The Electric Field.

[Dave45]

There is no ferrofluid in a crt tube the screen is coated with phosphorous, lets see you cant have an electric field without a magnetic field and Im sure its the same for a magnetic field, the two are different sides of the same coin.
So how can you understand one without investigating the other.

[Dave45]

I like Leedskalnin's view the electric field is just the magnetic field split, in a magnetic field you have a north field and south field running beside each other in opposite directions, in a electric field you have a positive polarity and a negative polarity, they are the same fields just split.

[Dave45]

I also believe that a magnetic field around a conductor is free electrons trying to enter the electron stream moving through a wire, so if you have a negative electron stream moving through a conductor the free electron field surrounding the wire will be positive, since opposites attract.
But in a true magnet you have both fields moving in opposite directions.
Something else Iv noticed is if you put a air core coil on the crt screen the first time its pulsed you get a definite defined field, but after that the field is much weaker.

[gravityblock]

There is no ferrofluid in a crt tube the screen is coated with phosphorous, lets see you cant have an electric field without a magnetic field and Im sure its the same for a magnetic field, the two are different sides of the same coin.
So how can you understand one without investigating the other.

I never said a CRT tube has ferrofluid in it. Go back and look at my post, you conveniently left out "or" . I said, "Dave's computer monitor is an electrostatic driven ferro-fluid display or a CRT monitor".

A changing magnetic field induces an electric field. If it's not changing, then there is no electric field. A moving electric field induces a magnetic field. If it's not moving, then there is no magnetic field. In one reference frame, there may be a magnetic field while in another reference frame you may see an electric field. I have investigated both, and I never limited my research to just Ed. Particles don't exist.

Try to wrap your mind around the following, if that is at all possible for you. Neither matter nor energy exist, but only deformed space, which is called matter, and what we call energy is nothing more than a phenomenon of transition between primordial space and deformed space.

An electron is an intergration of electromagnetic waves. We can define the electron as deformed magnetic space, propagated in wave form. Now an electron, as a wave form, is moved in an (anti)clockwise circle. In this spiraloid movement it has a discontinuous wave surface rather like a spiral spring. The movement itself is not discontinuous, but only appears so by virtue of its spiralling movement. It also shows a magnetic phenomenon cancelling out the charge on one side which gives an observer the impression that the energy moves in jumps. Further, it is subject to the outcome of the difference of charge due to this magnetic effect, as well as the result of its rotation.

The so-called orbits K-L-M'0 are nothing but stationary electrical waves in the field of the atom, each having its particular wave structure and frequency. It is known that waves of varying length do not interfere with one another as is shown by radio, even though they occupy the same area of space.

Take care,

GB

[Farmhand]

Hi GB, your last post make's a lot of sense to me. Except I would say that energy and matter are in a constant and continuous interchange between enrery and matter. So it could be said that they are the same thing but at a different time, as in they are in a constant light speed transition between matter and energy. The rotation generated by the process is electron spin and is what causes gravity and radiation. The process of exchange between matter and energy is "integration" and "disintergration". Well thats what my old school research tells me. Material from pre 1930. Most everything else I think I agree with. But I must add again, I reserve the right to be wrong. Thats just how i see it. It is in accordance with the quoted part of your statement. I concur. I think we just word it differently.

Try to wrap your mind around the following, if that is at all possible for you. Neither matter nor energy exist, but only deformed space, which is called matter, and what we call energy is nothing more than a phenomenon of transition between primordial space and deformed space.

Cheers

[mk1]

Hi all , what if it was 2 streams made of 2 part . How careful was i not to use terms bearing signification . There is 2 major theory could they not be part of the same , invisible to the polarized brain .

Mark

Got my iron wire got to build !

[Farmhand]

Hi all , what if it was 2 streams made of 2 part . How careful was i not to use terms bearing signification . There is 2 major theory could they not be part of the same , invisible to the polarized brain .

Mark

Got my iron wire got to build !

Yes mk1 thats always possible. And I would add that The word base "structure" or "particle" could be interchanged for the purposes of discussion, as long as the resultant effect is theoretically the same. In my opinion any actual particle would need to be built on the base structure of the Electric Fields lines of force.

Like this. Notice it says "ALL" mass. A partical would have mass.

http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pza0DApOvqAX-bSb9YOFg9gDLJ4GO0uPBvolGWe3KqjbYrBUjluFNeHg904yzpgbDEO0tQ-unUvkGJBAGMuO8iw/Walter%20Russel-3.jpg?psid=1

Which results in this.

http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pDOePC9MsX_B6KTPangjdIrK45ko0HfsV0mjBuE4evxo2Hfm1iXke81Jh1x-rDVuJhCgjmRsGCxzphfy4PC-lKw/Russell%20Diagram.jpg?psid=1

The wording in the diagram annotations tells it all really. They are Walter Russell Diagrams.

But thats not important what is is that the magnetic field is 90* to the electric. I think.

Anyway it's brain numbing to try to think too far back, so in my opinion just a bit this side of the formation of mass is a good place to stay.

Cheers

[mk1]

But thats not important what is is that the magnetic field is 90* to the electric. I think.

One other way of saying that would be 1/4 of the freq . North looking to the East .

I also believe 90 degree is about right ,but in a 3D world 90 degree is not all the story .

Mark

[Dave45]

Try to wrap your mind around the following, if that is at all possible for you.

Everyone has a different idea of whats happening thats what makes these forums interesting, If we all thought the same we might as well just stick to reading the textbooks and there would be no need for these forms.

I noticed three lines of force in the magnetic field I was observing, now whether it was the h field or b field Im not sure

[Dave45]

Hey
Iv been studying the alternator and the way its designed, now when the rotor is turned and the rotor is energized we get a north and south magnet rotateing inside a toroid made up of copper and iron, the magnetic field generates a current in the copper and the iron, the copper conducts the negative current away from the field but the iron retains its current, is this what causes Lens.

Can we wind iron coils in place of the solid stator and allow it to conduct as well, wouldnt this do away with the Lens effect.

Now this is just and idea.

[Jbignes5]

I didn't really specify anything.

Jbig,

The method I've shown you is the same method you said you could infer electric field lines with. I'm not the one who said that method would work, but it was you who said the electric field lines could be inferred with that method, and I've been arguing otherwise from the beginning. I hope we're on the same page now.

GB

What I did say is that we can infer the electric lines by knowing where the magnetic lines were. If you are following my line of thought there is a field holding up the magnetic lines we can infer their positions and shape based on what we can detect while using my idea of the supporting electric lines.

[Jbignes5]

Oh no this is a good point my friend.

Yes mk1 thats always possible. And I would add that The word base "structure" or "particle" could be interchanged for the purposes of discussion, as long as the resultant effect is theoretically the same. In my opinion any actual particle would need to be built on the base structure of the Electric Fields lines of force.

Like this. Notice it says "ALL" mass. A partical would have mass.

http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pza0DApOvqAX-bSb9YOFg9gDLJ4GO0uPBvolGWe3KqjbYrBUjluFNeHg904yzpgbDEO0tQ-unUvkGJBAGMuO8iw/Walter%20Russel-3.jpg?psid=1

Which results in this.

http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pDOePC9MsX_B6KTPangjdIrK45ko0HfsV0mjBuE4evxo2Hfm1iXke81Jh1x-rDVuJhCgjmRsGCxzphfy4PC-lKw/Russell%20Diagram.jpg?psid=1

The wording in the diagram annotations tells it all really. They are Walter Russell Diagrams.

But thats not important what is is that the magnetic field is 90* to the electric. I think.

Anyway it's brain numbing to try to think too far back, so in my opinion just a bit this side of the formation of mass is a good place to stay.

Cheers

When I say particle I mean a sub grouping of smaller particles which align themselves to much smaller ones. What ever the event that happened in the "beginning" had massive energy and that means particles the smallest absolute size. These can be considered a mass or matter as they line up and organize.

So when I say particles you have to remember the scale at which we are looking into. I believe the reason we are seeing geometric results from growth and these lines are because thats what influences the primal network. Take for instance the geometric patter around the magnet from the picture. It formed the pattern because of the underlying geometry of the lcd underneath it. The same goes for why we see crystaline patterns in everything in nature.

One thing I would like to say on this conversation about this. Please do not make statements like if you can be that open minded. That in itself is an insult. Lets try to keep this civil. If I do that please correct me. I don't wish this to become a battle.

[Jbignes5]

Are those alchemical notes?

Yes mk1 thats always possible. And I would add that The word base "structure" or "particle" could be interchanged for the purposes of discussion, as long as the resultant effect is theoretically the same. In my opinion any actual particle would need to be built on the base structure of the Electric Fields lines of force.

Like this. Notice it says "ALL" mass. A partical would have mass.

http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pza0DApOvqAX-bSb9YOFg9gDLJ4GO0uPBvolGWe3KqjbYrBUjluFNeHg904yzpgbDEO0tQ-unUvkGJBAGMuO8iw/Walter%20Russel-3.jpg?psid=1

Which results in this.

http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pDOePC9MsX_B6KTPangjdIrK45ko0HfsV0mjBuE4evxo2Hfm1iXke81Jh1x-rDVuJhCgjmRsGCxzphfy4PC-lKw/Russell%20Diagram.jpg?psid=1

The wording in the diagram annotations tells it all really. They are Walter Russell Diagrams.

But thats not important what is is that the magnetic field is 90* to the electric. I think.

Anyway it's brain numbing to try to think too far back, so in my opinion just a bit this side of the formation of mass is a good place to stay.

Cheers

They look very interesting and not that far from my own thoughts on this. So this agrees with my ramblings so far about the relationship of the degrees of propagation between the two fields. Hmmm... Very interesting indeed.... It seems this is not an accident then. By the way I have never seen those before. I have seen some esoteric ones on matter composition in mass though. I never saw the propagation ones like that...

[gravityblock]

What I did say is that we can infer the electric lines by knowing where the magnetic lines were. If you are following my line of thought there is a field holding up the magnetic lines we can infer their positions and shape based on what we can detect while using my idea of the supporting electric lines.

I respect your opinion, but I disagree. Just because there is a magnetic field, doesn't mean there is an electric field in the same frame of reference, thus you can't infer electric lines.

GB

[Dave45]

Some more pics, I tried to take the pics from the same angle, to give you and idea of the field lines and there direction.