet"...and to me, even though each pole is defined by N-S letters, that's not enough and deep explanation) whenever we see different and opposite deflections of just the beam...maybe he would not be able to explain POLE DIFFERENT DEFLECTIONS (OPPOSITE) between N-S without the SPIN THEORY?
...

When you work with the flux in terms of the field vector B, N and S are cumbersome and not often used. I do note the you can see the letter N on the red painted end of his magnet.

He explained the different deflections clearly using the right hand rule.

Regards,

bi

[spacecase0]

I have been planning out the math from the tests that smith did,
what do I need to build in order to test this idea ?
what gets me is the idea that this thing needs started.
or at least that is what the math is showing
this thing device needs quite a bit of energy to run while doing nothing
so the idea of idling is likely an issue,
the original information says that there are counter rotating fields
so, the test shows that rotation sets the direction of gravity.
now this thing is not zipping off at light speed all the time.
it needs an idle mode
this is why it needs counter rotating fields
if you want this thing to actually move, you have to have one direction of spin more intense than the other

[Gambeir]

There's no need to delete anything. Indeed perhaps you both need a ruthless judge. Considering my Germanic nature one would be hard pressed to find a more critical and harsher judge to ply your cases before, but be forewarned, the punishments can be severe. It is the Germanic way after all.



The problem for me is that I can imagine many things, and since I can imagine many things, I can also imagine many outcomes and alternatives to almost any proposed explanation.

"The problem with a really excellent liar is that you have to just assume they’re always lying.”
Holly Black, Black Heart

Once I find a liar, whose motivations are intentionally designed to obfuscate, hide, or deceive, then I will have no more of their lies and will consign all of them in total to the waste bin, unworthy of any consideration whatsoever. (*See the attached photo) It is the Germanic way and can never be changed: Honor demands it be this way.

"Do not accept an evil; you can change."
E. Lockhart, We Were Liars

For me the issue is not so much what the magnetic fields behavior is, rather the issue before us really is a question; what is it composed of? Once the fingerprints are matched to a photograph the creatures true self will be exposed.

“Hypocrites get offended by the truth.”
― Jess C. Scott, Bad Romance: Seven Deadly Sins Anthology

It's always easier to escape consequences for grievous mistakes by playing the fool. I personally have found this a clever ruse to bamboozle my accusers, or at least I tell myself it's a ruse.

“Of all the liars in the world, sometimes the worst are our own fears.”
― Rudyard Kipling, The Collected Works

[Ufopolitics]

But of course, Sir.

Hi Ufo,

I can't do the excellent job that this educator does. So please watch this short lesson. Note spin is absent.

[VIDEO]v=RqSode4HZrE[/VIDEO]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqSode4HZrE

Just as I said here.

I do not see spin on the CRT. Just the results of what can be fully explained by Lorentz Force Equation. That is the orthogonal relationship between the vectors of velocity (of the charge), magnetic field and force (on that charge).

Regards,

bi

Hi Bistander,

Well, if you have shown this video to ME, as a "proof" of Lorentz...it simply means you have NOT FULLY WATCHED my whole video below:

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7OzMURRU_k&t=1338s[/VIDEO]

Which was uploaded last year (2017) April 9th...

On FIRST PART of that video, I go over EXACTLY, about the WHOLE content of what is shown on your "proof"...but, like I wrote before...that was just an INTRO...to the whole 27:10 Minute Video I uploaded.

And yes, I ALSO DO NOT SEE A SPIN on your video, nor on my Intro...

BUT...and HOWEVER...

Like the Teacher shows on your example video, whenever he approaches magnet (no matter which polarization) FACING E-BEAM, there is NO DEFLECTION AT ALL.

Now, the explanation he gives, is that Forces CANCEL OUT, because of being of opposed Vectors, and up to a point, I also could agree with that explanation...

BUT NOW, PLEASE, SHARPEN YOUR UNDERSTANDING, 'cause you WILL DO need it working 100%.

When we have a RASTERED, HORIZONTAL SCANLINE (or it could be Vertical as well, just as reference for all, I used Horizontal Planes.) We then show a CLEAR SPIN.

Let's suppose that face to face, perfectly aligned opposed vectors Cancel Out...

But then, what about NOT AT EXTREMES ENDS OF SCANLINE, but at certain and EQUAL DISTANCES, (and here this distance varies EXACTLY AND ACCORDING TO MAGNET STRENGTH, fact I also show on that same video) we can clearly notice TWO OPPOSED AND EQUIDISTANT FORCES FROM THAT CENTER.

NORTH SPIN SEEN ON CRT SCOPE


SOUTH SPIN SEEN ON THE SAME CRT SCOPE SCREEN

Why, when we approach a NORTH POLE...we have a DIFFERENT SPIN (OPPOSITE) as when we approach a SOUTH POLE??!!

I noticed, your teacher, does not specify polarization type, (He just refer to as "other side of magnet"...and to me, even though each pole is defined by N-S letters, that's not enough and deep explanation) whenever we see different and opposite deflections of just the beam...maybe he would not be able to explain POLE DIFFERENT DEFLECTIONS (OPPOSITE) between N-S without the SPIN THEORY?

So...Could You EXPLAIN IT, without a Spin, please?

Below I have shown a SPIN, a Rotation using Elementary (2D) Geometrical Explanations...

And so, like I have shown further on my CRT Thread...if we grab BOTH RESULTS ABOVE, then set them in 3D Geometry...what do we have?

Even though, I have shown on my above quoted post, that a NORTH SPIN is COMPLETELY OF OPPOSITE NATURE to a SOUTH SPIN ...

When we get TWO of this CRT SCOPES, and set them according to below CAD DIAGRAM, meaning FACE TO FACE with the FIELD IN CENTER:



It is ONLY then, when we realize that BOTH SPINS AGREE ON SAME ROTATIONAL DIRECTION, from BOTH POLARIZATIONS...NORTH AND SOUTH.

Further on...I show, NOT my "Beautiful Paintings"...BUT the "Real Mc Coy":

And NOW, ...IN AN ACTUAL TEST, with Two CRT's showing exactly SAME DIRECTIONAL SPIN as seen on previous CAD Diagram...:



Therefore, this is NOT, just about Diagrams and CAD Images...BUT THE REAL DEAL.

Finally, If you would like, and because of the respect to this thread and his owner, we could move all this debate to my CRT Thread...

And honestly, Bistander, I wish you could provide enough and real full proof evidence which proves I am DEAD wrong...but, sorry to tell you that ALL your attempts-so far- have not worked out.

Regards

And Gambeir, I owe you an apology here, and I would move (delete) posts out of here if you wish, as I know Bistander will do as well.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Deflection vs spin

Hi Bistander,

Problem being that my way to show ALL this New "Evidence"...is NOT ONLY based on nice, colorful painted CAD's and Animated Graphics, but BACKED UP by real LAB testing "evidence" as well...which you lacked to "prove me wrong" with your "suggested" "Orthogonal" Lorentz Force Equation:



And so, the fact that you "don't see" things (DENIAL)...don't make you RIGHT in your "defense" about "your views".

But please, have in mind that...like in Law application and enforcement, the fact of IGNORANCE about certain laws, DON'T makes you EXEMPT (JUSTIFIABLE) in the event you break any of those laws you did not know about...

I showed to you THERE ARE SPINS AS DISPLACEMENTS of the FIELD by application of simple Elementary School Geometry...

But now you are playing "the blind"...

And playing blindness, won't help you at all...when time comes to see the TRUTH.

@Gambeir, please excuse this sudden interruption by Bistander on your Thread...but please understand the fact that Bistander can't resist Not to Follow me wherever I go...

As you could see, We are very "close-minded" with same views ...

The fact, the bottom line here being...that if we do not FULLY understand Magnetism...we will never have Flying Saucers by Antigravity...NOR Free Energy.

It is very obvious we DON'T...otherwise we will have ALL THAT...and then some...HERE and NOW!


INSTEAD, we are ALL "flying", "sailing", "running" and being energized Thanks to the Farting Machines Legacy...


Regards to all


Ufopolitics

Hi Ufo,

I can't do the excellent job that this educator does. So please watch this short lesson. Note spin is absent.

[VIDEO]v=RqSode4HZrE[/VIDEO]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqSode4HZrE

Just as I said here.

I do not see spin on the CRT. Just the results of what can be fully explained by Lorentz Force Equation. That is the orthogonal relationship between the vectors of velocity (of the charge), magnetic field and force (on that charge).

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Gambeir,

Visual "evidence", as you call it can be deceiving. I have been around and around with Ufo concerning this topic. And like you, a newbee as you say, folks read Ken's book and are impressed with Ufo's graphics may actually believe the stuff unless they study the true science and physics of magnetism. Hence I attempt to bring some reality into it. I do not want to derail this thread, so if it is of interest to you, here are a couple posts which can lead you to a thread where the topic is discussed at length.

http://www.energeticforum.com/283384-post223.html

http://www.energeticforum.com/282119-post67.html

Regards,

bi

Hi Bistander,

Problem being that my way to show ALL this New "Evidence"...is NOT ONLY based on nice, colorful painted CAD's and Animated Graphics, but BACKED UP by real LAB testing "evidence" as well...which you lacked to "prove me wrong" with your "suggested" "Orthogonal" Lorentz Force Equation:

I do not see spin on the CRT. Just the results of what can be fully explained by Lorentz Force Equation. That is the orthogonal relationship between the vectors of velocity (of the charge), magnetic field and force (on that charge).

Respectfully and regards,

bi

And so, the fact that you "don't see" things (DENIAL)...don't make you RIGHT in your "defense" about "your views".

But please, have in mind that...like in Law application and enforcement, the fact of IGNORANCE about certain laws, DON'T makes you EXEMPT (JUSTIFIABLE) in the event you break any of those laws you did not know about...

I showed to you THERE ARE SPINS AS DISPLACEMENTS of the FIELD by application of simple Elementary School Geometry...

But now you are playing "the blind"...

And playing blindness, won't help you at all...when time comes to see the TRUTH.

@Gambeir, please excuse this sudden interruption by Bistander on your Thread...but please understand the fact that Bistander can't resist Not to Follow me wherever I go...

As you could see, We are very "close-minded" with same views ...

The fact, the bottom line here being...that if we do not FULLY understand Magnetism...we will never have Flying Saucers by Antigravity...NOR Free Energy.

It is very obvious we DON'T...otherwise we will have ALL THAT...and then some...HERE and NOW!


INSTEAD, we are ALL "flying", "sailing", "running" and being energized Thanks to the Farting Machines Legacy...


Regards to all


Ufopolitics

[Gambeir]

Hi Gambeir,

Visual "evidence", as you call it can be deceiving. I have been around and around with Ufo concerning this topic. And like you, a newbee as you say, folks read Ken's book and are impressed with Ufo's graphics may actually believe the stuff unless they study the true science and physics of magnetism. Hence I attempt to bring some reality into it. I do not want to derail this thread, so if it is of interest to you, here are a couple posts which can lead you to a thread where the topic is discussed at length.

http://www.energeticforum.com/283384-post223.html

http://www.energeticforum.com/282119-post67.html

Regards,

bi

Thank you bistander,

Please understand that it is not my desire to be bombastic and combative. I am appreciative that you took the time to respond with useful links. I am as flawed as anyone else and what I think is logical has often proven somewhat flawed thinking. I try to keep my preaching down to a dim humm but I have a big mouth and little control over what it says. All too often I am compelled to make amends for it's crimes.

I sincerely do want others contributing here, but I want them doing so in thoughtful and considerate ways, and because the object here is that this thread serves as a reference library for myself, first, and for others whom are interested in this topic it may also or does serve as reference library to links and information. I do not want it filled with bickering or complete imbecility. I already have that area covered quite well without any assistance from others.

As our societies and lives become ever more interconnected, websites and specific threads within them are taking on roles not previously imagined, wherein they are now assuming points of reference for globally connected groups within specialized areas of interest. We need to all be aware of this fact.

Thank's again and, yes, I am looking at it.

[bistander]

Fantasy magnetism

...

Now what's this all about?

You and Ken continue to promote fantasy magnetism. Show us something useful you can do with it.

I don't know why this is an issue for you bistander. I, being a newbee here, do not understand the venom. I've looked at Ken Wheelers book, and I know others I communicate with have as well. The visual evidence alone shows the magnetic field is orbital in shape. All visual cues strongly suggest an orbital pattern. All other understanding logically supports the idea in my opinion.
...

Hi Gambeir,

Visual "evidence", as you call it can be deceiving. I have been around and around with Ufo concerning this topic. And like you, a newbee as you say, folks read Ken's book and are impressed with Ufo's graphics may actually believe the stuff unless they study the true science and physics of magnetism. Hence I attempt to bring some reality into it. I do not want to derail this thread, so if it is of interest to you, here are a couple posts which can lead you to a thread where the topic is discussed at length.

http://www.energeticforum.com/283384-post223.html

http://www.energeticforum.com/282119-post67.html

Regards,

bi

[Gambeir]

Sorry folks, been preoccupied but I am glad to see input taking place. I'm not ignoring Spacecase0 who well knows I share many similar views. Time is innate to our reality because of the way it operates. It isn't, however, applied to convention in most instances in a logical form in my opinion. For example, when one is first introduced to the idea that magnetism produces results over time in an electric field, most are left asking what that means. Rarely is there the description that movement of a field is a flow of time, such that one can then grasp the idea that a moving magnetic field, moving being key, is the explanation for time in conventional theory.

This only leaves us understanding time as movement, and according to what I can grasp, the notion is that that when energy is at it's lowest state time stops. What exactly this translates into is probably something we would have to ask the dead, for they seem to be the ones most close to this state.
homepage WorldITC


I always liked Salvador Dali's work but I don't think I fully appreciated it until recently. So for that I am grateful to be reminded of the artist's whom can see and tell what science and math cannot make visual to the spatially oriented.

Now what's this all about?

You and Ken continue to promote fantasy magnetism. Show us something useful you can do with it.

I don't know why this is an issue for you bistander. I, being a newbee here, do not understand the venom. I've looked at Ken Wheelers book, and I know others I communicate with have as well. The visual evidence alone shows the magnetic field is orbital in shape. All visual cues strongly suggest an orbital pattern. All other understanding logically supports the idea in my opinion.

I am an investigator and and someone who measures truth by logic and by reality of physical observation and demonstrated physical proofs. I do not subscribe to the notion that mathematics can prove anything other how to solve a numerical equation correctly. It isn't evidence of anything other than that. It only becomes evidentiary when it can prove an observed fact, but even here, when one mathematical proof exists, this does not, and cannot refute another mathematical proof which contradicts the former simply because one existed before another.

Two proofs may exist simultaneously with two opposing hypothesis. So we must understand that all knowledge is fluid, all truths are theories because all knowledge is fluid, and all mathematical proofs are subject to revision as a result. Now maybe there is no mathematical proofs to Ken Wheelers work, but that doesn't mean there won't be, and it's not important to me personally because the evidence is manifest. It is prima facie evidence.

A mathematical equation is no proof of reality and cannot ever be one since it is itself a fictional construct of the mind. Humans do not decide what is true on fictional constructs like mathematical equations. They decide what's real in a court of law where falsehoods can be unmasked as fictional inventions, and wherein mathematics has more than once played a role in deceit through the course of human history. No right minded prosecutor would ever employ mathematical constructs as evidence of truth all by themselves. It is a predictor based on past behavior and nothing more. It is not evidence foretelling future behavior of the unknown, it is only capable of making a forecast of behavior based on the past. It is not a crystal ball foretelling the future. That is an error.

Mathematics is just like any other piece of evidence and it is far from being incorruptible because it is only a tool, and above all else it is a fictional construct, one which may be invented to support another fiction, and which is the situation that has now lead to the last 100 years of non-scientific science practicing mental masturbation so profoundly perverted that almost no one can now understand, and which has also not solved gravity nor produced anything of value to anyone, yet again this so called science of mathematics has sucked up vast amounts of capital, and for apparently no gain by anyone other than those now practicing such perversity in bastions like CERN whom claim they are unlocking the secrets of the Universe.

Well if that's the case why am I now 60 plus years old and still traveling on around in a damned airplane that broke ground over 80 years ago, and why am I still in a car that has been around for over a hundred years now? I got one in my own driveway that's now 77 years old I'm thinking about donating to the Museum of Flying Idiots down at the Lazy B. Hell, I know they want it because it will look good sitting next to the F4U Corsair, or towing a B0EING B-17 out on to the tarmac.

Yet again, I'm to believe that you're right and Ufopolitics and Ken are kooks? This when I step out the damned front door of my own house and see a back triangle sitting motionless not more than 600 feet above the tree in my own yard before zipping off and covering 10 miles or more in under one second, which is mach 48 BTW, and yet again we understand what magnetism is huh?

Do you realize how absurd that proposition sounds to someone like me? How absurd that sounds to everyone whose had the same experience? I'm living in the middle of fortress Washington Boeing State, surrounded by military bases, nuclear weapons, missiles, and ballistic submarines. So why not black triangles then too? I mean good lord how stupid do you think I am?

That's why I've posted what a level III civilization human would possess for travel, as opposed to our black triangles, because nobody is arriving here on this mud ball we call home from anywhere's else unless they have something even alot better than these antigravity ships the perverts at Boeing are using to spy on me taking a leak outside. Even a Mach 48 capable machine still isn't good enough to get here from anywhere outside of our own solar system, and who the hell would want to anyways unless they were wanted, which might explain a few things, but at any rate these machines are manifestly ours. They cannot be alien ships because they are simply still too primitive for the job. Let's keep a more open mind about what is going on around all of us, because the lies the system told me are the same lies they are now retelling kids today, it's just an updated George Jensen lie wrapped in a new brown paper bag adorned with mathematical equations saying; Thou shalt not question the Lord your God.

These sons-of- politicans have these ships and they have the understanding and we are all paying for this in time, money, with our lives, and our kids lives. We don't need to be upholding what we think we understand when it's manifestly obvious that it's wrong. People say to me, oh take a picture next time, well the heck with that idea. Next time, if I get another shot, it won't be with a camera. How's that for taking a shot? Perverts sitting over my house are probably the same ones over your own homes, probably stocking your kid would be my guess. Don't kid yourselves people. Anything this advanced has no business hiding behind the doors of national defense. The danger of these people holding this technology secret to themselves far outweighs any concern over national security in my opinion. We all better wake up before it's too late. Let's work together here, and whatever the truth, and whoever is right is meaningless if we all end up as slaves because we have been fooled by criminals who have gotten their hands on technology which is god like and which we ourselves do not have.

This is not an airplane, it is not a missile or a submarine, it is something which invalidates all existing forms of other war making machines. It can defeat all of them and it can enslave all of us. Make no mistake about that. We have already been told this in their movies. Just look at the film Oblivion to see what a robot exterminator really would be like. All research is being directed to this end. This is what AI is about in their end game plan. This is what robotics is all about. It isn't about helping us. When have these people ever helped anyone other than themselves? They live in the sky and your kids will be their slaves. We cannot allow this to happen.

Who are these people you ask?

https://www.sott.net/image/s22/453682/full/The_world_s_100_largest_arms_s.jpg

[bistander]

Fantasy magnetism

not sure who you were talking about when you quote yourself...
seen this ? here is something you can do with magnetism
Experiments: Experiment 10
I am going to try another version of this to test what is really going on for sure.
results will be posted to this thread when I have finished building it.

Hi spacecase0,

If you click on the >icon after my handle (bistander) prior to the quote, it will take you to the source post for the context.

Thanks for the interesting link to the levitation experiment. The difference between that and what I referred to as fantasy magnetism is that was pretty much fully explained with conventional science and math. Fantasy magnetism is not. It simply says existing science and technology is worthless and proceeds to show swirling vortex colorful images which I see as interesting but worthless as a tool to do anything useful like converting energy or even information, the primary uses of magnetism in our society.

Regards,

bi

[spacecase0]

You and Ken continue to promote fantasy magnetism. Show us something useful you can do with it.

not sure who you were talking about when you quote yourself...
seen this ? here is something you can do with magnetism
Experiments: Experiment 10
I am going to try another version of this to test what is really going on for sure.
results will be posted to this thread when I have finished building it.