Rosemary Ainslie | A Magnetic Field Model

[sucahyo]

Please take the break, we all need it . What currently in Indonesian headline right now is a new very famous old singer that die because work too hard (Mbah Surip). We should rest enough to keep our health. I don't mind being answered late. It is not something we should rush too.

I agree with your opinion that if we know about how the basic physics really is, we can utilize it more. I hope I don't bother you with my many question.

What do you think happen in electrolysis? and why electricity created in the Lord Kelvin water dropper?

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, Hi Rosemary, are you familiar with Joseph Newman's work with motors and his theories. Instead of calling them zipons, he calls them gyroscopic particles. Also the large length coils in his motors take the flyback and recharge the batteries and from the videos he has shown the batteries do not appear to drain down. One thing that is very interesting about his using long lengths of copper wire for coils is that if we take say an 18AWG magnet wire in a coil at say 10 ohms worth of wire length and input 12V and pulse the coil and observe the magnetic field strength. Then we take say 8AWG magnetic wire in a coil at 10 ohms worth of wire length and input 12V and pulse to observe magnetic field strength which coil do you think has the greater magnetic field for the same input. These are some of the things he has been pointing out. That what we input from a battery or other is only a catalyst and that the energy is the wire or whatever occurs in or around the wire and similar to a lighter we only provide the spark, but the fuel for the flame is the copper and its interaction with our spark. Just thought you might find that useful since what he speaks of sounds similar to what you speak of.
peace love light
Tyson

[witsend]

Sucahyo - I've breached my undertaking here. Truth is the excitement at Aaron's thread sort of took over and I forgot. I suspect today will be calmer so shall give it a go. Abject apologies

SkyWatcher - I must tell you I kept typing Skywalker? Am way too old. I have not heard of Newman. I'll google and find out more. It seems decidedly similar.

And thanks again Sucahyo for being understanding. Never a problem for me to talk physics. I love it. The problem is in being understood. I'll do my best to deal with this today.

[Harvey]

Mike - and Harvey? This is for you - post 18 or thereby onwards. I'm posting this so that it can get back onto the front page of the threads.

Kindest

Honestly, I had a direct link into the other thread and hadn't even climbed up to the RE forum until now. I think I clicked on something by mistake and ended up in here. 5 days ago...sorry I missed it. I'll try and give it all a good look later, 2AM here and needing some repair time ZZZzzzz.

Best Regards,

Harvey

[Tishatang]

Useful FE links

@witsend

I use rexresearch.com to find FE info, not google. Go here:

Joseph W. Newman: South African Patent Application #831296, "Energy Generation System Having Higher Energy Output Than Input"

Another good source for FE is here in download pdf chapters. Has a lot of info on Newman near bottom of home page.

Free-Energy Devices, zero-point energy, and water as fuel

Google is Ok, but can be a waste of time too. I use scroogle.org scraper, which is a google search without permanent tracking of your searching history.
go here:

Scroogle Scraper

Hope this helps,
Tishatang

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, Hi tishatang, thanks for giving those links.
I once posted in a thread on this forum that if I had the funds I would build a large heater using nichrome or similar material in a long length of good thickness gauge to show that it is the material that is the energy and we dont fill it up with energy because its already full, we just tap it. I could imagine a room in a house with a nichrome coil going around the entire room from top to bottom in a concealed fashion to efficiently heat the room.
peace love light

[witsend]

following from sucahyo

Can you explain how spark find it's way to the opposite pole to jump?
My proposal is that all sparks and flames are zipons. They are polarised and therefore can adjust their position through space. Perhaps, therefore, they are moving towards the pole that best satisfies, balances, that polarity?

If material is burned, the zipon become slowed down and static? Do zipon reponsible for transporting heat and light (since I think heat and light will also transfered in vacuum)?
Good question. My proposal is that the zipon gets hot, slow and manifest outside of the field. The proposal is that photons are a fusion of two zipons. The flame has a limited range of influence through space. The photon no such limitation as it is moved by the field through the field.

Can you explain using your magnetic model why stainless steel become less ferromagnetic after evenly heated up? what is the cause of ferromagnetic and paramagnetic?
Had to look up ferro and para magnetic. If heat is introduced to a system then - in terms of the model, simply more zipos have been introduced to the system. They're plastic by which I mean that they can rearrange their fields through space. The eventual cooling is when the fields 'decay' back to the fast, cold balanced state of the fields orbiting the atoms in any amalgams. Additions or subtractions of these fields will vary the structure of the amalgams.

About heating up metal, do the caused of friction in metal is electron? Would magnetic oscillation create heat, or it is electric oscillation, or just amp?
I believe that electrons are visible in some applications. I believe that valence electrons may have a limited response to the fields that move around the atoms. But I do not think that electrons comprise any part of current flow. But this is contentious and I may very well be entirely wrong. It's just that my model would forbid the interaction of extraneous electrons with the zipons in the movement of current flow.

There is similar image of the atom which posted 100 years ago, occult chemistry.
That design in occult chemistry is fascinating. But it has very little to do with my own concepts. But having said that - nor does it mean that my model is correct. Just different.

Looked at the links and found them very interesting. But no real bearing on my model. But please, I cannot say it often enough. I will not insist that my model is right. Only that it satisfies my own logic. And there are many out there who question that I have any logic at all. Possibly with good reason.

Hope that helps and sorry I took so long to answer. And many thanks for the interest. It's always a pleasure to try and explain this. To me the model is just so simple. I find it difficult to understand why it's not so clear. But I think the reason is largely because it's so unconventional.

Thanks again. Always ready to try and answer questions. Love the exercise so, in fact, you've done me a favour.

[witsend]

@witsend

Google is Ok, but can be a waste of time too. I use scroogle.org scraper, which is a google search without permanent tracking of your searching history.
go here:

Scroogle Scraper

Hope this helps,
Tishatang

Thanks for this Tishatang. I'm going to read it in greater depth - but at first read I could buy into the Newman theory right up to point 5. Then it becomes too vague. Could be that the presentation is not complete. But I need to look into this more.

[witsend]

Honestly, I had a direct link into the other thread and hadn't even climbed up to the RE forum until now. I think I clicked on something by mistake and ended up in here. 5 days ago...sorry I missed it. I'll try and give it all a good look later, 2AM here and needing some repair time ZZZzzzz.

Best Regards,

Harvey

Harvey - I appreciate your need to rest - especially while you're sick. But don't underestimate a quick read of this model for it's soporific benefits.

[quantumuppercut]

Hi Rosemary,

I've came accross this thread once and saw truants and zipons. I thought "oh no, not another quantum explaination using quarks and more quarks". Now that I have to chance to go through it again, I think I can survive.

See, I like classical. The main reason is it simple. What I mean is strickly Newtorian mechanic. It has a giant model that we can see in everyday life. When they discover electricity, they try to use Newtorian mechanic to visualize "electron flow", kinda speak. I think they did the right thing. It is all for the benefit that we can simplify things using the big model easily accessed. The problem, in my opinion, they failed because Newtorian mechanic is incomplete. If you carry a flaw and build something to it, the flaw stays. The incompleteness was not resolved by Newton and Leibniz ,but solved by Bessler, and I strongly believed later solved by Coriolis. It's a shame that the human heart is not open enough to except Bessler or give the unexpected a chance.

On your theory, I must say it's some new good food for thought. I visualized your zipons as many scientist so call "aether". The explaination might varies, but the general thinking is intatch. It's great to read because I've never read anything shocking more than "aether is a medium proposed that occupy vaccum". You've taken your theory and applied it to battery and circuit in a new way of understanding . That is the most valuable thing a science theory could offer.

Anyway, let me take some times to absorb the things you say.



Quantum

[witsend]

Hi Quantumuppercut, so nice to see you on this thread. And so unexpected. I'm afraid my model is also based on aetheric concepts.

Hope to see more of you
Rosemary

[Harvey]

Harvey - I appreciate your need to rest - especially while you're sick. But don't underestimate a quick read of this model for it's soporific benefits.

ROFL - If I could count the times I've dozed off proof-reading my own posts!

Feeling better - not 100% ready to read over the foregoing

[Harvey]

Hi Rosemary,
An interesting read to be sure. It would be good to develop a concise summary that outlines the key points in a progressive manner.

Some of the attributes you assign to the zipon are reminiscent of the gluon particle. While still other attributes seem to adopt the characteristics normally assigned to virtual photons in Hawkings works.

You mention with regard to the eventual decay of the resistor that it will simply 'short out'. I beleive that this is incorrect. As the conductor decays, outer layers of the conductive material will become unbound, oxidize and in some cases flake off in macroscopic proportions. This results in a smaller diameter conductor which increases its resistance. The increased resistance causes increased heating in the narrower regions which exacerbates the oxidation process and eventually results in a liquefaction of the material. Cohesive action causes the liquid material to 'ball up' and this results in an 'open circuit' rather than a 'short circuit'. However, that being said, in some cases the liquefied metal can bridge windings and cascade into a straight bridge from terminal to terminal, and this would satisfy your statement of a 'short circuit'

Evidently there had been much talk regarding current and its definition. In a post elsewhere I drew attention to the matter that current is a measurement of charge passing a given point in a give period. The charge is not exclusive to electrical charge. It can relate to water in a river, or air in a pipe or even magnetic flux in a magnetic conductor. Conventional electrical current is generally accepted to refer to that value positive charge that propagates through an external circuit from the positive voltage source to the negative voltage reference. In physical reality however, it is a redistribution of a finite quantity of free electrons as they are allowed to 'spread out' through the provided pathway. When we apply a charge to a battery, we are actually forcing free electrons together in a manner that prohibits them from pushing away from each other. It is this tension, the charge force of compacting these free electrons into a smaller space that we call voltage. At the same time that we do this to one terminal, we are doing just the opposite to the other terminal. Here on the surface of this planet we have a normal distribution of free electrons that we call 'ground' and we often associate 'zero volts' to this arrangement. If we deplete this arrangement of free electrons we then have a positive voltage relative to 'ground' and if we compact or force more electrons together we get a negative voltage relative to ground. This 'ground' is different than the 'ground state' or neutral charge balance of atoms and chemical reactions, as that would be a true zero. Instead, we find that the planet actually has a negative charge when compared to the neutral state. So we see that the 'reference' plays an important part in electrodynamics. There is a real measurable pressure between two metal strips that have the exact same charge regardless of the reference. If you check the videos offered by MIT for 8.02 regarding electric charges you will find some very interesting demonstrations. So to sum up this paragraph; we don't add electrons to a battery, we simply pack them all to one side .

Regarding flames, sparks and other forms of plasma: I will try an make this as simple and short as possible. Any matter, when sufficiently raised in energy will convert that energy to electromagnetic radiation. For a campfire, we see the superheated smoke particles emitting a wide spectrum of EM energy from white blue to deep red and have measured frequencies above and below the visible spectrum. The rising glowing smoke is what we know as flames. There is an interesting video showing a flame in microgravity on you-tube. Sparks are simply another example of molecules converting energy to the EM spectrum, as does plasma. Note that the molecules do not have to raised in temperature for this to occur. It is possible to have a cold flame (ionized gas) just as easily as it is to have a hot one. The emission of infrared energy is just one indicator of the underlying thermal temperature, but some things can be extremely hot with zero IR emission. A hydrogen flame for instance.

This post would not be complete without some reference to space-time. IMHO, space-time is the Aether by which all observed effects interact. The recent Gravity Probe-B experiments proved that space-time does in fact become dragged along with a moving mass and that Geodetic effects to occur. Tesla was among the first to declare that this was the case and cited it as the reason why the Michelson Morley experiment failed to show an Aether existed. This is important. The reason, is that our reference for charged particle movement is directly hooked into space-time. The particle must move, relative to space time in order to produce a magnetic field. This means, if we took a loop of wire around two conductive wheels at different potentials and moved that wire around those wheels such that the speed of the current in the wire matched the rotation of the earth (hence space-time), the magnetic field around that current carrying wire would disappear. You heard that here first. The same holds true for all EM propagation.

Cheers,

Harvey

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, Hi Rosemary, yes you really should look more into Joseph Newman's work, try and get hold of his book in pdf. He really has a clear and simple explanations for things and that is supreme. Of course some of your ideas make much sense also, Newman just takes it from a more practical mechanical view which is easier to translate into devices here in this dimension. He points out that a thicker piece of resistance wire becomes less resistive yet emits more heat which is the opposite of copper conductor which with a thicker copper conductor again becomes less resistive however less heat is manifest which does show an interaction directly with the atoms or whatever in the material. And I am sure some have noticed that copper wire has a threshold where the magnetic field stops increasing and heat manifests which also destroys our magnetic field, overheat a permanent magnet and magnetic field is gone. These things that Newman has been pointing out, totally contradict the theory that we are filling up these coils, they are filling themselves up as far as magnetic field goes, by whats occurring in the material and when we scale these coils up with thicker wire to maintain the same resistance it becomes obvious that is the case.
peace love light
Tyson

[witsend]

Harvey - am just so chuffed that you have actually read some of my model. Many thanks for that.

I see that my endless problems with electrons are not yours. I must acknowledge that it is highly unlikely that my concepts are correct. And regarding 'fire' I'm too fond of my own interpretation at this stage to entirely 'give it up'. But again, I must acknowledge that you clearly know whereof you speak and I cannot claim that advantage. Just see it as the eccentric deductions of an equally eccentric mind. I'm afraid I'm awfully fond of my reasoning but perhaps should not be so free with its expression - lest it generally confuse people more thoroughly than already appears to be the case.

Thanks again for the comments. I'm flattered that you replied at all, and with such remarkable tolerance. I would be very interested in seeing the outcome of that 'test' that you proposed.

edit. I see TK is now 'quoting' me on every post. "As an amateur, the propect of attempting a meaningful comment on physics is, at best, inappropriate". I'm really grateful that he is giving such ample exposure to my own thoughts on the matter. My own 'logic', if such it is, is just so much fun. I keep hoping I'll find others that share that fun. But I grant you I cannot claim that it is also right.